|
|
Post by martin on Apr 20, 2022 7:14:59 GMT
Oh....one more thing...here are some thoughts on basing. Many (but not all) modern players prefer ½ base width deep bases for their foot elements That’s a bold shout and I’d love to see your evidence base for this. I’m struggling to think of a single player I’ve met at a UK tournament who’s based their heavies on 20mm, instead of 15mm, depth bases… P Well, off the top of my head….. stevie (he just posted). Smith M. Skelton M. O’Shea C. Pulley R. for a starter. |
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Apr 20, 2022 7:39:17 GMT
That’s a bold shout and I’d love to see your evidence base for this. I’m struggling to think of a single player I’ve met at a UK tournament who’s based their heavies on 20mm, instead of 15mm, depth bases… P Well, off the top of my head….. stevie (he just posted). Smith M. Skelton M. O’Shea C. Pulley R. for a starter. But I can’t recall playing any of these boys with 20mm based armies at events such as Tarrington, Bakewell, etc… P |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Apr 20, 2022 7:53:10 GMT
Tarrington may not be much of a guide as players only use their own army once. Bakewell is another matter, but they may not have been using armies with solid foot elements.
It is, sadly, the case that the heresy is fairly wide-spread.
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Apr 20, 2022 8:16:35 GMT
Tarrington may not be much of a guide as players only use their own army once. Bakewell is another matter, but they may not have been using armies with solid foot elements. It is, sadly, the case that the heresy is fairly wide-spread. Burn me at the stake……..I’ll not recant 😊 |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 20, 2022 9:39:03 GMT
Ha! This next picture will blow your minds then! Inspired by Paulhannah (see fanaticus.boards.net/post/35568/ ) I have 8...yep, that’s right, eight!...Pikemen on 20mm deep bases:-  What you see is six Macedonian 4Pk elements facing three Polybian Roman 4Bd. These Pikes act exactly the same as a normal DBA Pike element, and is called a ‘4Pk element’ because that’s how many figures are in the front (the other four behind are purely decorative). You gotta admit, it looks fantastic...even with my poor painting & photographic skills!  |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Apr 20, 2022 10:25:08 GMT
I too am guilty of the 20mm depth option on all of my armies that I've built for DBA.3.0 and I have re-based my Swiss to match.This is mainly because the Mirliton pikemen stance of the front row pikemen and is done to protect the pikes from bending and snapping.I also changed my Norman foot and intend at some time to do my Xyston Spartans(and Athenians when complete) which look far too huddled on the 15mm depth bases.
As to the evidence of using the deeper bass there was a rule within one of the WRG Ancient Rule editions that allowed the option for you to base your LHI/LMI infantry with a HI/MI frontage to simulate these troops fighting in a closer formation.Even the later WRG editions altered and enlarged several base sizes.As WRG evolved into DBA/DBM some of these troop types became Sp/Bd/Wb or designated as Ax.So there is a precedent within the WRG/DBA evolution that these base sizes existed.
I know the wording on page 5 does ask players to keep to the minimum "depths" possible but by the wording is ambiguous and does allow players to base their figures on deeper bases....so let's not argue over it.
My Robert Guiscard General now feels much more Excommunicated for leading an army whose foot elements commit such heresy!😂
Now let's get back to Skalde's Theban army.🙂
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Apr 20, 2022 12:49:14 GMT
That’s a bold shout and I’d love to see your evidence base for this. I’m struggling to think of a single player I’ve met at a UK tournament who’s based their heavies on 20mm, instead of 15mm, depth bases… P Well, off the top of my head….. stevie (he just posted). Smith M. Skelton M. O’Shea C. Pulley R. for a starter. I am glad we are collecting names for re education purposes |
|
|
|
Post by paddy649 on Apr 20, 2022 16:22:14 GMT
I know the wording on page 5 does ask players to keep to the minimum "depths" possible but by the wording is ambiguous and does allow players to base their figures on deeper bases....so let's not argue over it. Although there is a lot of ambiguity in the Purple book there is zero ambiguity here. There are only two justifications for HI bases deeper than 15mm either the figures won’t fit or they are based for another rule set. That’s it! Xyston Republic Romans chucking javelins do fit on 15mm bases. I know - I have them based on 15mm bases. I can’t comment on Mirliton Pikemen and bendy pikes but it doesn’t sound like it isn’t something wire pikes can’t fix. So the figures not fitting doesn’t seem to apply. So please come clean guys - what other rules have you based your figures for…….or are you trying to get a tactical advantage on the tabletop? If so please come clean and discuss what the pros and cons of 15mm basing vs 20mm basing are so we can FAQ it and everyone can do likewise…..or is this another rule that the community chooses to ignore in perpetuity? I ask again - why are the rules that we love so much so imprecise when it comes to something as simple as base sizes? |
|
|
|
Post by martin on Apr 20, 2022 18:59:04 GMT
See my post of 11 hours ago…
(and 52 rivets, in case anyone is wondering…..)
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Apr 20, 2022 18:59:27 GMT
There are no ifs or buts about the base width....it must be 40mm.But there is an allowance to essentially give enough room to accommodate figures on the base allowing up to a 5mm increase the base depth.The pose of a figure can have just the same effect as an increase in size creating the same spacial problem on a base....the Essex CH17 spear men for instance have a figure posed with a horizontally leveled spear that would clearly stick out over a 15mm base and make base to base contact very difficult.The Mirliton Swiss front rank pikemen have the figure holding the pike at a 45 degree angle which could also cause the same problem....not everybody wants to substitute the spears for wire ones and replacing them could spoil the original paint work, especially a problem if a player has bought a pro-painted army.The fact that one person can achieve this doesn't mean everyone can.
As for alternative rule sets there were a few other sets used as alternative to be DBA/DBM/DBMM and older WRG editions which are played but I cannot vouch for their base sizes.. Armati,Shock of Impact and Warhammer Ancients all have their followings.
Going back to what I said about WRG, there was a rule that allowed you to base LHI/LHI infantry with an alternative frontage of HI/MI with the LHI/LMI depth,giving the advantage of the unit fighting with a reduced frontage but it moved at the slower rate of the HI/MI....I'm sure this was in the 6th edition?This allowed you a deeper base for those figures.
I also think that when DBA.3.0 was launched the designers were still aware of players still having armies used for alternative or older sets of rules who were reluctant to re-base their armies but still needed to be accommodated to play DBA.
As for the advantages/disadvantages of the 15mm vs 20mm bases has been debated in a thread before.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 20, 2022 20:21:00 GMT
Hmmm... Paddy does raise an important point, as 20mm deep foot bases are superior to 15mm deep ones... ...as it allows all foot to recoil the same distances, keeping them together, giving them an advantage. Likewise, having Camps, Cities and Forts with curved edges instead of straight ones gives them an advantage... ...should this be allowed, if your opponent has kept to straight edged BUA’s and Camps? As for the page 5 basing ‘guidelines’, it says that Elephants should be only one model... ...so should having a few skirmishers on the same base accompanying the Elephant be allowed? (Obviously yes, that’s ok, as the extra foot figures doesn’t affect the elements performance.
Nonetheless, a strict reading of the page 5 basing conventions says Elephants should be 1 model only)So before we end up in a major split, with some players insisting “because I have kept to an antiquated obsolete basing system dreamed up over 50 years ago for a different set of rules, so you can’t have 20mm deep bases”, while their opponent says “look, it’s in the rules, so it’s perfectly legal, and it’s not my fault you won’t change”... ...may I offer the following simple solution?:- (a) If you have heavy foot on 20mm deep bases, they still recoil 15mm. ----OR ALTERNATIVELY--- (b) If you have heavy foot on 15mm deep bases, they will recoil 20mm. That way neither side has an advantage, and no re-basing is required.  |
|
|
|
Post by paddy649 on Apr 20, 2022 21:54:45 GMT
Stevie, Either solution you propose would mean that the 15mm/20mm base depth issue for HI is truly immaterial in game play and would align with Martin’s observations on the historical reality of unit depths and the artificiality of the rules. So let’s put one of those interpretations in the FAQ and get back to counting the rivets on Hoplite shields!
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Apr 20, 2022 22:28:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffreythancock on Apr 21, 2022 1:43:08 GMT
Oooh, I love a good dogma vs. doctrine argument. Let me go make some popcorn! Butter anyone?  |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Apr 21, 2022 9:17:51 GMT
Oooh, I love a good dogma vs. doctrine argument. Let me go make some popcorn! Butter anyone? What....no toffee flavour?😂 |
|
