|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 26, 2022 9:26:03 GMT
Ahh, the old WRG loop of string! I can see why 18BW as it gives a circle slightly less than 6BW in diameter.
Maybe we're over thinking this? If we add the good going loop of string as an option for each terrain region as a non-compulsory item and let the attacker choose the first/second non-compulsory piece then perhaps we overcome a lot of the issues. It'll usually give the attacker at least one piece of terrain that suits their army.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 25, 2022 13:57:29 GMT
Definitely. All based up and ready for battle. Now just the worry of turning a flank in the middle of a battle line with the possibility of losing one or two double based sparabara in one combat as the flanking unit cannot recoil!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 25, 2022 13:53:02 GMT
This is such a complex topic given the number of armies in DBA. But the simple Aggression factor does quite well considering the complexity. As an example, I'll take two Ax heavy armies I own, Welsh and Thracians. The Welsh, at Ag 3, are often in terrain they don't like. But if you cross into Wales then you're in trouble. This seems to fit history quite well. Thracians at Ag 1 stay home a lot but then they didn't really go and conquer anyone historically.
Looking at the enemies list for Mongol conquest shows that a large majority would prefer open terrain so again, the factors seem to work. But perhaps what would be useful is the ability to adjust the terrain by displacing them a certain number of BW provided the terrain remains legal. That way you could create a section of the field that suits your troop types.
But don't expect much luck if you take cavalry into the Zagros mountains or Psiloi onto the steppe!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 21, 2022 14:49:02 GMT
Very nice work!
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 15, 2022 23:06:07 GMT
It always seemed to me that Polybian Romans were a "prototype" army for PB, with a line of heavy infantry (Hastatii/Principes mixed together), a reserve of Triarii and flanks covered by lights and cavalry. Separating Hastatii and Principes seemed too granular for the DBA-level that the general represents. But there is an answer. 6mm figures! You could easily make the chequerboard with these and they don't take that long to paint, once you realise that no one is going to see any detail from arms length.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 11, 2022 6:38:00 GMT
The BUAs, camps and terrain help set the scene in my humble opinion. They are also far more visible from a standing height that the figures.
If I had more storage space, I think I'd make DBA battlefields from XPS foam. You could easily texture it to give a more realistic good going with slight undulations before flocking.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 10, 2022 14:44:13 GMT
Hi stevie.
The rough going is a problem. 4Ax will at least look for good going as a contrast to 3Ax, which can't hide from Bd. Side-support in rough going may be a little too far. The formation is probably less of a problem but I did think of giving them side support from all infantry so other lights could support them.
The quick-kill rule looks promising. I'll give it a try.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 10, 2022 11:20:06 GMT
Finally finished...well nearly. I need two more packs of archers (Xyston) to complete the solid bows.   Hope you enjoy! Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 10, 2022 10:38:31 GMT
I'm about to start my Illyrians as I continue collecting classical armies around the eastern Mediterranean. Now we all know that 4Ax will be slaughtered by Sp in RAW in good going. Unfortunately, the Illyrians have an aggression of 3, so will face hoplites across a billiard table more often than not. I'm not expecting them to dominate. They will be a peripheral army in a future campaign. But they have to have some chance of inflicting damage, otherwise it's a waste of time. So my house rule will be that 4Ax get +1 side support from all solid infantry in good going. This my interpretation of 4Ax being a hinge between heavy and light infantry. I thought about giving them side support from any infantry but that seemed too far a reach.
I've done some testing with blank bases and they lose but they do last longer. So when finished, I'll be testing them against Argos, 10 Sp+2 Ps, against 10 4Ax+2Ps. Hopefully, the Illyrians can win the Ps exchange (50/50) and get onto a flank and just might etch out an occasional win.
Any other house rules for 4Ax being used?
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
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 jim1973 on Apr 13, 2022 9:07:49 GMT
There's an ever increasing range of coloured fillers and grouts that can also save a significant amount of time. Put it on when you glue to the base then come back later to add some tufts, grass, etc. These can also cover any imperfections. They can also help bond the miniatures. I have a mocha acrylic grout for wetter climates and a biege wood putty for drier climates (currently being used on my EAP).
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Apr 10, 2022 20:36:10 GMT
You can also consider a Waterway to anchor one flank against non-littoral enemies. Then you get to choose Ps or Cav to hold the other flank or place in reserve to fill holes in the phalanx.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Apr 9, 2022 23:30:57 GMT
Hi stevie. I wasn't disagreeing with your choice. I was supporting your position on 4Ax.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Apr 9, 2022 19:11:10 GMT
No rules changes? Where is the real stevie???
3Ax were the fast moving troops and get a movement bonus without being impetuous. 4Ax can stand against heavy infantry and get... to beat fast troops on ties? Not sure how that helps against heavy infantry. Maybe side support from 4Ax/4Bl/Sp/4Pk would see them play their historical role?
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Apr 8, 2022 19:47:14 GMT
An interesting discussion...were the Macedonians ‘Greeks’? A difficult question to answer after 2500 years, particularly with the added spice of modern politics in a world tinged with nationalism. It's becomes more complicated when you consider that the Ancient Greeks divided themselves into four separate ethnic groups: Dorians, Achaeans, Ionians, Aetolians, rather than a pure "race". These ethnic groups are thought to have arrived on the Greek peninsula at different times rather than being four concurrent tribal groups. Macedon was certainly at the edge of the "Greek world", surrounded by Illyrians, Thracians, Paeonians, etc. Not dissimilar to Syracuse and the other Greek cities in eastern Sicily. We see in those cities a natural admixing of Sicels and Greeks and I am sure this would have occurred on the frontiers of Macedon, Thessaly and Akarnania as well. So it's best to go to the experts, and who are better qualified to determine who qualified as ancient greek and the ancients themselves? Alexander I of Macedon (who claimed Argive descent) had his claim to "Greekness" adjudicated by a court of Elean hellanodikai in order to compete at the Olympic Games and was considered Greek-enough to be allowed. Alexander ISo this question is actually 2500 years old. But if the priests of Zeus, at the most holy religious festival, are satisfied then that's enough for me, particularly as Macedon was neither rich nor powerful at that time to obviously corrupt the process (I'm looking at you, Rome!). But it was still discussed amongst the southerners, particularly the Athenians, so much so that Thucidydes also wrote about it, in agreement with the priests, 100 years later. (Seems bigotry is an old pastime as well.) It is so human to continue this discussion after so many years. Imagine the chat room banter if Philip and Demosthenes had internet access? Cheers Jim |
|
