|
Post by twrnz on Jun 12, 2016 6:18:48 GMT
The campaigns I have run are based around nodes or zones, a node if a city and zone if an undeveloped province. I have used this for computer moderated systems such as PBM Umpire as well as manually moderated campaigns.
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 11, 2016 22:52:05 GMT
I'm enjoying reading your progress. Thank you for updates.
Have you published your thoughts on Stratagems? I've been considering something similar. Stratagems and weather are aspects of DBMM which I rather like. They don't translate simply to DBA but some would, I suspect, work with modification.
|
|
|
Allies
Jun 11, 2016 22:03:54 GMT
Post by twrnz on Jun 11, 2016 22:03:54 GMT
|
|
|
Allies
Jun 11, 2016 21:27:16 GMT
Post by twrnz on Jun 11, 2016 21:27:16 GMT
I knew that III/40b ally was common, but I thought there was one list that could have a III/40a ally. On checking this morning I can't find it. Looks like I misread it previously.
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 11, 2016 20:51:14 GMT
The Conquest convention is held each year in Christchurch New Zealand. As with other years a 15mm DBA competition will be held. The date is Saturday the 5th November and Sunday 6th November (BBDBA). The player briefing is at 8.45am on Saturday with games starting at 9am. Games last one hour. The competition will comprise six rounds divided into an Ancient and Medieval Section each of three rounds. The Ancient Section requires army with a list dating between 3000BC to 450AD. The Medieval Section requires an army with a list date from 451AD-1520AD. Each list is limited to a specific year or sub-period with no change of elements during the course of the Section from that selected in the first round. Full details, including how to register can be found here: ancientwargaming.wordpress.com/conquest-dba/
|
|
|
Allies
Jun 10, 2016 22:05:25 GMT
Post by twrnz on Jun 10, 2016 22:05:25 GMT
Not only Zama, but Numidian contingents proved useful during the Spanish and Greek campaigns as well.
Elephants, though historically correct, would pose a slight problem.
Yes, I'm not convinced by elephant as allies. Too many PIPs are required to move things and an ally can absorb PIPs as it is.
|
|
|
Allies
Jun 10, 2016 22:00:46 GMT
Post by twrnz on Jun 10, 2016 22:00:46 GMT
Some very interesting allies here Martin.
Locally I don't recall anyone conducting a landing with allies but agree there are some interesting opportunities. My own armies are restricted in these capabilities.
I think a Viking 3/40a ally would be useful in this respect as it has 3Bd. Once landed it can move quickly possibly causing issues for your opponent.
|
|
|
Allies
Jun 10, 2016 6:00:46 GMT
Post by twrnz on Jun 10, 2016 6:00:46 GMT
I rather enjoy using a Numidian allied contingent with Polybian Romans. It contains 1 x General (Cv or LH); 1 x horsemen (LH) and 1x javelinmen (Ps). This ally adds a very different aspect to the Romans and of course would be well at home on the fields of Zama. It doesn't provide a powerful strike force but the LH can act independently which I think is useful.
|
|
|
Allies
Jun 9, 2016 11:24:18 GMT
Post by twrnz on Jun 9, 2016 11:24:18 GMT
In standard DBA what allies have you used and what were their strengths and weaknesses?
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 9, 2016 6:21:42 GMT
Interesting list of armies. Where are the elephants in the podium placings?
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 9, 2016 6:11:46 GMT
Nice pics of well presented models, Keith. Martin Thanks Martin.
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 9, 2016 5:56:15 GMT
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. I completely agree with their being no need in standard DBA. I am however a little concerned that in BBDBA that some armies may be more competitive than others where players play generic games and focus on using the same army repeatedly. I can see this happening locally as a group of players that are perhaps more competitive are starting to play. My own interests are more focussed on games between historical opponents and I see myself using different armies and mixes of troops. In this scenario I don't see a real need for a points systems at all. Interestingly over the last few days I have played both DBMM, using points, and BBDBA without points as a contrast of the system. My opponent really likes DBMM but regularly plays DBA. From my perspective BBDBA produced a more interesting visual game and was fast moving. If anyone is interested you can find the reports at my main blog. thewargamesroom.wordpress.com
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 9, 2016 5:21:35 GMT
I haven't built Dark Age armies but I've had the fortune of playing a number using DBA 3.0.
In my view the rules have really improved the interactions of troops in this period. The article, as with my own on hoplite warfare also on my site, have been very popular, based on visitor numbers. It's pleasing to read that people have found some of the articles on the blog interesting.
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 8, 2016 1:13:50 GMT
I have played a few games against Norse Irish using a range of armies including Viking IIRC. They are a surprisingly tough little army and not as challenged as I would have expected. Careful use of terrain is of course important. The Norse-Irish came mid-field in a recent small medieval theme.
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 7, 2016 19:33:40 GMT
The BBDBA wording is not as clear as it could be.
The wording on littoral landings state "either side can reserve 2-3 elements... to be deployed at the start of its first bound..."
Big battle changes this by stating only that it is by a full command. It does not specifically state it is no longer deployed at the start of its first bound. It is a seperate sentence from deployment by commands.
|
|