|
|
Post by saxonred on Oct 23, 2022 15:40:47 GMT
Axe needs to be different from sword for the same reason that pike is different than spear - they fight differently. So in your 'house rule' where axe is different to blade, what's the CF of the axe armed unit? Would a Viking or Anglo Saxon Bd element be just sword or just axe? I suspect it was mixed. |
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Oct 23, 2022 17:59:01 GMT
You know I actually really like DBA as it is, now and again there may be something I need to reach a reasonable conclusion on with my opponent. I cant think of a wargames rule set I have had to have similar discussions on or ask a more experienced play for an interpretation.
I like the simplicity of the game that still has enough flavour to keep me interested after hundreds of games.
Sure Alexander's Pike or the Hun horse archers may not be as effective as they were in real life but I can accept that.
I also like Lart which has more bells and whistles but j dont play nearly as many games of it as DBA.
I can understand players wanting to find a perfect simulation of an ancient battle but will it ever exist. I am certainly no expert but as I understand it many mighty empires were won or lost with assassinations, deceit
, water shortages/crop failures pure bad luck as well as some set piece battles.
Trying to give a good game experience without special rules for daggers, sticks and stones, longbows, hand cannons, sharp pointy sticks in a variety of lengths means compromise. Then throw in users abilities, motivation, armour or the skill/quality of the materials used to make em and it can get really complicated.
Some may prefer DBA some may prefer something else, games will rise and fall like the empires themselves. I hope DBA keeps me supplied with opponents. At least until the fully immersive VR battle simulators are invented and we can really understand what it is like to have your brain bashed in by a nasty piece of metal and wood
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Oct 23, 2022 19:27:44 GMT
You know I actually really like DBA as it is, now and again there may be something I need to reach a reasonable conclusion on with my opponent. I cant think of a wargames rule set I have had to have similar discussions on or ask a more experienced play for an interpretation. I like the simplicity of the game that still has enough flavour to keep me interested after hundreds of games. Sure Alexander's Pike or the Hun horse archers may not be as effective as they were in real life but I can accept that. I also like Lart which has more bells and whistles but j dont play nearly as many games of it as DBA. I can understand players wanting to find a perfect simulation of an ancient battle but will it ever exist. I am certainly no expert but as I understand it many mighty empires were won or lost with assassinations, deceit , water shortages/crop failures pure bad luck as well as some set piece battles. Trying to give a good game experience without special rules for daggers, sticks and stones, longbows, hand cannons, sharp pointy sticks in a variety of lengths means compromise. Then throw in users abilities, motivation, armour or the skill/quality of the materials used to make em and it can get really complicated. Some may prefer DBA some may prefer something else, games will rise and fall like the empires themselves. I hope DBA keeps me supplied with opponents. At least until the fully immersive VR battle simulators are invented and we can really understand what it is like to have your brain bashed in by a nasty piece of metal and wood Absolutely SPOT ON, Baldie. Couldn’t have written it better if I tried for a year 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼 |
|
|
|
Post by saxonred on Oct 23, 2022 19:53:41 GMT
You know I actually really like DBA as it is, now and again there may be something I need to reach a reasonable conclusion on with my opponent. I cant think of a wargames rule set I have had to have similar discussions on or ask a more experienced play for an interpretation. I like the simplicity of the game that still has enough flavour to keep me interested after hundreds of games. Sure Alexander's Pike or the Hun horse archers may not be as effective as they were in real life but I can accept that. I also like Lart which has more bells and whistles but j dont play nearly as many games of it as DBA. I can understand players wanting to find a perfect simulation of an ancient battle but will it ever exist. I am certainly no expert but as I understand it many mighty empires were won or lost with assassinations, deceit , water shortages/crop failures pure bad luck as well as some set piece battles. Trying to give a good game experience without special rules for daggers, sticks and stones, longbows, hand cannons, sharp pointy sticks in a variety of lengths means compromise. Then throw in users abilities, motivation, armour or the skill/quality of the materials used to make em and it can get really complicated. Some may prefer DBA some may prefer something else, games will rise and fall like the empires themselves. I hope DBA keeps me supplied with opponents. At least until the fully immersive VR battle simulators are invented and we can really understand what it is like to have your brain bashed in by a nasty piece of metal and wood Absolutely SPOT ON, Baldie. Couldn’t have written it better if I tried for a year 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼 Agreed!  |
|
|
|
Post by macbeth on Oct 24, 2022 0:52:20 GMT
I'm with you Baldie,
I don't remember who said it in earlier discussion pages, but there was an analogy to Knitting in the creation of DBA
Hard to knit the Jumper (ie write the rules)
Easy to tug on one loose thread and unravel the whole creation.
DBA has many good points that outweigh the fact that you can't perfectly simulate Hastings or Cannae.
The games take under 1 hour - so we can get 6 games in easily in one day
Because you can get so many games complete in a single day, players are less 'invested' in the time taken, so are more happy to accept a defeat - after all we can be underway again in a few scant minutes.
You can collect a vast array of different armies (I have 168 at present)
You can fit a field of 20 players comfortably into a standard hall for a tournament.
You can even get a reasonable campaign run in a day.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 24, 2022 8:20:45 GMT
I do agree with you all…DBA is fairly simple, quick to play, and reasonably realistic. (No rules can ever be 100% realistic, or they’d be the size of a telephone directory!)However, DBA shouldn’t cease evolving and remain fixed forever in its present state. Merely re-wording it to make it more understandable would be a vast improvement. I don’t believe that DBA 3.0 will still be in use 50 years from now, just as the earlier DBA 1.0, 1.1, 2.0 and 2.2 have been superseded by new improved mechanisms and are no longer in use by the majority of players. It’s a bit like the physicists of the late 19th century declaring that “physics is dead, and we now know all that there is to know”. (Mind you, physics has become a lot more complicated since 1900…  ) |
|
|
|
Post by dpd on Oct 24, 2022 13:45:55 GMT
Stevie, Upon review and reflection I've come back around to your way of thinking on units types. But I believe that the next stage of evolution should incorporate a unit taxonomy that makes logical sense and doesn't appear to be thrown together in an ad hoc basis. So if you organize unit types by tactics (shock, melee and missile) and formation types (standard foot, extreme foot, horse mounted, other) you get an even dozen basic unit types. Further subdividing these by formation characteristics (fast, solid, deep/exceptional) and you get 36. So with some tweaking, I'd suggest the following:
| SHOCK | MELEE | MISSILE |
|
| | | | FAST | 3SP | 3BD | 2PS / CMP | | SOLID | 4SP | 4BD | 3AX | | DEEP / EXC | 8SP | 6BD | 4AX |
|
| | | | FAST | 3PK | 3WD | 3BW / LB / CB | | SOLID | 4PK | 4WD | 4BW / LB / CB | | DEEP / EXC | 8PK | 6WD | 8BW / LB / CB |
|
| | | | FAST | 3KN | 2LH | GUN | | SOLID | 4KN | 3CV | ART | | DEEP / EXC | 6KN | 6CV | WWG |
|
| | | | FAST | 3CM | 2CM | 5HD / 7HD | | SOLID | HCH | LCH | LIT / CWG | | DEEP / EXC | ELE | SCH | BAG |
Some suggested names:
| SHOCK | MELEE | MISSILE |
|
| | | | FAST | MILITIA | BLADE | PSILOI | | SOLID | PHALANX | SWORD | PELTAST | | DEEP / EXC | GUARD | AXE | AUXILLIA |
| | |
| | FAST | MEDIEVAL PIKE | TRIBE | SKIRMISH | | SOLID | HELLENIC PIKE | WARBAND | BOW | | DEEP / EXC | MIXED PIKE | CUNEUM | PAVISE |
| | |
| | FAST | LANCER | LGT HORSE | HAND GUN | | SOLID | KNIGHT | CAVALRY | ARTILLERY | | DEEP / EXC | GENDARME | CATAFRACT | WAR WAGON |
| | |
| | FAST | LGT CAMEL | LGT CHARIOT | HORDE | | SOLID | HVY CAMEL | HVY CHARIOT | COMMAND | | DEEP / EXC | ELEPHANT | SCYTHE CHARIOT | BAGGAGE |
Thoughts or comments? |
|
|
|
Post by saxonred on Oct 24, 2022 17:42:12 GMT
You can call DBA elements whatever you like, it's how they can be used in the battlefield that defines them. What are your newly named elements movement rate, combat factors and combat outcomes?
|
|
|
|
Post by dpd on Oct 24, 2022 21:53:09 GMT
The names match the units designations above. But like you say, names aren't all that important.
Instead of militia, phalanx and guard we could just use fast spear, solid spear and deep spear.
A rose by any other name.......
|
|
)