|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jul 19, 2020 8:18:53 GMT
Just my fourpenny worth as a horseman of over 55 years (well not actually 55 years. I did get off for toilet breaks and when visiting the cinema). No ride in cinemas?  Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jul 13, 2020 8:57:20 GMT
Welcome back! I am so impressed with your ACW armies and terrain. It shows that you can make A 2ft square board look like a battlefield. I must admit that if I were starting again in DBA I'd go with the small scale. I was thinking Baccus 6mm on 60mm bases. But you show smaller can also work and the Picoarmor Celts are to die for!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jul 12, 2020 12:24:00 GMT
Just finished the first battle. Excellent as always. Your Grecian ring adds to the theme!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jul 5, 2020 7:52:26 GMT
The easy way around it is to model your BUA on a hill and just call it "BUA". That was my solution for the Thracian and Celtic Hill Forts.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jun 28, 2020 23:25:14 GMT
Very nice. I liked the post on banners, which now has me eyeing my Crusaders in the lead pile for a lick of paint! One substep I have used as well to get a reasonable effect is to use clothes pegs to hold the wet flag in position whilst it dries. I'll be spending this evening diving through the rest of your posts.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jun 21, 2020 7:12:42 GMT
I had a similar thought about randomly determining the strategic position (e.g. undersupplied, reinforcements en route, etc) to try and simulate what may happen in a campaign. I was toying with cards or two dice to get a bell curve. Never did go through with it but it may add some more layers to the line'em up and knock'em down standard.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jun 9, 2020 5:58:32 GMT
Thanks Bob. Well, I like them. Pity I have the Ancients available so far but these would work well for a travel set so I may get some. Also looking at Napoleonic/ACW/AmRev DBA variants and these work well to get the rules finessed. It's anazing how much steam you lose on a project waiting for painted armies.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 25, 2020 7:46:49 GMT
I have liked the idea of Double-based Pikes because a block of 3x2 Pikes does not a Phalanx make (in my eyes). It is too easily outflanked by the Polybian Romans (8xBd Hastati/Pricipes and 2xSp Triarii). But from my reading it was disorder and local flanking from the more flexible Roman deployment that destroyed the Phalanx. After all, the Triplex Acies is quite deep when all the ranks are counted. This is well-represented by the Pursuit rule in DBA. I want to experiment with 6x8Pk for the Hellenistic armies at base CV +3 but Side-Support of +3 and pursue half a base depth. That way one element needs to pursue twice before being isolated. I think this will work well against Spears, which don't pursue so don't cause as much disorder and Blades, which do pursue and can seriously disorder the line.
But this has to wait as my Xyston Persians have arrived so back to the 5th Century BC.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 19, 2020 9:47:43 GMT
Yes. Keep all the river rules unchanged. Keeps it simple even if you get a paltry river. Just think of it as false information.
It is a little double edged though. You get to choose either flank to arrive on. But you must deploy on the far side of the river. There will be some subtleties to play test such as camp placement etc. But it will be fun!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 17, 2020 13:12:56 GMT
We were on the obligatory family walk today, as the only form of outdoor entertainment allowed, and as we crossed our river here in Melbourne I naturally started to think about DBA.
It is not a big river, perhaps 30-40m across, and about 2m deep. It's not even in the same league as the Nile or Danube, which are listed as possible Waterways in DBA. Yet, I cannot see any meaningful ancient combat occurring across a River such as this, which raises the question of how the ancients fought across rivers and what were the characteristics of these rivers at the time of battle.
Now, stevie has given us a wonderful understanding of how Alexander crossed rivers previously but the idea of crossing anything above knee high in the face of the enemy seems incredulous to me.
Anyway, why am I ranting on the House Rules thread? Well, I thought that one way to negate the River defender terrain tactic is to allow any army to "land" on the defenders side of the river (on either flank) up to three elements exactly like a littoral landing, simulating fording elsewhere by part of the army ( e.g. Battle of the Hydaspes). No need for a new mechanism, just a new opportunity to use it. This may help push rivers to the flanks, which seems more in keeping with historical accounts.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 15, 2020 10:59:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 13, 2020 9:54:31 GMT
Thanks stevie. Another tidbit that's easily missed. Thankfully you put it on the Hint cards so I have no excuse.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 13, 2020 3:03:38 GMT
I have started working on the preliminary stages on a new Renaissance Period adaptation. Hard to say when this will be out as it will draw from several sources along with some new stuff. It will also not be called DBA-RRR or RRR anything to avoid confusion. Great! Another period to game in. And I thought I could see the top of the lead mountain!  Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 13, 2020 3:01:32 GMT
You will always have the support of this community Tony. Whatever the shape of your future input into the hobby, it will always be positive!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 6, 2020 1:39:49 GMT
The Sp element at the end of the line is most likely to be isolated because its neighbour was recoiled (rather than due to player incompetence  ) the vast majority of times, causing overlap. So the current situation is Ps 2 v Sp (4-1)3 and provides your once in a blue moon chance of destroying the Sp (1/36). The current rules do not make the Sp invulnerable. The Ps however, cannot be destroyed by the Sp. To (mis)quote a friend "Is there no situation whatsoever in which Spears can ever catch skirmishers at a disadvantage!?". This doesn't bother me though, as historically I don't read about it, and practically, it makes sense that the skirmishers run away provided they have an avenue of escape. But I also don't read about skirmishers defeating heavy infantry in the frontal melee of the main battle line. The same situation with Sp at base CV 3 makes the equation Ps 2 v Sp (3-1)2 and the Ps has 4/36 chance (11%). That seems high historically. But it did make my early Hoplite battles more interesting as a game. I'm not talking about a stranded element caught foraging in farm. If you can find me accounts from the historians that have influenced many of your comments then I am eager to read and learn. If this is to improve the game the experience as a game then that is justification on its own. But picking holes in PB's rules yet dismissing critics of your solution when knock-on effects are illustrated seems a bit rich. Cheers Jim |
|
) the vast majority of times, causing overlap.