Help support TMP


"Camp/baggage with rules" Topic


5 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ancients Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

Ancients

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset

Warhammer: Ancient Battles


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Profile Article

Report from Bayou Wars 2006

The Editor heads for Vicksburg...


510 hits since 2 Apr 2014
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
colin knight02 Apr 2014 2:55 p.m. PST

I really like the diorama effect of seeing camp at the back of an army. It lets you use some interesting civilians etc.
Trouble is no need to make unless rule make you.
I play Clash of Empires with fiends and toy around with Basic Impetus solo. So never have put one on. Sometimes I wish I did.
Is it just another expense however?? Thoughts anyone.

colin knight02 Apr 2014 4:09 p.m. PST

Spell check in order I think..Sorry.

aapch4502 Apr 2014 4:21 p.m. PST

DBM has rules for a camp. So does 1st ed DBA.. not sure about later editions of dba.

Both can be found at wrg.me.uk

Thanks
Austin

Marshal Mark03 Apr 2014 9:04 a.m. PST

Generally, it seems that the top-down design big battles rules (e.g. DBX, FOG) have rules for camps and require their presence, whilst the rules that focus on indivual figures (e.g. WAB & "successors") don't.
Given that supply camps were an important feature of many ancient battles, and the sacking of camps could have a significant effect on the outcome, you would think that any set of rules that is designed to represent large ancient / medieval battles should include rules for camps.

It's something I've been pondering recently. My Sword & Spear rules include rules for camps, but they are not compulsory in the rules as they stand. Whilst camps were an important feature in many battles, they were often too far away from the action to be threatened. So maybe they should be optional ? But if they are optional, there needs to be an advantage to having one on the table.
In my rules the loss of a camp means an army morale test, but I'm not sure exactly what advantages having a camp should bring. Some ideas are :
It counts as a unit, which boosts the army break point and provides a command dice (making it easier to activate units).
Without a camp, the amount of bonus dice given to shooting is restricted (bonus shooting dice represent sustained shooting, which is not possible with the facility to resupply units. The presence of a nearby camp should presumably make this more possible).

Or maybe in an equal points game, you can choose to have a camp, and if you do so you get X more points to spend on troops. But the downside is that if the camp is sacked there is a negative outcome.

colin knight03 Apr 2014 3:25 p.m. PST

I suppose what I saying is that it would be nice to have an excuse to create a nice diorama baggage camp.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.