Post by stevie on Jun 8, 2021 22:48:04 GMT
I think Jim has it pretty right.
In LADG there is no 'rear support'. Sure, a unit of Pike is usually modeled deeper with an extra rank or even two, but it counts as one unit just like everything else.
If Pk had their CF adjusted so that they did not need rear support, it would de-nerf Pk armies. Just need to get the CF balanced right.
I have some thoughts that may turn out to be pertinent to the current discussion.
I’m currently working on a ‘Simplified Version of DBA’ (a serious version this time ).
This will have much of the complexity, exceptions to exceptions, and difficult fiddly
stuff removed, without the addition of any House Rules…although simplifying the
rules is in itself a House Rule.
And this has brought up some fundamental questions.
Base Depths: why do we have such a bewildering array of different base depths?
15mm deep, 20mm deep, 30mm deep, 40mm deep, 60mm deep, and more.
Is it because it’s more realistic? Is it because it’s more expedient?
No…the only reason we still use them is because they’re an old fashioned leftover
from the early WRG days, an outdated system dreamed-up some 50 years ago!
I plan on simplifying this by having ALL troops on 40mm x 40mm ‘stands’.
There is no need to re-base either…just place the existing DBA bases on 40mm card,
held in place with double-sided sticky tape. That way you can remove them if you
wish to use the full DBA rules in tournaments.
And since you can get two DBA infantry elements on one 40mm deep ‘stand’, you
can have your infantry two ranks deep…which looks far more realistic and impressive.
In short, the number of figures on a ‘stand’ becomes purely decorative.
It even solves the tricky decision between 3Ax/Wb and 4Ax/Wb…have three figures
in the front rank and you have a ‘unit’ of 3Ax/Wb, even if the 2nd rank has 4 figures.
‘Fast’ and ‘Solid’ troops: we now take these for granted, but they're a new addition to DBA.
From DBA 1.0 (in 1990) until the introduction of DBA 3.0 (in 2014), for 24 years there were
no ‘Fast’ and ‘Solid’ troops…and few if any players complained.
Again this is a leftover from the old WRG days…and we now have ‘Fast’ and ‘Solid’ rules
purely to explain why some of our bases have different numbers of figures on them.
So rather than having rules to reflect reality, we now have rules trying to justify an
obsolete basing system! Talk about the cart pushing the horse!
I plan on simplifying things by going back to the old system and combining these together.
So all Ax move 3 BW and fight as 'Solid' 4Ax, and all Wb also move 3 BW and fight as 4Wb.
As for heavier foot, all Bd/Pk will move 2 BW, and fight as if ‘Solid’.
Playing on a Virtual Grid: the biggest complication in DBA is the free measuring system,
which requires numerous elaborate rules to cover various things such as group wheeling,
contacting the enemy, conforming, if conforming is blocked, free sideways slides, who
turns-to-face when contacting the flank of a column, and so on.
All this becomes much simpler when playing on a ‘Virtual Grid’.
And few players even realise that DBA is already being played on a ‘Virtual Grid’.
Oh, you can move about pretty much as you like, but once you contact the enemy strict
intricate convoluted rules come into play to force you to act as if you were playing on a grid.
So why not extend this principle to cover ALL movement and positioning?
I plan instead to make all moves in whole Base Widths, with no factions, and ensure that
all units always end a move whole BW’s from the table edges.
The grid is still there, but it’s invisible, and you’d be playing on a much simpler ‘Virtual Grid’.