DBA has got EVERY SINGLE THING about Cannae wrong!

Odd. I just have 6 Uighur cavalry to paint and I have finally finished my Mongols - after over 20 years!

Well, to quote myself from the very first post of this thread:-
       “Hannibal’s Libyans should be Bd, not Sp, partly because they used captured Roman equipment,
　    　but mainly because they were veterans...and veteran spears would be better than ordinary spears.
　    　Does it not say at the top of page 3 “Troops are defined by battlefield behaviour”?
    　　Well, was their behaviour at Cannae that of passive spearmen huddling in a defensive shield wall?
　    　Or did Hannibal use them aggressively to attack?”

“But Stevie, they carried spears, so they must be spearmen!”
Very well…then why are the Vikings classed as Blades?
They were armed with spears as well.
In DBA, it their behaviour that matters, not what they carry in their right hands.

In addition, here is something else from another one of my posts:-
Hannibal in Italy: give the Carthaginians a lower aggression of 2, so Hannibal chooses the terrain.
After all, it was Hannibal, not the Romans, that chose the battlefields at Trebia, Lake Trasimene, and Cannae.
“But” I hear you say, “the battles were fought in Italy!”. My answer to that is so what? Both will be Arable.
Hannibal should be Arable (no fleet), so does it matter where the battles are being fought?
As wargamers what is important to us is who gets to place the terrain, not which country we are in.
And with the nightfall time limit, it’ll be the Romans, being the attackers, making the rash advances,
just as they did at the River Trebia, at Lake Trasimene, and at Cannae, or Hannibal will be the victors.
(See static.wikia.nocookie.net/fanaticus-dba/images/4/41/TIME_OF_DAY_DISPLAY.pdf/revision/latest?cb=20170212182516&format=original )

Actually, the Later Carthaginians are a little bit more complex:-
1st Punic War: Carthage had a mighty fleet, so should be Littoral. But they weren’t the invaders.
                         Carthage had been in Sicily for centuries fighting the Greeks of Syracuse.
                         It was the Romans who were the invaders, entering a region they had never been in before.
                         So Carthage should be Littoral with an aggression of 2.
2nd Punic War: Carthage had lost their fleet in the First Punic War, and had been in Spain for decades.
                          It was the Romans who were the invaders, entering a region they had never been in before.
                          So Carthage should be Arable with an aggression of 2.
                          As for Hannibal in Italy, see my comments above.
3rd Punic War: Rome were definitely the invaders, so again Carthage should be Arable with an aggression of 1.

Yep…any way you look at it, the DBA Later Carthaginian army is totally wrong in every possible way.

I went further with mine...they joined my Timurids.😁

Only if you misinterpreted what I meant, I didn't say you couldn't win with them

Hang on…one minute you’re saying that you don’t like the idea
of making the Carthaginians stronger in DBA against the Romans…
…but you don’t seem to mind if they are made stronger in DBMM.

Now it is true that in DBA Spartans are no better than ordinary
Greek Hoplites, and the Silver Shield Argyraspids are no better
than ordinary Macedonian Phalangites.

DBA could be considered as just a dumbed-down simplified version
of DBMM (or DBMM is an over-complicated version of DBA)…
…but with a few minor tweaks here and there, DBA could become
a little more historically accurate, without making it more complex.

It all boils down to each individual player’s personnel preference.
Some people like ♫“Country and Western Music”♪, some like
♫”Heavy Metal Music”♪, and some like ♫”Hip-Hop Rap Music”♪.

Which of them is right?

It is a game though. Getting historically accurate results may not be great fun after a while. I'm happy with historically plausible with a nod to the historical results. Romans should beat Gauls more often but not to the point that no one buys Gallic miniatures. Most rules deal with this with points but then you simply get the repeated scenario of a small high quality army dealing with a larger low quality army trying to get around the flank. Though this happened, most ancient reports I read seem to indicate a thinning of the line to deal with these situations together with mounted and light troops protecting the flank and terrain anchors.
Period specific house rules can certainly add to the flavour and get closer to history (eg Sparta gets 1-3 Spartiates elements that cause -1 to enemy heavy infantry) but this leads to predictable battles or ahistorical tactics IMHO. And that is another strength of DBA3. You can use it as tool kit and tinker it as much you like to get the game you want.

Jim

PS The issues with 4Aux and LH armies are more problematic as they don't seem to get near plausible historical results