|
|
Post by jim1973 on Feb 16, 2020 7:38:55 GMT
I agree with primuspilus. For shooting, it should be reserved for troops that may be likely to charge forward to disperse lighter missile troops. It can add disorder into a line and drain PIPS and may help underpowered missile troops. For close combat, it can add granularity for similar troops in scenarios (e.g. militia hoplites v regular hoplites).
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Feb 14, 2020 0:20:21 GMT
I also very much like the idea of applying it to troops who are shot at as well (if they roll a '6' it shows th ey have become enraged by all the shooting and have surged forwards to get at their tormentors, even if it means breaking formation...the French at Crecy and Agincourt anyone?) PB does have a "Press Forward" mechanic in his Horse, Foot, Guns rules that may fit the bill for you. Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Feb 13, 2020 11:16:57 GMT
Well Nic Robson at Eureka has done it again and created an itch for a new army/period. This is the beginning of what looks like an amazing ECW line: Eureka ECW 18mm miniaturesSo my question is what is the closest to DBA3 from the available options? There are a few threads with some tantalising teasers. But has anyone come up with a definitive answer? Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Feb 13, 2020 11:07:25 GMT
I agree with your mates and with this bloke called... stevie! He said it's about the outcome. I like random pursuit but probably only if they destroy the element in front of them. That would make more sense for militia hoplites to break through in a mad rush but more disciplined hoplites (did someone say Spartans?) to regroup , wheel and attack the disordered mob (Battle of Mantinea).
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Feb 13, 2020 10:59:10 GMT
Final thought: what is the better simulation outcome? I' free to do whatever I want in Knights & Knaves and would like to get some thought on what is the better real world interp. I'm leaning toward front corner contact as the depth is way over scale and a bit random (its legal to have some elements with different depths). Keep in mind that I can fix anything in K&K and to a lesser extent in D3H2. Well, in this particular setting, it's to allow the Theban deep phalanxes the opportunity to destroy the Spartans in front of them. That would be 4+1 (deep)+1 side support ?+1 General against 4+1(side support) ?+1 (General). So 7v5, 7v6, 6v6 and 6v5 combinations. Not great odds for the Thebans but then again the Spartans have no specific modifier for themselves against other Hoplites. Perhaps -1 to the enemy would be better modifiers in order to make the combat more decisive? In general, there are enough examples of echelon advance to allow a decision to be made on one side before the other was involved/enveloped for it to be plausible in DBA. But how? Maybe groups don't need corner contact, only side? Great for specific periods but I think too radical for all 4500 years of DBA. Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 27, 2020 22:10:33 GMT
Cromwell, is there any way you can keep abreast of the offices, inheritances and hereditary titles that constantly change during this period and also avoid curling up in the corner as a blabbering mess?  Jim Played once so far. Then re-read the rules. I use the supplied markers for offices and place them on the corresponding Noble on the Role of Parliament chart. Thenheirs are numbered in order of sequence but there is alot to learn. Sorry, I should've been clearer. I was meaning the actual history of the Wars of the Roses, not the game. Reading about it is giving me a headache! Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 27, 2020 8:39:48 GMT
I have recently purchased the board game "Crown of Thorns" by GMT. The game is about the War of the Roses. Lavishly produced with superb graphics and components. Steep learning curve though. However from opening the box to reading the rules I can see this as a fantastic vehicle for providing DBA battles in a campaign setting. Before looking into this I will get a couple of normal "Crown of Roses" games under my belt. If you are into War of the Roses well worth looking at this game. It can be checked out here boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/36480/crown-rosesCromwell, is there any way you can keep abreast of the offices, inheritances and hereditary titles that constantly change during this period and also avoid curling up in the corner as a blabbering mess? Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 27, 2020 8:34:54 GMT
Rod's work, particularly his Persian War tower, has me seriously considering home 3D printing. Only my addiction to lead is keeping me from an addiction to plastic!
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 27, 2020 8:31:53 GMT
I was thinking of using an operating microscope (sorry Cromwell) to paint woad tattoos to make Ancient Britons...  Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 27, 2020 7:37:22 GMT
I'm not sure why but I have a serious urge to get these and put them on 60mm DBA bases. Picoarmor 3mm ancientsDo I need help? Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 27, 2020 7:32:36 GMT
Interesting as always stevie. If this works out, it will make a nice addition to a campaign. Maybe in a campaign you don't send half your field army but one quarter so the loser will lose one element from the roster until the next recruitment phase? Losing two elements may skew the next major battle.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 24, 2020 8:52:39 GMT
How timely as I'm reading The Wars of the Roses by Hugh Bicheno at the moment!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 16, 2020 10:45:22 GMT
Have you looked at the Perfect Captain website? Perfect CaptainA think the campaign "A Crown of Paper" (and the attached rules "A Coat of Steel") might be of interest to those fighting the Wars of the Roses. Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 14, 2020 5:16:12 GMT
But then Paddy bless him came up with the idea that maybe rivers, being Linear Terrain, should be the going they pass through, like roads. And now rivers are back on the menu. (Although we liked the “Randomly Generated Terrain” so much we still use it) Hi stevie. Do you still dice for the river when using this House Rule? I like the rule but it would create some strange combinations on a roll of 5 or 6. (Just as the current rule creates a strange combination on a roll of 1-2 in Good Going...) Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jan 4, 2020 0:08:52 GMT
Thank you to the FAQ team for their efforts.
It's efforts like this that will keep DBA around for some time to come.
Cheers and Great Gaming for 2020!
Jim
|
|
