Steel Warriors DBA 2024 sponsored by Irregular Miniatures.

My six games at Steel Warriors:-

1. Using Early Germans against my own army of Ancient Brits, commanded by Tom W. We invaded, and I unwisely chose the side with the Brit’s enormous city on it. I’d been thinking of nabbing it, but realised pretty quick that I was unlikely to without heavy casualties. The main battle lines met in a confused melee, typical of warband encounters, and low initiative on my part saw Tom grab a well deserved victory, 2-4.

2. Using Lithuanians, nearly all archers on foot, against Pete D.’s Prussians. The theme of this round was ‘Blind General’, where you’re unaware of your PIP score until you run out. We defended a wooded battlefield, but Pete closed quickly and inflicted a 2-5 win pretty quickly.

3. This round I chose an army from the pool, and took Scots-Irish, hoping for some littoral landing action…and then invaded the grassy steppes of Ken G. and his Alans. Rather than hang about we advanced on the right and took the fight to the Alans. Surrounded enemy light horse refused to die, and then the heavily armed Alan general and bodyguard charged to clinch a win. 2-4. So three losses in three games so far…ho hum 🙃.

4. After a lunchtime recharge I defended dense woodland with Prussians against those pesky Alans, now led by Colin A.. His light horse swung wide to swoop on the Prussian camp, but luckily were repelled. Meanwhile the Alan general charged but got himself into trouble, surrounded and killed by an assortment of Prussian foot and mounted. A win 3g-0.

5. Next, my Aztecs attacked the Aitolian early hoplite Greeks under John S., whose army was 2/3 light skirmish foot (psiloi). We engaged on the flat plain, away from some rocky hills : The obsidian equipped Aztec swordsmen clashed with Aitolian hoplites in the centre, while the peasant masses (hordes) engaged Greek skirmishers on the flanks. The Aztec right was weak and under threat, some fleeing, but the left helped win the game by breaking through and turning in toward the centre. 4-0 (+ 1 x Hd) win.

6. Lastly, I commanded Numidians (all light horse and light foot, bar one elephant) against invading Caledonians under Phil S. The main body of Caledonian warbands held back, protecting their encampment, so the Numidians advanced on the right to tackle the enemy chariots. Initially successful, half the chariots being defeated, the Numidian commander took on the remainder unsupported. Falling with a Caledonian javelin in his face, the Numidians lost heart, and a swift counterattack routed some of the Numidian horse to win the day for the northern warriors.

A fun day of mixed theme gaming, commanding six different weird and wonderful armies, chosen (in theory) primarily for their ineptitude. Different gamers’ choice of a ‘poor army’ varied wildly, some being my favourites (though that may reflect my own poor judgement!).

Well done to the organisers, Mark and Phil, for running a fine tournament.

First, what a great venue! I travelled from the city by bus, up and up onto the moor. And the hot sandwich shop at lunchtime was excellent.

Second, my six games:

(1) I invaded with Pete D's Lusitanians (9 Ps...) against Pete with my own Numidians (6 LH 5 Ps El). I invaded; we both discovered that Ps v LH is a stronger matchup than we'd expected; I won 4-1.

(2) I defended in the deep dark forest with the Tamils and Singhalese allies - 5 El, a Hd, 3 Bw, 2 Ps and a Cv - against Baldie. I am not sure what he had - early Germans? - but in any case he has well described my sorry performance. I lost 5-2.

(3) I defended with the Attalid Pergamenes (mostly Ps) against Rory who commanded the Samnites, delightfully embellished with two lots of Samnite allies (all 12 elements Ax). I got on his flank at the start, but couldn't make it pay before the solid Ax arrived. I lost, killing 2 (including a camp).

(4) I defended with the later Moors (3 fast Ax 3 Ps 6 LH) against Tim Kohler with the medieval Irish (3 LH 3 fast Ax 6 Ps). In the context of this tournament these armies were each balanced. I won for the loss of two elements.

(5) I defended with the ancient British (6 Wb...) against Colin A with the Tamils. He skilfully lured me onto his tusks, and I was foolishly aggressive in addition. I lost three and a general, all Wb, killing 2.

(6) I defended with the Scots-Irish (nearly all Ax) against Martin M with the Alans (mostly LH). Losing draw, 0-3. I should have played more aggressively against the LH, I think.

Third, what do we players think makes a weak army, based on this evidence? Low aggression (apart from the Mongols, I was not aware of any army with aggression more than 1); allies who don't bring anything new; few Kn, Bd, Sp etc (obviously) but also few Bw, and more El than you would expect.

Several players brought an army whose camp did not include a CF. I ran over two of these. This I think is historical - in the ordinary game, the reward for breaking through to make contact with an enemy camp seems to me too small/risky.

Keen to play again next year

Paul H

It was John's idea last year.
As you bring an army, camp and specific set of terrain that whoever ends up with the army has to use. 
Being very clear that the camp has been designed not to have a camp follower leaves it undefended.

I rarely attack or have to defend a camp but in this tourney I lost an undefended camp, destroyed an undefended camp and hid some psilo in an undefended camp when it looked like being lost.

No camp followers is the new big thing in Sheffield.

I’d even brought a spare camp and camp follower element in case there was none shown….but exactly how the army’s provider would have ruled on this one is a moot point.

…nothing to stop the owning player deploying an element in his camp, apart from having to play with a football team worth instead of the standard dozen.