|
Post by nangwaya on Sept 9, 2019 17:59:42 GMT
Looking forward to it!
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Sept 10, 2019 8:20:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by vtsaogames on Sept 10, 2019 16:30:47 GMT
So 24 elements, 50% wider field, 1 sub-general as a range extender and 8 losses break a side? Any other differences?
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Sept 10, 2019 16:46:20 GMT
So 24 elements, 50% wider field, 1 sub-general as a range extender and 8 losses break a side? Any other differences? You have covered all the essential details. I will add that the increase in game time to complete a battle will decrease with experience and games will become tighter.
|
|
|
Post by nangwaya on Sept 10, 2019 22:08:30 GMT
Although both armies did have decisive victories, overall they seem well balanced against each other, especially with the last battle.
Again, great pics. and good write up.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Sept 11, 2019 6:48:07 GMT
For clarity I would like to add the following about command and the use of allies.
Only the CinC can use the +1 bonus for combat. Combat factors for the subordinate general remain the same as per element type. The subordinate general assumes overall command upon the loss of the CinC. This takes place on the following turn and negates the extra pip cost for movement of single elements or groups.
I would suggest the following guideline if using allied contingents. This follows the same procedure as listed on page 31 or the rule book. Firstly, select the general’s element, then 3 from the largest number of elements and lastly 2 of player’s choice of elements yet unused.
Using two allied contingents, select the general’s element and three from the largest number of elements for each contingent. Together, the allied contingents will total eight elements.
|
|
|
Post by vtsaogames on Sept 11, 2019 12:53:50 GMT
Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by vtsaogames on Sept 11, 2019 22:27:17 GMT
I presume if the sub-general is lost it only counts as a single element, unlike the C-in-C?
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Sept 11, 2019 22:42:19 GMT
I presume if the sub-general is lost it only counts as a single element, unlike the C-in-C? Exactly. In a recent test between Arab Conquest and Sassanids, the Sassanid sub-general (4Kn) fell victim to Arab swordsmen half-way through the battle leaving the Sassanid left inert. His loss (1 element) did even the score and kept the Sassanid CinC dancing until the end of the battle.
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Sept 17, 2019 3:28:33 GMT
A bit disappointed in the Roman performance there (some better than average rolls for the Sassanids in key areas?), but nice report and interesting battles.
Looking forward to the next batch.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Sept 17, 2019 6:04:05 GMT
A bit disappointed in the Roman performance there (some better than average rolls for the Sassanids in key areas?), but nice report and interesting battles. Looking forward to the next batch. Goragrad, Using the larger command will take some adjustment. The number of turns needed to reach a decision in most cases doubled. Deployment of troops changed from the standard twelve as later successes demonstrated the usefulness of two or three reserve formations (2 or 3 elements) behind the first line.
This was well demonstrated in several test games between Parthia and the Early Sassanid.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Sept 17, 2019 7:28:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Sept 17, 2019 8:44:16 GMT
Having shifted sympathies based on their opponent, nice work by the Sassanids.
Tough taking on ellies with limited BW or lights.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Sept 21, 2019 16:37:05 GMT
Testing the larger command continues and this coming Tuesday I will post Parthia vs. early Sassanid. Lots of mounted troops.
The following are also possible for large command battle: Consular Rome vs. Iberians Consular Rome vs. Carthage Consular Rome vs. Numidians Consular Rome vs. Early Germans Seleucid vs. Graeco-Bactrian Seleucid vs. Consular Rome Seleucid vs. Parthian Middle Imperial Rome vs. Early Germans Middle Imperial Rome vs. Parthia Middle Imperial Rome vs. Early Sassanid Middle Imperial Rome vs. Sarmatian Sarmatians vs. Huns Later Imperial Rome vs. Goths Early Byzantine vs. Sassanid Umayyad vs. Abbasid
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Sept 22, 2019 2:34:03 GMT
I'm looking forward to more/all of these. The 24AP armies have such a look of 'rightness' about them, and with your particular rules the battles seem to match. (Maybe try out Paddy's recent idea for LH PIPs with it...and if you do, Stevie's suggestions on pg2 of that thread appear good too)
At this early stage with your 24AP tests, do you have a preference between the 18AP games with standard PIPs and board vs the 24AP games with Sub-Gen + standard PIPs + wider board?
With your 18AP variants on the 12AP armies, are you taking normal quantities x 1.5 and rounding up (or down)? (My copy of DBA 3.0 is in transit from UK to AUS so I can't tell.)
Cheers
|
|