|
|
Post by paddy649 on Apr 24, 2022 17:21:07 GMT
You know my opinion on this. It would be best if we all did the same thing but making it truly immaterial to game play would be an acceptable alternative. The current status quo just feels wrong to me.
Weirdly I was playing with Paddy Myers very nice Khursan HYW figures yesterday at the Alton tournament. These are big figures and so were based on 35mm deep bases and would not have fitted on smaller. When I questioned how to deal with them he pointed out the line in the rules “Players should keep as closely as possible to the minimum depths recommended below (in the rules.) Larger alternatives are to accommodate figures based for other rule sets or over-large figures.”
Although larger base sizes are not given as an alternative for knights (except for wedge formations) - he argued that the 30mm base depth were only “recommended” and not mandated. Reading the rules I can’t fault the logic of this argument and I won’t bother offering any “reductio ad absurdum” thoughts on where this could take us.
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Apr 25, 2022 1:46:59 GMT
This is a tough one with both sides making good points. But can we actually quantify and advantage to one or the other? I'm not sure we can do that generically. But as players we may get "a feeling" regarding a specific army. Here's an example:
My practice is to use 15mm depth where practical. This is by convention and also to easily tell solid from fast troops at a distance. But I'm currently making an EAP army. It gets one element of Lydian Spears with no other element that can give it side support. So I suspect that a 15mm depth amongst the other troops would be troublesome but I've not played the army. I've based it on 20mm base because of my suspicion. This army needs all the help it can get to be anywhere near its historical potency. I justify it by the general giving the Lydian's orders to have a defensive posture and to maintain the line. Will this pan out in games? Time will tell.
I would be interested to hear Joe Collins' thoughts on this topic as he was particularly interested in the development of the Dark Age Blades v Spear match up and may be this was discussed in relation to the Viking army that has 3Bd and 4Bd.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Apr 25, 2022 8:55:02 GMT
Forgive me for reviving this very old thread, but I have given this some thought. Some players that have kept to the original 15mm deep bases for their heavy foot (i.e. Sp, 4Pk and 4Bd) are concerned that they’ll be at a slight disadvantage by modern opponents who have their heavy foot on 20mm deep bases, as allowed in DBA 3.0. Having all foot that do recoil moving back the same distance does keep them together and reduces overlaps, compared to having some foot recoiling 15mm while others recoil 20mm. If this is considered to be a major issue, then may I suggest the following simple solution:- (a) If you have heavy foot on 20mm deep bases, they still recoil 15mm. ---OR ALTERNATIVELY--- (b) If you have heavy foot on 15mm deep bases, they will recoil 20mm. That way everybody will be treated equally.  What are the thoughts of the wider DBA community and tournament organizers on this subject? A third possibility would be to have a variable recoil of EITHER the base depth OR ½ a base width for all foot elements (c.f. the recoil distances for mounted elements). Player's choice. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 25, 2022 10:26:13 GMT
Hmmm...that is a possibility Menacussecundus...
...but it will mean more fiddly awkward micro-measuring.
My personal preference is to keep things simple and just say:-
“Foot recoil ½ a base width (no matter their base depth)”,
as that is much easier and more practical...
Also, “recoil EITHER the base depth OR ½ a base width for all foot elements” has a flaw in it.
Some foot have a base depth of 30mm or 40mm, and these shouldn’t recoil those distances,
or they could outdistance pursuing foot (effectively 'breaking-off' from contact)..
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Apr 25, 2022 10:45:29 GMT
The latter point is easily fixed, stevie. "Either ½ a base width or own base depth if that is less than ½ a base width. Player chooses"
As for the measuring, that is no different from measuring recoils at present. And one would have to do some measuring even if there were a standard recoil distance, be that 15 or 20mm.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 25, 2022 11:01:37 GMT
Good point. It would mean that 15mm deep bases instead of being at a disadvantage would have an advantage! They can choose to recoil 15mm OR 20mm, while those on 20mm deep bases or more will have no choice. Now the balance has been tipped slightly in the other direction!...Ha, ha, ha!  |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Apr 25, 2022 13:08:45 GMT
Good point. It would mean that 15mm deep bases instead of being at a disadvantage would have an advantage! They can choose to recoil 15mm OR 20mm, while those on 20mm deep bases or more will have no choice. Now the balance has been tipped slightly in the other direction!...Ha, ha, ha! It was always there Stevie....those based on 15mm bases give less ground have a few advantages that aren't immediately obvious.If positioned with their rear edge one base width from bad or rough going it takes two recoils for a 20mm base depth to contact the terrain with their rear edge..an element with a 15mm depth will still be in good going.Likewise, if in bad/rough going it takes longer to push the 15mm depth base out of it.Thus a line of 15mm elements can give ground more slowly and buy time for other elements to do their stuff or join the party.😉 Also remember if you are going to allow the option for 15mm based infantry recoiling,you also have to allow it under section (c) when persuing as if you don't 15mm based elements won't be able to contact any 15mm or 20mm based elements recoiling.😉 |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 25, 2022 15:16:04 GMT
Er...I’m not quite sure what you mean Haardrada. Page 12 Pursuing says:- “(c) An element of Pikes, Blades or Warband pursues ½ BW.” So it doesn’t matter what depth they have..all pursuing foot move ½ BW, and foot recoil ½ BW (unless they are on 15mm deep bases, and recoil less). So contact is still maintained. Look, I’m quite happy with the current situation, as all my HI are on 20mm deep bases. It’s some of those players with their HI still on 15mm deep bases that are complaining. Having all foot that recoil or pursue moving ½ BW seems the fairest simplest solution. Either that or leave things exactly as they are now...and 15mm deep bases are at a slight disadvantage when recoiling compared to an all 20mm deep army, so live with it or re-base. I...in my cock-handed way...am just trying to help...  |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Apr 25, 2022 15:27:36 GMT
Er...I’m not quite sure what you mean Haardrada. Page 12 Pursuing says:- “(c) An element of Pikes, Blades or Warband pursues ½ BW.” So it doesn’t matter what depth they have..all pursuing foot move ½ BW, and foot recoil ½ BW (unless they are on 15mm deep bases, and recoil less). So contact is still maintained. Look, I’m quite happy with the current situation, as all my HI are on 20mm deep bases. It’s some of those players with their HI still on 15mm deep bases that are complaining. Having all foot that recoil or pursue moving ½ BW seems the fairest simplest solution. Either that or leave things exactly as they are now...and 15mm deep bases are at a slight disadvantage when recoiling compared to an all 20mm deep army, so live with it or re-base. I...in my cock-handed way...am just trying to help... Sorry Stevie I had a 🤯💨. |
|
|
|
Post by robert on Apr 25, 2022 16:42:09 GMT
not sure phil saw this occurring as on page 31 he hoped players produced armies in pairs. as it is 15mm following up in to a 20mm line are overlapped once if enemy recoil 15 and 20mm will be on a second as well. also if closing the door on a double rank line of 15mm they can recoil 20mm can not.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 25, 2022 23:37:35 GMT
I have some 200 or more heavy infantry elements based as originally prescribed, at 15 mm deep. I know not what course others may take, but as for me I will keep them that way. I don’t worry what the opponent has as I will try to double him and not worry about recoils. :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by brasidas19004 on Aug 24, 2022 12:02:55 GMT
My thoughts...
- unless one wants to play in a tournament, it doesn't matter since - as you note - you can recoil to match your opponent's 15 or 20mm bases, and it's just a friendly game.
- deeper bases are safer for figures and spears [if you use piano wire for spears, they are also safer for people].
- varied basing reveals the biggest weakness in the DBA game mechanics: geometry can be very important but in real life was largely irrelevant.
I'm not basing my figures for DBA or any set of rules in particular. I will base them how I like and adapt the rules to the figures and basing.
My deep sympathies to people who have 1000 figures or more and are considering re-basing. My thought is that unless you are retired...dont' bother!
Alex
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Aug 25, 2022 13:00:20 GMT
As a tournament organiser, I would be quite happy for players to agree how they would like to manage recoils with different depths of bases. The constructs "tournament" and "friendly" are not mutually exclusive!
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Aug 26, 2022 17:42:40 GMT
Just remember that just because we do not prosecute you and carry out the sentence doesn't mean you are not guilty of heresy.  |
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Aug 27, 2022 16:40:36 GMT
... It would mean that 15mm deep bases instead of being at a disadvantage would have an advantage! They can choose to recoil 15mm OR 20mm, while those on 20mm deep bases or more will have no choice. ... It was always there Stevie....those based on 15mm bases give less ground have a few advantages that aren't immediately obvious.If positioned with their rear edge one base width from bad or rough going it takes two recoils for a 20mm base depth to contact the terrain with their rear edge..an element with a 15mm depth will still be in good going.Likewise, if in bad/rough going it takes longer to push the 15mm depth base out of it.Thus a line of 15mm elements can give ground more slowly and buy time for other elements to do their stuff or join the party.😉 Also remember if you are going to allow the option for 15mm based infantry recoiling,you also have to allow it under section (c) when persuing as if you don't 15mm based elements won't be able to contact any 15mm or 20mm based elements recoiling.😉 I find these small differences very interesting. I admit that for quite a while I got the rules of recoiling and pursuing a bit wrong, for I somehow mixed up the rules of DBA 2.2 and 3.0. (Sorry for that) We played for example: Bd vs. Ax, CC outcome: Ax is recoiling its base length of 20 mm. Now Bd must pursue its base length of 15 mm, that means Bd looses CC contact. The point is: Due to the loss of contact, now it's up to the next player's PIP roll and his decisions where to close into contact to use any advantages! We found that these small movements to and fro of the battle line simulated the hot action of battle very well and added very much to the tension in the game, because it made the outcome of the moves a bit more unpredictable. In DBA 2.2. you get quite similar results because originally Bd don't pursue. These details give the strong feeling of dynamic processes: heavy troops holding their ground, lighter troops giving way and reforming shortly out of reach of the pursuers, and each side struggling for an advantage and a breakthrough in the line. Now in DBA 3.0 heavy Bd (in GG) simply pursue the lighter Ax, keep always contact and mow them down sooner or later. Is this better? And another point, using the base length to measure the movement is quick and easy and quite exact. O.k., the 15 mm bases tend to topple over the terrain pieces and figures surely look much better on 20 mm, but I think it's the look AND the feeling of the game that creates a fascinating gameplay. Therefore I'll keep my 4Bd on 15 mm! And even consider to return to DBA 2.2. "La guarde ne recule jamais!" |
|
