Shooting ?

Hmmm…very interesting. Thanks for posting that Tom.

So “nearest” is supposed to mean “a supporting shooter that is nearest to the primary shooter”, and not “one of the three shooters that is nearest to the chosen target”.

I can see problems with this approach.

Three red shooters, ‘A’, ‘B’ and ’C’, are targeting the blue element.
The red player decides that element ‘C’ will be the primary shooter (perhaps it’s a WWg or Art).
Bow ‘B’ is nearest to the primary shooter ‘C’, so will be shooting in support.
But what about Bow ‘A’?
Bow ‘A’ is not the nearest to shooter ‘C’…Bow ‘B’ is.
Does this mean that Bow ‘A’ cannot shoot in support?
But this contradicts with the Sequence of Play on page 8 paragraph 4: “(Shooters) that are eligible must shoot…”

The same thing happens if the blue element were in the Threat Zone of Bow ‘A’.
Bow ‘A’ would have to be the primary shooter, and Bow ‘B’ would be the nearest support shooter.
But what about red element ‘C’…is this excluded because it’s not the nearest support shooter to primary shooter ‘A’?

I think this is one for the FAQ team to sort out.
Until they do, I shall continue using the closest shooter to the chosen target is the primary shooter, and any others support it.
This may not be how the rule was intended, but it's much simpler, cleaner, quicker, and has no contradictions. 



Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes

Oh…one thing I forgot to mention in my previous post…although it was implied.
If Bow ‘A’ were the primary shooter, and both ‘B’ and ‘C’ were allowed to shoot in support, then being “nearest” to the primary shooter becomes superfluous and has no meaning.

But there is another consideration that I would like to bring to everybody's attention.

In my previous post it was ascertained that all three red elements shoot, but the primary shooter is the one closest to the chosen target.
This means that the combat factor of element ‘C’ (which is a WWg or Art) is ignored…it’s just a support shooter.
But what about the Combat Outcomes on page 11?

Fast foot recoil from shooting solid foot on an equal score.
If the blue element were 3Ax or 3Wb, and primary shooter ‘A’ were 3Bw, an equal score would have no effect.
But the blue element is being shot at by solid WWg/Art, albeit in supporting role, so it should recoil.

Likewise in the following cases:-
        Elephants are destroyed by shooting Artillery if they score less…
        Light Horse flee from shooting Artillery if they score less…
        War Wagons are destroyed by shooting Artillery if they score less…
…even though the WWg or Art is not the primary shooter, these targets are still being shot at by these elements.
After all, the Combat Outcomes on page 11 makes no distinction between the primary and support shooter.

Therefore, although WWg and Art lose their combat factor when support shooting, their Combat Outcomes still apply.

(Sorry to complicate things, but it’s better to have these arguments here rather than in the middle of a game.
Especially a tournament game!)

Actually scottrussell, I am 100% serious (which is unusual for me  ).
Nowhere in the rules is the phrase “primary shooter” used.
But it’s a useful phrase for us players to decide the practical mechanics of who’s combat factor is used when shooting.
The Combat Outcomes on page 11 say “if shot at”, nothing more.
And shooting in support is still shooting…


Of course not…because edge-to-edge contact is not close combat.
Neither party has a front edge in contact with each other.
Oh, some troops on the margins will be fighting, disrupting cohesion, order and morale, causing the -1 combat factor, but not enough to be classed as fully engaged in close combat.


Now I know this thread is supposed to be about shooting, but while we are on the subject of flank attacks, consider this:-

The unfortunate blue Blades have been attacked in the flank by red Knights while also fighting red Spears to their front.
* If the blue Blades score more than the red Spears both red elements will recoil (and the Blades will pursue).
* If the blue Blades score equal then there is no effect (note that the Knights are not ‘quick killed’ by the Blades, even though the score is equal, because the Blades are not in front-edge close combat with the Knights, but only with the red Spears).
* If the blue Blades score less than the red Spears they will be destroyed, as they cannot recoil, and the Knights must make a pursuit move straight forwards!

Yep, that’s right…page 12 paragraph 9 says “An element whose close combat opponents recoil, flee or are destroyed must immediately pursue (if they are of the right type)”.
The Knights were in front-edge close combat with the Blades flank, so they should pursue 1 BW straight forwards.
(I presume that if both red elements have to pursue, then element ‘A’ would do so first, as they were in mutual front-edge close combat with the destroyed blue Blades, and this pursuit would block the Knights pursuit).


Confession time
I have a slight advantage over some other players, as I don’t have any pre-conceived notions of how the rules should work, or how they used to work in previous editions. I only go by the rules as they are written now. Yes, I used to play DBA 2.0 in the past, but that was decades ago, and I have forgotten everything about them (I stopped using DBA 2.0 because it was too unrealistic…elements swapping position after they had deployed, Psiloi fighting from behind the front line instead of in front of it, geometric ploys preventing contact, etc).
So I am facing DBA 3.0 afresh as it were, just as a new player would.
And the only guide I have is the current rules, as they are written, word for word.
So if the current rules give unexpected results contrary to what players expect, then so be it.
Perhaps the DBA 3.0 rules should have been worded differently…

Gentlemen.

Sorry to reiterate but I do so for those few who do not know - I hate DBA3.0, it went to far from DBA2.2, to become a sub-set of DBMM.

You are killing it, and it will end up like games of WRG 6th, look for the things you can exploit, loopholes and super armies.

It needs to be made clearer, write for a 12 year old, bullet points etc.
Put things where they belong, if it belongs under movement put it there.

I have just spent nearly £300 on figures to upgrade my DBA2.2 armies to DBA3.0, I now regret that. So I will go back to my 1982 rules and continue to modify, using 6mm figures.

David Constable

Ah Simon, but where in the rules does it say “supporting troops do not pursue”?
All I can find is the following.

Page 10 paragraph 6:-
“(Close combat) occurs when an element moves into, or remains in, both front edge and front corner-to-corner contact with an enemy element…”
Well, the Knights in my picture are in both front-edge and front corner-to-corner contact with an enemy element.
So they fore-fill the requirements for being in close combat.
Note that the above rule does not say mutual or both front-edges must contact each other.

Page 10 paragraph 7:-
“When an element is in close combat both to front and to flank or rear or in close combat to its front and overlapped, only it and the enemy in front fight each other. Others only provide tactical factors.”
This tells us who’s combat factor to use, and which element rolls the dice.
But it doesn’t tell us what happens after the combat has been resolved…that is described under the Pursuing rules.

Page 11 paragraph 4:-
"A supporting element in close combat against an enemy element's flank or rear recoils if the friendly element in combat with that enemy's front recoils, flees or is destroyed."
There you have it...troops attacking a flank are in close combat.

Page 12 paragraph 9:-
“An element in a city, fort or camp or in bad going (other than marsh or gully) or whose pursuit move would cross a battlefield edge or enter such bad going, does not pursue.”
That’s a fairly long list of exceptions…but no mention of troops attacking a flank being exempted.

Page 12 paragraph 9:-
“Otherwise an element whose close combat opponents recoil, flee or are destroyed must immediately pursue, but only if (they are of the right type)…”
We have already ascertained that the Knights attacking a flank have fore-filled the requirements of being in close combat (they are in both front-edge and front corner-to-corner contact with the enemy), therefore they must pursue.

Now you may prefer troops attacking a flank not being classed as being in close combat…
And you may have been playing that way for years…
…but it is not what the rules say.

Besides, I find it absurd that impetuous troops must make a wild uncontrolled pursuit move when they defeat an enemy that is in face-to-face combat with them, but the very same troops are all nice and under control and refuse to pursue when they charge an enemy in the flank (especially warbands and medieval knights!).


Oh, one last thing about support shooting and combat outcomes.
When artillery with no support targets an elephant, they are shooting at it with large rocks, metre long iron bolts or cannon balls.
If the artillery is shooting in support, they are not going to change their ammunition.
They are still shooting with large rocks, metre long iron bolts or cannon balls, even if they are not the ‘primary shooter’.
Support shooting is still shooting…and their combat outcomes should still apply.

Ha Timurilank...I'm glad you asked. 
I have already posted the answer that you seek:-


So the cavalry in full mutual front-edge close combat with the pike has a flee outcome, whereas they would have been destroyed were it not for their much greater speed, while the cavalry attacking the flank of the pike column recoils.

As to why there are two different outcomes, there are two different reasons:-
    1) the cavalry in front of the pikes are being prodded by multiple ranks of very long pointed sticks, 
        and when they flee it puts the wind up the cavalry attacking the flank, so they fall back as well.
    2) it's in the rules. 

Hello Bob, 
Well, can you tell me where my interpretation is incorrect?:-

Page 11 paragraph 4:-
"A supporting element in close combat against an enemy element's flank or rear recoils if the friendly element in combat with that enemy's front recoils, flees or is destroyed."

Page 12 paragraph 9:-
“Otherwise an element whose close combat opponents recoil, flee or are destroyed must immediately pursue, but only if (they are of the right type)…”

Seems pretty clear to me...attacking a flank is classed as close combat, and close combat troops must pursue.

Still, you are quite right, people are free to play the game anyway they want.
I just prefer to play by the rules as they are written, and not make things up or leave things out.
Would you care to tell us what other rules you purposely choose to ignore?

As I posted before:-
You may prefer troops attacking a flank not being classed as being in close combat…
And you may have been playing that way for years…
…but it is not what the rules say.