 timurilank  | 26 Aug 2012 1:46 a.m. PST |
The Austrian and Bavarian, knights, pike, halberd and crossbow engage in a clash of arms. It is my first use of the DBA 3.0 draft and first game with new armies. Report with photos and observations posted to the Agora blog.
dbagora.blogspot.nl Cheers,
Robert Note: the blog has recently been altered to host a late medieval campaign, painting projects and items for sale. |
| timurilank | 26 Aug 2012 1:49 a.m. PST |
I know, medieval should not be spelled medievel. Perhaps the good editor can change this. Cheers, |
| Yesthatphil | 26 Aug 2012 2:07 a.m. PST |
Attractive looking game  Useful conclusions Phil |
| timurilank | 26 Aug 2012 2:12 a.m. PST |
Thank you for commenting. I will have another report tomorrow. Cheers, |
 Brigadier General | 26 Aug 2012 8:18 a.m. PST |
As always good looking minis and good terrain. I really like your road. |
 vtsaogames | 26 Aug 2012 11:20 a.m. PST |
Very nice. So overall you think 3.0 is a change for the better? |
| timurilank | 26 Aug 2012 11:47 a.m. PST |
Change for the better? My first thoughts when I heard of a possible 3.0, why the change? We saw no need, but I did like the army list revisions. Further reading and re-reading the latest draft I found myself appreciating the subtle changes. I shall certainly run all my Late Medieval armies through 3.0 testing including a hypothetical Peasant uprising. I am focused with operating a 15th century DBA campaign so the latest draft seems to work very well. Where the revision falls short, I will make some adjustments to fit particular scenarios, such as the Peasant Uprising. Cheers, |
| lkmjbc3 | 26 Aug 2012 12:14 p.m. PST |
DBA 2.2 was horrible for certain periods. 3.0 makes a stab at fixing them. Dark age combat is much better. Later Medieval is also greatly improved with Longbowmen/XBow now more fairly represented. The smaller scale allows a greater range of battles to be fought as historical scenarios. Some improvement may also be seen in the classical period as well, with elephants being improved and Ax being different. Joe Collins |
| lkmjbc3 | 26 Aug 2012 12:26 p.m. PST |
Oh, one quick change I am play testing. I'll try to get Phil to adopt it. Hordes are too vulnerable to fire. Try some of you peasant revolt/late medieval games with Hordes as +4 in distance combat. Please note, they are still killed if beaten! This may give your peasants a little more backbone! This certainly helps the Saxon lessor fyrd a
against Norman bowmen. They need the help! Joe Collins |
| timurilank | 26 Aug 2012 1:22 p.m. PST |
Hello Joe, Thanks for the suggestion. My Peasant list use both 5Hd and 7Hd to distinquish between freemen, serfs and slaves. Both are stiffened with fanatic Franciscan monks. Ex-soldiers deployed as Ax and Ps have been added for variety. My next tests will make use of different terrain options and pit the Austrians against the Swiss and perhaps the Later Hungarians. The Peasants are scheduled for the week after as I am waiting on an order of camp followers from Donnington. Cheers,
Robert |
 Bobgnar | 26 Aug 2012 2:01 p.m. PST |
Joe is optimistic about getting Phil to change the Hordes but Phil does not seem receptive. He keeps adding his own ideas for "improvement" and seldom takes Helpers' suggestions. He blames them for adding complications when they are working to clarify and simplify. I suggest play testing with the version as written and then report problems instead of trying out new ideas. |
 Phil the french | 30 Aug 2012 10:20 a.m. PST |
|
| Thomas Thomas | 09 Sep 2012 7:06 p.m. PST |
He sometimes takes my suggestions – which may be the root of the problem… Peasant Revolt Army: Fanatic Followers Wb(f) Gen
More Fanatics 2 X Wb(f)
Enthusastic Rable 3 X Horde(f)
The huddled masses 3 X Horde Options:
Taxed out Nobles 1 Kn; 2 Spear
Men in Green 2 Lb; 1 Blade
ex-Soldiers 2 Blade; 1 Cb
Hill/Forest tribes 2 Aux(f); 1 Ps
Raiders 3 Lh TomT |
