No love for DBM or DBMM at Fanaticus?

I prefer DBMM

1. I have not played DBM

After that concise explanation of my point of view I will add that me and my regular gaming chum have played DBMM three times. We found it a bit of a slog because nobody else at club plays it so we ain't got an "expert" to quiz whilst we play

We are considering the 100 points version

Still prefer DBA cos it fits the description of myself, slightly simplified but beautifully put together.

I have never played DBM but have dabbled with BBDBA which I found worked well for me.

Although I have bought DBMM 2.0 (the 2010 version), and all the Army List Books,
I must confess to not being fan…far too complicated, and unnecessarily so, what
with certain things happening only when it’s your or your opponents bound,
except on a Tuesday, unless it’s a leap year, and only before midday, except
when there is also a full moon…
(Ok, I exaggerate…but only slightly)
I dislike rules with exceptions to a rule, then exceptions to that exception, and so on.

For me ancient wargaming is all about moving my little metal or plastic soldiers around
on a table in a reasonably realistic manor that roughly simulates the historical accounts.
If this can be done simply and quickly, then why make it complicated?
It’s the effects on our wargames tables that is important…
…not the mechanisms that are used to generate these effects.

This is why I think DBA is superior (although even that could be made a bit simpler without
distorting the effects too much: see fanaticus.boards.net/post/37843/ ).

However, I do see the point Dpd is making in his original post.
The conversion of the the troop classes from DBMM to DBA could have been done better.

I think DBA’s 3Ax should be the equivalent of DBMM’s ‘Irr Ax(O)’ class, and DBA’s 4Ax the
equivalent of DBMM’s ‘Reg Ax(S)’ class…not necessarily using the same mechanism, but
somehow make them a little tougher in close combat and not be massacred so easily by
heavy foot. This alone would make the battle of Cannae possible and extend a pike army’s
battleline, thereby negating the need for the invention of 8Pk elements to prevent outflanking.

Started with 5th Edition, never got on with 6th, moved to, and played a lot of DBM, after brief flirtation with DBR, but agree with Stevie (what's going on here?!!) found that the introduction of DBMM had too many variations to factors depending on whose go it was etc, etc. It seemed to me that the fairly simple workable system of DBM had been amended and complicated in the name of increased accuracy and become less enjoyable. It also divided the playing community which meant fewer players and made it more likely that you'd end up playing the 'serious gamers' at a competition.

I now prefer DBA where the participants are great fun to play, you can play 6 games in a day rather than it taking a whole weekend and you can collect 3 or 4 small armies instead of one big one.

We adopted a grid based DBA here in Munich last year - I started to look around for alternatives after numerous "discussions" over millimetres with my opponent
Out of interest i just bought a copy of DBMM. On page 5 it says "The player should have to demonstrate skills - not of an accountant" Well in my opinion
the rules do just that! - and are boring to boot!
Grid based gaming has huge advantages, for instance i can post my opponent a gridded map of the battlefield beforehand so that when he arrives we save time
setting up.
Another "time saver" instead of stroking one's beard on deciding how to allocate ones pips/move one's elements
we have adopted a new movement system - At the beginning of each bound, flip a coin to determine which side begins activation. The side that begins, rolls a die for activation and may move only ONE unit or group or continue ONE ongoing melee. Then the other side does the same. This continues, until one side declares it has finished or rolls "1" for activation after which only the opponent may continue until he also rolls a "1". If after the final activation neither side has "activated" an ongoing melee, (from the previous bound) then both sides take turns to "adjudicate"one each. Also we allow a unit already engaged to its front to turn and face a flank attack -which can happen at any time.

As a reminder as to which elements have been activated ie have moved shot or "meleed" (shooting precedes movement in our variation) - each unit is placed with its rear edge
resting on the back of the square it is occupying before the beginning of each bound, and moved to the front of the square after it has completed its move or shot etc. Also units that have assisted in
overlap or fought a melee cannot move again for the rest of the bound. our units are 4cm square - and each square 5cm.

Just watched Tony Aguilar - yes a great improvement - but a lot of fiddling around with measuring - and once again one player "looks on" while being
outflanked - in my system the opponent can respond immediately...