3.0 Points System for Big Battle?

I am afraid I don't know of any points values for v3 of DBA but a couple of thoughts:

- if you are interested in playing big battles have you checked out the new DBA book of battle scenarios?   Details are at:

ancientwargaming.wordpress.com/   There are example chapters for free download and soon the whole book will be available as a free download as well as there being a printed version for sale.

- Although I am not a DBMM (or DBM) player, I hear DBMM is more closely aligned with DBA v3 than DBM.  Have you checked out how DBMM points values might work?

Kind regards,

Simon

This is an interesting question.

I have considered it, however I see it as being a little difficult as the DBA army lists are based around 12 elements, and BBDBA in it basic format as multiples for simplicity. As a result if you had "cheap" troops you would need more stands than the standard 36 elements. This impacts the selection process. However, your suggestion of x4 above is very clever!

As mentioned the "Great Battles of History for DBA 3" may indeed of interest, but focussed on historical refights rather than a points system.

HOTT has a point system which I adapted for D3H2.

Its simple and seems to work well enough. We use it all the time at home and I use it for my Ice and Fire battles. These are Big Battle and use the High King tournament system (sometimes called King of the Hill).

TomT

Hey CC,
I like the min - max idea in general, seems to give you the flavour of the army (I note your mins seem to be x2 and your max x3 for most of the troops in what you wrote though, unless I misunderstood, some were x4).
I'm not entirely sure what to do about commands and break points. I'd go for something like.
a) each general above the first (or second) reduces the points you get for the battle by at least 10-20% ish.
b) the over-all break point is based on army points (so 4 for a standard army, 8 for a x2 army, but should probably be the same for both armies). Which is then used either:
1) when the army as a whole reaches that number of losses (my preferred option). or,
2) divided among the commands as equally as possible. so 2 commands in a x2 army has 4 BP each, with 4 commands 2 BP each. And either taking off the elements of broken command or allowing them to hold groups for a pip or two each until they are all gone (with or without a fighting penalty). This complicates the game quite a bit, so I'm in favour of the removal of all its elements (probably at the end of a turn).

I do have a really more complex (than I originally thought) thought, which follows Thomas's idea, but it takes some continuing effort, as DBA is pretty balanced anyway its balance and results will depend on your own play style.

a) a normal army (12 elements) is worth 120pts. so if you want 36 elements you want about 360 pts.
b) make up a list of how good you think each element is say 6-14 pts. Initially guesstimate probably giving each type a value of 6/8/10/12/14 points each. Based on how much you like the elements.
c) adjust elements values over many games with the criteria:
1) Up if people keep taking maximum (or at least more than half of the max).
2) Down if people keep taking minimum (I'm sure everyone will keep taking minimum knights this way .
3) Up if they keep destroying more elements than they lose (probably at least 3:2).
4) Down if they keep losing more elements than they destroy (probably at least 2:3).
5) Up's and downs cancel out, and each battle only one up or down adjustment should be made on each element type.
6) Any adjustment towards 10 should be only 1 pt, and any away 2pts (unless an element keeps fluctuating).
d) The minimum should probably not get below 2 or 3 though. The maximum value is flexible, probably 30 is pushing it though. After twenty or so games you could probably count it as a fixed final value (if you were feeling brave).
e) This system probably works better in a particular period, scale of battle, and for a particular set of players.
f) It could also go horribly wrong, if an army's minimum elements cost more than the total army points for the battle (completely unlikely of course) then I suggest reducing their minimums by 1 until the value of their elements fall under the battle value.

or, much simpler
a) each army (12 elements) is worth 36 pts (very like HOTT), so 108 pts for 36 elements.
b) initially guesstimate if an element type is worth 2,3,4 pts.
c) after playing a few battles decide if a element is better or worse than you first thought. probably no less than 2 or more than 6.
d) after enough battles you'll probably keep it the way you've decided.

Thoughts?

have fun,
Alex.

In HotT, the elements vary in cost from 1 to 6 points.  A standard sized army is 24 points.  For a standard sized army, no more than 12 points can be spent on elements that cost 3 or more points.

Hordes and Lurkers cost 1 point each.

Flyers, Knights, Riders, Beasts, Blades, Spears, Shooters and Warband cost 2 points each.

Airboats, Artillery, Sneakers and Clerics cost 3 points each.

Gods, Dragons, Paladins, Behemoths, Magicians and Heroes that don't fly cost 4 points each.

Aerial Heroes cost 6 points each.

Edit: There is no grading except for the fact that one of the elements is the general (like DBA). There are some restrictions on what can be the general, for instance, Gods, Dragons and Lurkers can't be the general.

I think you are on to something with disregarding the idea of points though.  I don't have quite the experience, but I have heard often that 3.0 is quite balanced the way it is especially after the list revisions correct?  Every element being of the same value for its period does kind of negate the point idea.  

I was just stumped with how DBM added points I guess.  I know there is irregular and regular and the grading, but if you take an ordinary Blade that is regular (assume all DBA types are for simplicity) there is a difference, at least in Barkers eye, between a Blade and Spear.  I think ranking may be one thing for starters.  If elements are mainly powerful in by rank that does come at a disadvantage for the player who loses frontage.  I apologize for the rambling.  I have an idea, I believe I saw it in the wiki, of just using the Regular Ordinary (O) points for DBA and seeing how that goes.  If all goes well then I may further play test it.  

I do agree that, regardless, many games must be played to even enter an "Alpha" stage.  Oh and that points don't always interest people 

I think that a point system is actually unnecessary, since DBA 3 has improved or adjusted most elements that were weak or too strong in prior versions.