"What are the characteristics of the different Rulesets?" Topic

I'm not sure if this has been asked before, but I couldn't seem to find it in my searches.

I'm looking for a comparison of the various popular Ancients rulesets, so that I can make a more informed decision on which to go with.

I've tried to do some research on my own, but the information available on the 'net seemed skimpy at best. In any case, here's what I've gathered.

DBA: Ancient warfare abstracted down to the most basic "building blocks". Good for fast and fun games, but may lack the depth of other rulesets. Theoretically requires only a handful of miniatures to play, so the cost of setting up an army can be very low.

FOG: Highly detailed strategic gameplay, but the downside is the steep learning curve. Also requires a lot of miniatures to set up an army.

Impetus: Sits in the middle ground between DBA and FOG, allowing fast play while still including some depth.

WAB: No idea. Supposed to play very similarly to WHFB, since it is based on the 5th edition of WHFB. But since I have no experience with WHFB, I don't know how it compares to DBA/FOG/Impetus.

WMA: No idea. Supposed to play very similarly to Warmaster, since it is based on that game. But since I have no experience with Warmaster, I don't know how it compares to DBA/FOG/Impetus.

Armati,

Simpler than FoG and DBM, more complicated than DBA.

restricts movement, emphasises deloyment, a little geometric for some tastes.

Tactica

Large units of variable size, simpler than Armati and easily convertable to house rules, ideal for demo games, aimed for Historic games not poins balanced tournament play. Second version due out for Christmas.

All use or can use the same basing, so with Ancients, your never really on to a looser as far as figures go.

What sort of number of figures do you want to paint, which armies in aprticular, and what sort of games do you prefer?

if you like saving throws, then WAB is more for you, if you like small armies and lots of them, then DBA

Do any of the ancients rule sets support army building in the way that WAB does with an extended list of army components? In looking over Basic Impetus, the army choices seemed simplistic and without variation.

Ran the Cid, see DBM, Warrior, FoG, etc. Most ancients rules are accompanied by a number of army list books.

I don't think that any other ruleset supports army building like WAB e.g. buying individual weapons and musicians for units. As John says above, most ancients rules allow a fair choice of units.

Basic Impetus is designed to be easy for fast play with fixed armies. The full set (for which I am a happy customer) allow reasonable choice. The lists are here:
dadiepiombo.com/beta1e.html

adding standards and extra weapons and what not is more of an old WRG thing, most rules now focus on the units, not what they are armed with
- also a funciton of the scale, at @ 1 : 20 this matters, at @ 1 : 500 it doesn't.

you really should start by deciding what sort of game you want.

if you want to count each figure in combat, it will be a different game from if your are interested only in the units.

I might add that what makes one rules set terrific for one player may make it very unsatisfactory for another.
The very factors that make DBA so popular for some leave me cold. To me it gives absolutely no sense that I am playing an "Ancients" game. It is as abstract as chess. To me. Your mileage may vary. If you love DBA, your opinion is just as valid as mine.

What does your group play or are starting a new one?

The amount of time that you have available is also key.
DBA plays very fast less than 30 minutes for many games.
FoG takes 3 1/2 to 4 hours for one tournament game.

The size of forces may be key as well. Max of 48 for a DBA army which is only a fraction of the troops needed for FoG. Many DBA players are able to build a large number of armies.

Actually, there are some fairly detailed review available on the web:

DBA: link
link
link

FoG: PDF link
link
link

Impetus: PDF link
link
link

WAB: link
link
link

WMA: TMP link
link
drunkdwarves.com/?p=27

And just to clarify, the Impetus free beta lists include those armies not yet published in either the main rule book, or the two supplements released to date. The beta lists do provide a good sense of the range of troop types and characteristics available for different historical armies.

Cheers,
Scott

The Art of War ("popular" with us) Single element basing on 15mm to 30mm frontages, with each base representing 30 to 100 men companies.

Any miniature scale can be used.

Historically researched armies lists assign the unit organization, arms and tactical drill limits.

Simple 2d6, "man to man" combat with battles quickly getting out of the player's control. Rather intense handling of the playing pieces with individual bases/figures taken out as whole casualties (no "caps" or record keeping).

Fast-playing (often in under two hours), with all combat tables contained on one side of an 8.5 x 11 sheet.

Arguably the finest looking tabletop battle results known to the "industry".

Designed around the concept of playing known historical battles in order to get historical results….

1066.us

WAB – units are composed of individual figures, rated for their weapons and capabilities. Combat is resolved through "buckets of dice" and figure removal, though (as in history) most units are destroyed during pursuit. "Command" is not modeled by the rules, but "Control" is to some extent. Games can be as small or large as you want, and can be play balanced through WAB's point system.

Or the shortest version:
WAB – a toy-soldier centric game informed by history and focusing on miniatures, dice and fun.

"The Art of War ("popular" with us) "

Why is it that the only people who ever seem to mention these rules are Doug and Rocky?

Interesting to note what hasn't been mentioned

Crusader
An interesting half finished project. Not WAB (almost anti-WAB) but has WAB similarities. Use of stands rather than individual figures. Uses an interesting game mechanic of playing a unit through move fire fight morale before the next unit rather than the more conventional move al fire all fight all etc. Short on supporting army lists. Some tightening of wording clarifications needed.

WRG 6th
Next to the last son of a famous family. Still has its faithful followers. Comprehensive army lists (but probably found more on second hand stalls or e-bay). Scoring casualties on paper until 20 reached before figure removal.

Might of Arms
Actually for 15mm, my favoured set. A WRG 6th derivative using notional units of 6 foot, 3 horse on DBx norm bases. On table recording of deteriorating morale leading to whole stand removal. full range of army lists included

DBM (and I presume DBMM as son of DBM)
DBA's big cousin. Units as such don't exist. Each stand can be a discrete element. Never felt right to me even though I played it a lot in its hay day. PIP based movement entitlement. Not everyone's cup of tea. Comprehensive set of army list books.

"Why is it that the only people who ever seem to mention these rules are Doug and Rocky?"

They wrote them, produced them, sell them and are the only people to have reviewed them.

Hack: Stands of figures are grouped into units. Units are given orders each turn with simultaneous resolution.
No army lists per se, units are rated by formation, weight, and morale.

D10 resolution mechanic. Specific Quick Rference Sheet for each army.

Period Specific rules sets for Classical (Greco-Roman, Dark Ages, Medieval, Homeric, and Biblical periods. Eacg adds specific details that make that period unique.

"They wrote them, produced them, sell them and are the only people to have reviewed them."

How can an author review his own product? Has anyone here other than Doug and Rocky actually bought and played them?

I agree with Jeremy on Crusader. I bought them 2nd hand cheap, so not too disappointed because they have great modeling photos. I found the rules incomplete and confusing.

Several/many TMPers have bought AofW over the years; but SO FAR nobody has said anything more than they like them (and only that much a couple of times). But, fecklessly, I soldier on, hoping for a change in the "weather". You can only do what you can do….

More online rules reviews:

Crusader: link
link

DBM: grognard.com/reviews/dbm.txt

DBMM: box.net/shared/n18bvwh4o4
link

Hack series: TMP link
TMP link
TMP link

Might of Arms: TMP link

WRG 6th edition: link
link

Cheers,
Scott

It's probably worth mentioning Big battle DBA -armies 3 times the size, or however many you want really.
"Justified Ancients" anyone?

C&C:A was designed as a miniatures game. It is published with wooden blocks instead of figures to make the game affordable.

Units are composed of groups of blocks, units retain full capability until destroyed.

Command and Contrl is card driven. Cards allow player to issue commands to specific numbers and/or types of unts each turn.

Fast playing, special rules allow for specialit unit types unique to a scenario, many battles of classical antiquity are covered.

Cons: Scenarios are all historically based, no army lists or scenario design. Simple rules may lose replay appeal for some.

Hi

Actually, besides Pvernon, I have seen several mentions in previous history discussion threads.

R

Couple more: Ancient and Medieval Warfare (AMW), rules from the book of the same name by Neil Thomas; Lost Battles, again to be found in a book by Prof. Phil Sabin, the latest generation of the Strategos rules. Both systems are relatively simple and quick to play.

In terms of material I get sent for Slingshot (which, I grant, may well mean nothing), the most "popular" (just measured by the words people are willing to write about them) systems are DBA, FoG, DBMM, WAB, AMW, Armati and WMA, in that order.

Re CCA, Dave wrote:

"Cons: Scenarios are all historically based, no army lists or scenario design. Simple rules may lose replay appeal for some."

If you go to ccancients.net you can find additional scenarios and the ScenarioX army lists, which are CCA abstractions of (I think) the DBA lists.

Hi

I sort of lost track of Slingshot a long time ago when it seemed to be "DBA" all the time. Not a criticism. Larry Irons, for example, is a long time friend who was doing a lot of DBA and stuff in slingshot.

The problem with any magazine starts with what the writers produce for the editor. I think that the strong element of need for tournament results both makes the field bigger and better AND doesn't interest me.

Too often, all wargaming magazines get in a rut of doing rules specific articles that don't "crossrough" to some general principle of the gaming or the history.

As with the other thread on design, it is knowing the audience of the magazine.

Rocky

Slingshot is totally different now.

it was a hobby tax for me when it was all DBM a decade ago, as I had no interest in those rules, and got almost nothing else out of it.

now it is great.

Like the hobby now, it is much more varied and well worth revisiting

Slingshot: In terms of published gaming articles over the last 2 years, and measured (again) by word count, DBA, DBMM, FoG and WAB are each at 12-13%; AMW, Armati and WMA are at 5-7%; stuff which isn't system-specific is at 14%. The rest includes articles about other systems. So there is a fair amount of variety.

Some stuff is reusable elsewhere (DBA campaign articles, or Jim Webster's historical articles which generally have a DBMM list at the end, or Adrian Goldsworthy's notes on how to design a WAB EIR list); some stuff isn't (the occasional tournament report, there's a WMA one in the latest issue, but still an interesting read I think). I don't see Slingshot as a "newspaper of record" for tournament results, though I'm happy to carry reports.

I play WAB myself (when I get the chance to play). I'm arranging with the local club to get some tutorial games in FoG and DBMM, an experience which I plan to write up.

M

More online reviews of rule sets mentioned in this thread:

AMW: link

BBDBA: link

CCA: link
link
link

Justified Ancients: link

Lost Battles: link
link

Thus far, I have been unable to locate any in-depth online reviews of The Art of War or Strategos written by people other than the rules authors.

Cheers,
Scott

Well, 'Lost Battles' is pretty much the latest version of Strategos, so the Lost Battles link above will do for that.