|
Post by stevie on Oct 29, 2022 14:38:03 GMT
Is there an "official" method for comparing DBA's 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 figure units with DBM's F, X, S, O, I units? There are only the arbitrary whims of Phil Barker (bless him) as shown in the DBA 3.0 rules I’m afraid.
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Oct 29, 2022 16:35:57 GMT
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... I love the fiddling and micro measuring
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 29, 2022 19:28:44 GMT
You’ll go blind Baldie.
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 29, 2022 20:09:31 GMT
You’ll go blind Baldie. and Bald. Joe Collins
|
|
|
Post by oriel on Oct 29, 2022 22:44:14 GMT
You’ll go blind Baldie. Unfortunately my main opponent here - a very decent chap in other ways , suffers from the "expanding" tape measure syndrome- no way to cure it other than Grids!
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Oct 30, 2022 0:30:33 GMT
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. I would love to know (and see) more of your variant! Jim
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Oct 30, 2022 6:04:51 GMT
You’ll go blind Baldie. and Bald. Joe Collins Scandalous
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 30, 2022 8:20:31 GMT
I would love to know (and see) more of your variant! Jim Like Jim I would be very interested in your grid variant Oriel. In the mean time, have a look at this and see what you think:- fanaticus.boards.net/post/37843/
|
|
|
Post by Piyan Glupak on Oct 31, 2022 10:35:15 GMT
Triumph is now the prefered ruleset for shorter games . That's OK if you can get the rules from the USofA , without paying an arm and a leg for them . Although I understand that they now have hard (paper) copies available, I am sure that they still sell the PDF online (which is what I used when I was into Triumph!).
Edit: To address the original question:-
I have tried both DBM and DBMM, but found both a bit of a slog because I didn't have a player experienced in either to play against. I originally went into DBA version 1.1 because I was struggling with DBM, and wanted to gain experience of using similar, but simpler rules that I could learn without input from an experienced player. I found that I actually preferred DBA. Much later, after DBMM came out, I played a solo game of DBA, then another solo game of the 100 point version of DBMM using the same armies. Both played well and gave a similar result, but the DBA game was quicker and easier for me.
I also got into BBDBA, and enjoyed that. (It looks good with 6mm figure armies, by the way.)
When DBA version 3 came out, I preferred earlier versions and the DBA Plus variant to DBA 3. When Triumph! came out, I adopted that as my preferred rules until version 1.0 came out, and I felt that the finished version wasn't as good as the later pre-publication ones. There was a lot I liked about the approach (slightly bigger armies based upon a simple points system, more troop types to give the effect of a couple of grades for some troop types, for instance). I ended up starting to do my own rules in conjunction with my main opponent. We went for core rules with period specific supplements. Currently, there are supplements for Ancient and Medieval, Fantasy, Pike and Shot, American War of Independence, the Napoleonic Wars, American Civil Wars and Retro-Science Fiction (based upon the "Barsoom" series).
|
|
|
Post by oriel on Nov 1, 2022 3:07:55 GMT
Just looked at stevie's simple rules- yes Great. Albeit i do not see the point of a 2 square long threat zone - have cut mine down to 1 square. But have introduced the rule: If the square orthogonally adjacent to a unit's front is unoccupied, that square and each square on either side (ie diagonally adjacent to unit's front) are its threat zones. However a psiloi unit only generates a threat zone directly to its front except toward other psiloi-( prevents psiloi nailing down knights etc). There is not much more to explain about my "movement" version- it's the nearest thing to simultaneous movement. Very simple: 1. Begin each bound with simultaneos shooting and place each unit that has shot, to the front of it's square (as a reminder that it cannot move for rest of bound). 2. 1 player rolls a die 123 he starts- 456 opponent starts. Whoever won the die roll now rolls a die; regardless of what he rolls he can only move one unit or group OR instead resolve ONE ongoing melee from the previous bound between units adjacent to eachother. The usual requirements for pips are used, so if he threw a 1 he can only move something requiring 1 "pip" (ie can't move an elephant). Following this the opponent rolls a die and moves 1 unit/group or adjudicates ONE ongoing melee. Then the first player rolls again and moves 1 unit/group etc. This procedure continues, but if a player rolls a "1" for "activation" (this is what i call these die rolls) its his last "move" etc, after which the opponent may continue rolling 1 die in succession (moving 1 unit/group or resolving 1 ongoing melee from previous bound-per die roll) - Until he also rolls a 1 for activation, after which he must cease (dicing for activation). A player always gets to expend 1 "pip's worth of "move" after rolling a "1" before ceasing. Close combat is immediately resolved the moment one player moves (in his turn) one unit/group into such contact. After the close combat has been resolved, all surviving units from both sides-including those that lent flank or rear support are placed to the front of their respective squares - indicating that they cannot move for the rest of the bound. (ie have "shot their bolt"). However if a player later on moves a fresh unit/group etc into the existing close combat, then combat is fought again - but only between the fresh unit(s) and its/their immediate opponent (but both sides may include overlaps and rear support - even if such units have already fought previously that bound. If a unit that has already fought that bound is attacked in flank or rear - it immediately turns to face its attacker (any opposing unit it is still in mutual front contact from a previous melee aiding the fresh attacker. After both sides have finished all activations (ie both have rolled a "1") the bound ends. If however there are any unresolved close combats from the PREVIOUS bound - ie neither player has "sacrificed" one of his activation rolls to adjudicate such, then both sides take turns to resolve ONE such combat EACH (ie each seperate group of opposing adjacent units.) This does not include any ongoing close combat from the present bound (which is continued in the next bound). It is easy to see which opposing units have not already fought etc because they are still at the back of their respective squares. At the end of a bound all units are placed at the back of their squares. Each square is 5cm, each unit 4cm - so as to have room to to shuffle back or forwards in its square. That's it folks! Makes for a very exiting game! - in my opinion...
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on Nov 1, 2022 8:31:00 GMT
Piyan Glupak: I read your rules last year. My main opponent has also read the rules. However, we did not use the rules in favor of Triumph because the rest of our playgroup only wanted to play Triumph and no other experiments. My main opponent and me did use all the rules: DBA but not version 3, DBM, DBMM and also ADG as we like larger battles. But the others of our Swiss group like Triumph. We also use sometimes DBA-expansions for ACW.This are baset on DBA2.2...
|
|
|
Post by skb777 on Jan 19, 2023 11:26:30 GMT
Having started out on the WRG rules set, when it became DBA we never got beyond the first game. Warband are far too powerful, in our book anyway, beyong the initial charge. All you carefully planned Pike, spear, blades just dissolved. Not sure if this has ever been rectified. Recently looked at DBMM and it does at least offer solutions to this conundrum, though translating Phil Barker's language is a challenge.
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 19, 2023 11:57:23 GMT
Having started out on the WRG rules set, when it became DBA we never got beyond the first game. Warband are far too powerful, in our book anyway, beyong the initial charge. All you carefully planned Pike, spear, blades just dissolved. Not sure if this has ever been rectified. Recently looked at DBMM and it does at least offer solutions to this conundrum, though translating Phil Barker's language is a challenge. Welcome to fanaticus! I do hope you try DBA 3. It is not perfect but it's very good and improved from the earlier versions. Certainly warband are not considered too powerful in the current version. If anything people find them a little underpowered but they can still pull off a win with some careful planning or good dice rolling! Cheers Jim
|
|
|
Post by martin on Jan 19, 2023 14:05:28 GMT
Having started out on the WRG rules set, when it became DBA we never got beyond the first game. Warband are far too powerful, in our book anyway, beyong the initial charge. All you carefully planned Pike, spear, blades just dissolved. Not sure if this has ever been rectified. Recently looked at DBMM and it does at least offer solutions to this conundrum, though translating Phil Barker's language is a challenge. Which version of DBA are you discussing? It’s on v3 now, thirty+ years later….and most experienced players would say you’d have to be ‘bloody, bold and resolute’ to field a warband-heavy army. A warband general might as well have a big roundel on his shield, being such a good target as he is. DBM/DBMM is OK if you want to spend all evening waiting for the inevitable…In the time it takes to play a DBMM 6’ x 4’ game you’d get three or four challenging games of DBA in. YMMV.
|
|
|
Post by skb777 on Jan 19, 2023 15:17:19 GMT
Having started out on the WRG rules set, when it became DBA we never got beyond the first game. Warband are far too powerful, in our book anyway, beyong the initial charge. All you carefully planned Pike, spear, blades just dissolved. Not sure if this has ever been rectified. Recently looked at DBMM and it does at least offer solutions to this conundrum, though translating Phil Barker's language is a challenge. Which version of DBA are you discussing? It’s on v3 now, thirty+ years later….and most experienced players would say you’d have to be ‘bloody, bold and resolute’ to field a warband-heavy army. A warband general might as well have a big roundel on his shield, being such a good target as he is. DBM/DBMM is OK if you want to spend all evening waiting for the inevitable…In the time it takes to play a DBMM 6’ x 4’ game you’d get three or four challenging games of DBA in. YMMV.Hey, I have v3 i didn't get around to trying it as I still see that warband just destroy Blade/pike/spear which I don't think should happen beyond the initial charge. It's probably more to so with I have a Camillan Roman that just dies against warband and is a bit of a buzz kill lol. i know what you mean about DBMM being too long, but it at least allows you fro the long game and you can use the larger forces to negate warband. Anyway that's just the way it worked out for me.
|
|