|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Dec 29, 2017 6:10:53 GMT
Gentleman,
I have read the Threat Zone section of the purple book, but I am a little confused. I thought that an element that is 1 BW away is not in the TZ. Essentially on the "border" of 1 BW. This came up because I thought using a full BW recoil would help me getting out of an enemy element's TZ but my friend and I decided that it would not: element would still be in TZ. In a 15mm game, this would mean that if any portion of your base edge is equal to 40mm or less away from an enemy element it is restricted by the TZ. Is this right? If so, I don't understand why being able to recoil 1 BW is all that useful.
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Dec 21, 2017 21:34:34 GMT
Well, news to me!
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Dec 21, 2017 6:44:48 GMT
Goldsworthy is a fantastic historian and author. Right now I am reading "The Oxford History of Byzantium" edited by Cyril Mango
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Dec 17, 2017 8:56:13 GMT
In terms of collecting a new army, do you choose based upon historical interest, or purely gaming interest?
I always find my way to an army (for any game) by getting interested in the history first. I have some friends that always look at the gaming aspect and then discover the history later (if at all). They look at the power of lists before they buy anything. That is fine, but it does trouble me a little bit for some reason.
How do you normally find your army?
Poll added for fun, added other as an option because I am sure others have different approaches to finding an army.
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Dec 15, 2017 9:19:48 GMT
I own it as well. I find it to be quite entertaining for a singleplayer and multiplayer experience. Those familiar with the Pike and Shot game that Slitherine published will find it similar as it uses the same engine. I believe going back to Battle Academy. I like the streamlined multiplayer list building. I never really enjoyed FOG on the table top, but the previous game, and now this, show that FOG is a really exciting system on PC.
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Nov 15, 2017 2:48:30 GMT
Over the past few weeks I have read the following that are related to the Ancient period:
Lazenby, Hannibal's War: A Military History of the Second Punic War - A great and thorough breakdown of the Second Punic War. More on the academic side I would say. He really goes through Livy and Polybius and measures their accuracy while doing so.
Peter Green, Alexander of Macedon, 356-323 B.C A Historical Biography - Big book with a solid narrative. I have also read his book on the Greco-Persian wars, but I liked that book a lot less.
Gregory Daly, Cannae: The experience of Battle in the Second Punic War - This is one of my favorites so far. A wargamer interested in the nature of battle in the Second Punic War should really read this. It is roughly 250 pages, but dense with information. That being said, it is not a hard to read book. I would say it is very well written. It also answers a lot of questions regarding tactics, deployment, command, and fighting style of both armies at Cannae.
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Sept 11, 2017 18:57:22 GMT
Noble Knight carries the Essex line. Scale Creep (great service) carries Black Hat figures. Old Glory 15s carries their own extensive line of figures (I own many and they are great and at a great price). Brookhurst hobbies carries Peter Pig figures (For DBA their War of the Roses range is great). These are all 15mm figures. For 28mm figures, Warlord games does sell in the US so you do not have to order over seas. Old Glory 25s (they are really 28mm) are produced in USA. I am not aware of any dealer who sells Perry Brother figures or other English manufacturers. I am a 15mm collector. Now, not all of what I list above sells ready packaged DBA armies, but, especially with the extra details, DBA 3.0 does a good job listing what elements should represent. For example, in list II/5 it lists the spears as Hoplites. So you can purchase figures as you see fit. Old Glory has the disadvantage of selling figures with usually 24 foot and 9 Cavalry which makes them great for BBDBA, but you can also order as a 12 element army, but you may have some extras hanging around. The more you purchase from them the more you save. If you have $400 worth of figures in your cart for example, you receive a 40% discount. $100 receives a 20% discount. So, even with extras, they are very affordable. Unfortanutly I cannot help on the painting front as I paint my own figures and I myself have stopped my commision painting (School is proving to be too time consuming for me to finish orders). Here are the links to the websites I mentioned. oldglory25s.com oldglory15s.com www.brookhursthobbies.com/Product-Listing.cfm?C=4&D=1303&N=10&S=&M=PETER%20PIGwww.nobleknight.com/ViewProdLine.asp_Q_ManufacturerID_E_2145083386_A_CategoryID_E_17_A_GenreID_E_0www.scalecreep.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=3723_1483&osCsid=92e594e6b1e12f50d26452a88c915ac9I am sure other members have good links as well.
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Sept 7, 2017 8:53:19 GMT
Your desire to replicate historical battles is admirable but DBA is ill suited to that use. This is not to say DBX is ill suited only that DBA with its rigid 12 element armies and troop types which must span 3000 years of history isn't the screwdriver your looking for - and no wonder its purpose is to be a tournament in which armies from a vast historical and geographic range can compete on equal terms. Having studied this problem intensly as part of moving DBA 3.0 in a more simulation direction and also trying to create a medieval version of DBX, I eventually concluded it was the inflexiable troop types that were causing all the problems. DBX basic mechanics (esp the DBA 3.0 ones) work great: PIPs, Groups, individual moves, sequence of play etc. But the troop types constantly find us trying to bang a square peg into a round hole. Hence the decision in Triumph to make more troop types or make "Spear" into "Blades" or the DBMM attempt to use the Grading system to essentially create more troop types. This has lead to massive increase in complexity as we try to bandaid over the fundmental problem. Better to go back to basics hence: Spartan hoplites: Heavy Foot (HF) CF +4 (so mount four figures on the base); MA: 2BW (so mount on "skinny" base - 20mm in 25mm) Drive Off Mounted (and Foot?) (Recoil opponent on Equals) Shieldwall (side support from Spear) Pursue Foot (if you feel this is suitable)? Cry Havoc v. HF (Destroy on Equals)? Another example (to compare) English Yeoman: Medium Foot (MF) +3; MA: 2BW; Loose Order (ignore Bad and Rough Going Movement & CF penalties) Longbows +1 v. Mounted; Shoot out to 3BW w/Stakes: Cry Havoc v. Knights (Destroy on Equals) Retinue (get Side Support from Blades) By these methods you should be able to create any historical troop type using the basic building blocks (it has the added advantage of being much easier for new players to digest). Has worked great for A Game of Fire and Ice. TomT I agree with much of what you say. I do own your rules (A Game of Fire and Ice) and I like your thought process on these matters. I think the following profile, given your suggestions might feel right (baring any experience ratings of any kind): "Heavy Foot (HF) CF +4 (so mount four figures on the base); MA: 2BW (so mount on "skinny" base - 20mm in 25mm) YesDrive Off Mounted (and Foot? I think keeping it at mounted is fine) (Recoil opponent on Equals) Shieldwall (side support from Spear) YesPursue Foot (if you feel this is suitable)? I do think that this would be valuable in representing less drilled elements (Citizen Hoplites vs Sparta, etc.), but that "pursuit nature" seems to be a part of the "phalanx experience" that I have researched thus far. Opinions and specifics do change as time, and research, flies by Cry Havoc v. HF (Destroy on Equals)?" I think the Cry Havoc attribute would treat superior elements very well. This would give them that combat edge that grading is trying to do, but without the extra thought, or math, so it actually seems a rather elegant way to enhance the destructive capabilities on an element.Big battles always interest me the most. I find they also take "special rules" and such better since you have more than just 12 elements. I tend to go all out with a project. All of my DBA armies are built for BBDBA. I enjoy the 36 elements even more than the base game. I think I am going to run with these ideas sometime this week and turn my Romans and Auxilia into Greeks for some playtesting The Gauls just won't do. As a fun side note, auto correct wants to turn"Hoplites" into "Shoplifters"...
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Sept 6, 2017 6:02:53 GMT
Yes I think any house rules for the period need to be really subtle to still sustain the nature of the fighting. The warbands would, in my imagination, make it too quick. For Spartans, A house rule could be that they get a +1 to their final attack value if they rolled lower than their opponent. A straight +1 is arguable too. I think that variance would depend upon a historical scenario. Generically, however, I would argue that the Spartans were superior enough that if we were going to apply some form of grading they should receive positive modifiers. For BBDBA what would be a little fun would allow for instances where a "hero" can rise up from the ranks, making the element at a +1 combat factor, but counting as 2 bases if destroyed (effectively a double element).
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Sept 6, 2017 1:21:01 GMT
I always thought all HI should pursue. It certainly gives opportunities for HI to be the deciders of battle once committed. That said, it would make games very short, and in my view the hoplite-hoplite battle is already quite decisive with the flank support rule. At least the lines last a few bounds before one shatters. But in accordance with the previous suggestion, I have always thought some hoplites could reasonably be classed as warband. These would be your impetuous impact players, but could also deal with bad and rough going more easily. They are also less able to withstand cavalry. This seems to align with what I have read of hoplite warfare. By the way, we note that Greece is very mountainous. Strange that the hoplite was the weapon of choice.... It seems, from my readings, that they seemed to have always fought on open fields. There is a discussion of Honor involved as well. Pride, in the form of "look we are all here on your property where you grow and work" so the citizen hoplite had a reason to fight in the Phalanx. Just had a fascinating discussion about all of this in one of my survey courses on Ancient Warfare. I must say, this class is making me want to Wargame the period and I assume this trend will continue as we advance....
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Sept 6, 2017 1:17:43 GMT
All makes much sense. Very interesting discussion. I was opting for a house rule this whole time, but I did not word that correctly.
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Sept 5, 2017 1:16:10 GMT
I want to say that all Sp elements in the II/5 (probably I/52 as well) lists should have pursuit against opposing Sp elements. The goal to punch through the opposing phalanx and the "wobbly" nature of the lines makes me think that in DBA they should pursue opposing Hoplites. The Book The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece seems to suggest that pushing forwards, to benefit or not, was part of the very nature of Phalanx warfare. Additionally, this would also make the battle more interesting at least in my mind. Any others with experience playing with these lists? Historically that is.
Does this ruin the Sp Flank rule? Thoughts?
|
|
|
Spam
Sept 3, 2017 16:27:48 GMT
Post by crazycaptain560 on Sept 3, 2017 16:27:48 GMT
Splendid job!
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Aug 26, 2017 23:55:40 GMT
Interesting! I have a few bags of Misc Later Samurai figures I was given and I have been thinking about turning them into a project. The lists look like a lot of fun. War of the Roses is also on my list. I am thinking a mixture of Blackhat or Essex and Old Glory 15s might do the period pretty well. I have a lot of Essex Eastern Renaissance Poles and Ottomans, but the project is not complete and the fire has left me for now to finish them. That project has sparked a love/hate relationship with Essex figures. Some are just too "gnome" for my taste and sometimes not enough poses. They also don't mix too well with some old glory figures.
My only problem is I want to purchase everything for BBDBA for each project. I love DBA at its traditional 12 element scale, but 36 elements is very fun and looks really good. This is why I like the Old Glory figures. If you put $400 worth of product in your cart, you only end up paying $240 which makes the figures dirt cheap for doing 2 BBDBA Match Pairs.
|
|
|
Post by crazycaptain560 on Aug 26, 2017 8:57:12 GMT
What Historical Match Pairs do you find to be the most fun?
|
|