"DBA 2.2+ or 3.0?" Topic

Which do you prefer?

Or 2.2+?

V3 for me, for reasons regular visitors to this board will have seen before (better production; better basing; better move measurements; better shooting; better melee modifiers, and outcomes; cleaned up recoils; improved win/lose; bonus of diagrams; vastly more informative army lists) …

Barker's best … (for once, an improved edition from WRG with all ups, no downs)

Phil

Mega dittos

Why is this question continually asked? I never seem to see this in the other rule sets. Which is better Warhammer one or Warhammer 2, which is better, Field of glory one or field of glory 2. Ancient warfare one or ancient warfare 2, etc.

Dear editor, please stick to editing and stop trying to stir up controversy!

Dear editor, please stick to editing and stop trying to stir up controversy!

Or end controversy by taking a poll?

Oh, 3.0 is very slick, games well, and improved over 2.2 or 2.2+

The schism diluted the community and ruined the game for me. I prefer 2.2+ to the entirely new game called 3.0, but yearn for the plain old 2.2 days. Oh well….it used to be my favorite game. Now I have more time for micro armor, board games and X-Wing!

I find it hard to believe many people would still be playing an older version after 3.0 came out.

"better production; better basing; better move measurements; better shooting; better melee modifiers, and outcomes; cleaned up recoils; improved win/lose; bonus of diagrams; vastly more informative army lists"

Exactly.

2.2+ caused the schism that diluted the community. 3.0 is the author's new vision of how the game shall be played. Thus leading us away from the hi-jacked stigmatic veiw (read 2.2+) of the past.

Not involved with the schism, didn't pay that much attention. I prefer 3.0, a faster, cleaner game.

Thanks Bill! Another hundred post thread of the same half a dozen people rabbiting on about their own particular brand of Kool Aid.

Haven't played either. I am gonna side with 2.2, cause it has more numbers..

3.0 all the way. Great set of ryles, but always out of stockvwhen I have the money to buy.

Actually, I do prefer older versions of a lot of games, not just DBA!

Rogue Trader
Warhammer 3rd.
Original D&D (although AD&D isn't bad)
Original Traveller

Blood Bowl I preferred 2nd Edition with well-tested amendments over 3rd Edition which I skipped and kept playing the old one. Nobody at all liked 4th Edition, so much so that the old numbering was dropped and the first round of 5th Edition became Living Rule Book 1.0 and Jervis could largely pretend that 4th never happened. I eventually did switch to LRB which was a big improvement over 3rd.

And DBA2.2+ for me.

**
Edit, make that Warhmmer 3rd, the first one out of the Black Box. I think I stared with 2nd, but hadn't been aware of 1st.

Bill didn't ask which is better, but which I prefered. A slight but important difference.

I prefer v3.

Cheers,
JohnG

And sometimes people prefer things because they are more used to them, not because one is perceived as better than the other.

3.0

The 2.2+ rules are played chiefly in the Washington DC area. Tournaments a plenty at the HMGS east coast conventions. None of this is good for me. I prefer three point oh.

3.0 for me.

I'm still on the fence. I bought 3.0, and I've played a couple games. But 2.2+ is preferred by the gentleman who is kind enough to organize our local tournament, and I've been enjoying it so far. I intend to give 3.0 more of a try in the coming months. I really like the improved, more detailed army lists in 3.0.

As to why/how this has endured so long: some of the great luminaries in the American DBA community authored 2.2+. Like many other American DBA players, I have great respect for these folks, and appreciate their many contributions to the game. Because of this, 2.2+ has gotten a degree of traction (at least on this side of the Atlantic) that is very unusual for a home-brew modification. And, I hasten to add, 2.2+ is not your typical set of house rules---it's the product of painstaking development by a lot of folks.

Ultimately, I would prefer for one set or the other to prevail, as having a unitary DBA community is more important to me than which version is being played.

Some may ask why I care, to which I respond: because DBA, like most segments of this hobby, is a tiny community, and so it is very important to have common rules, lest the community get even smaller. The fact that you have the same rules in many places gives a game a richness that a set of rules only played with your local mates would never have.

For example, I've had the good fortune to play in tournaments in Portugal and Italy, with gentlemen I'd never met before, some of whom had only limited English, and every game was effortless and great fun, because we were all familiar with the same rules.

I'm still on the fence. I bought 3.0, and I've played a couple games. But 2.2+ is preferred by the gentleman who is kind enough to organize our local tournament, and I've been enjoying it so far. I intend to give 3.0 more of a try in the coming months. I really like the improved, more detailed army lists in 3.0.

Here all gaming I'm aware has switched from 2.2 to 3.0. I've not even seen a game of 2.2+.

I have found 3.0 a much improved game over 2.2. Phil has articulated the points above well so I won't repeat them.

Some may ask why I care, to which I respond: because DBA, like most segments of this hobby, is a tiny community, and so it is very important to have common rules, lest the community get even smaller. The fact that you have the same rules in many places gives a game a richness that a set of rules only played with your local mates would never have.

Very true. It is one of the great aspects of our hobby, and DBA can offer a great opportunity to play a games within your own country and indeed internationally.

2.2+. There are bits I like about 3.0 (army lists, contacting enemy element rules), but most of the changes seem off to me.

I have not seeen anyone playing 2.2+ in the UK.

Still haven't updated from 1st edition

2.2 without BUAs

I find DBA 3.0 superior in every way.

We just had a successful Tournament at Siege of Augusta. Our next tournament for DBA 3.0 is scheduled for Nashcon over Memorial Day weekend in Nashville.

I may try to make the DBA 3.0 tournament at Little Wars… though the budget for now is tight.

For those interested… There is a DBA 3.0 campaign book being developed that will feature 8-10 historical campaigns of varying size. I expect it sometime next winter.

There are rumors of other DBA 3.0 follow-on products in the works.

Joe Collins

Just play both games and pick your favorite. 3.0 will start with the disadvantage that some mechanics are unfamilier so try several games before you decide.

DBA 3.0 was designed and (esp.) developed to be a better simulation and to work better in historical scenerios. For some reason this put off some old tournament hands though only in the US. A great deal of effort went into killing off some old (and it turned out) much loved tournament tricks. You can't please everyone.

Oddly enough, having survived the old 2.2 tournament days, I've found 3.0 much better balanced and with a wider range of armies and tactics that have at least a chance of success. I thought this would help in tournament play and seems to in all sectors except the US East coast.

I realize in a few areas you get 2.2+ or nothing stuff but I think if you politely ask to alternate games it would be only fair to honor your request. And you may win a new convert.

In any case I'll be at Historicon running tournaments and fantasy big battle using 3.0. Sorry can't make Cold Wars which remains the only big venue world wide without a 3.0 event.

TomT

With the caveat that I'm a casual DBA player (no tournaments, and not accustomed to gaming with very "rules strict" opponents), I prefer 3.0 to the previous editions I've played.

The few 3.0 battles I've managed to get in so far have been more "furious" than in 2.2, due largely to the longer move distances. Then again, I also enjoyed "MicroDBA" (DBA variant played with 6 elements on a 1/2 sized board) for the fast and furious battles it gave, so <shrug>.

I've never tried 2.2+, but from discussions and glancing over the rules, it appears to be geared more towards not breaking player's favorite gambits while incorporating some of 3.0's new parts. But that may not be a fair appraisal.

At this point I have no preference. I am willing to play using either one. If US East Coast conventions are 2.2+, then I will play 2.2+ there. If other gaming events have 3.0, I will play 3.0. Since I have played more 2.2+, I am more familiar with it, but would like to do more 3.0 events so that I can learn more about it.

My preference is more about scale (I prefer 28mm) and army (Late Imperial Roman) than rules version.

The ideal game situation right now would be to try DBA 3.0 in 28mm with the Late Imperial Roman army I have been working on over the last six months.

Not happy with dome of the list changes in 3.0, like some of the others.

3.0 plays well and is the preferred version at the club

Haven't tried 2.2+, but if someone sowed up and wanted to play, would be appy to.

Not happy with some of the list changes in 3.0, like some of the others.

I understand the changes in the lists are the result of more detailed / accurate research on specific armies.

Amen on the 28mm front, BTW.

I've rebased a lot of "Dark Ages" figures for DBA, and I've decided that all new armies will be in that size.

Big Battle DBA on a 6x4 foot table with 28mm figures!

Did the game significantly change or is it more clarifications and clean up?

Did the game significantly change or is it more clarifications and clean up?

Significant changes, and I, like many others' opinions stated above, all for the better. 3.0 is a complete redesign, and much superior to Phil's 2.2 version and especially 2.2+.

That depends on what you consider "significant". The basic ideas are still there (roll d6 for "PIPs", spend PIPs to move groups, roll modified d6's for per-element combat, "doubling", "Jack-knife kills", bad going penalties, etc.)

But there are non-trivial changes, including a new class of infantry ("Fast") and a completely re-worked "ground scale" as it relates to shooting ranges, movement speeds, etc. Combat factors have changed for a few elements and situations. A seasoned DBA player would do well to study the new rules closely.

But on the whole, you'd never mistake it for a game other than DBA.

Forgive my ignorance, but what are "Jack-knife kills"?

including a new class of infantry ("Fast")

Actually a sub-class.

and a completely re-worked "ground scale" as it relates to shooting ranges, movement speeds, etc.

Only in the substitution of Base Widths (BWs) for inches.

The only two major USA east conventions I attend are Cold Wars and Fall In. Unfortunately, there is no DBA 3.0 tournament events at either of those two conventions. At Fall In, it even appeared that the DBA 2.2 attendance had fallen, but I can't confirm that.

At our local gaming store, we are introducing a DBA 3.0 gaming date, once a month, starting this month, so hopefully, we can attract other players to participate.

I currently play DBMM, so I am used to most of the terminology in 3.0, but i'm not sure the average gamer will?

I'm not going to say which is superior, balanced, smoother to play, unsupported, authorised or cleaned up, I'll leave that up to others, it's always the same people saying the same things trying to convince others they are right.

BUT can we please stop having these silly topics on this subject about which is best or who prefers what as it just stirs up pointless stupid things , we all just want to play with our toys and have fun and I personelly don't care which version you play.

Myself I prefer the 2.2+ version over the other but am not going to convince the world my view is the right one as they both have bits that appeal to different people, just play your version and leave the other kids table alone.

You mean the same stupid thing you just stated?

I'm a 25/8mm player and spent a lot of development time making sure 3.0 worked for the larger scale. My personal feeling is that the larger movement scale, increased bow range, option for larger boards and increased basing flexability make for a much better game in 25mm. I run 25mm events at every con I attend including Historicon (I'll run both a tournament and a Ice and Fire Big Battle event.)

As to changes – its still DBX, you roll for PiPs and use to move groups/elements. Combat is opposed D6 with losers recoiling unless doubled which generally destroys. Some troop types "Quick Kill" just by winning and some Flee even if doubled. Significant 3.0 changes:

1) Set up similar to HOTT – no more teleporting elements
2) Everything measured in Base Widths – longer moves/ranges
3) Bow shooting increased to 3 Base Widths (BWs)
4) You can shoot out of Overlap
5) You can only move 1 BW and still shoot
6) No psilio "shooting" out of the back rank to grant "support"
7) Death by Recoil greatly reduced – at last your own troops are less deadly to you than the enemy
8) Fast sub-category for Foot elements – increase move by one more BW but Recoil on ties from non-Fast Foot
9) Mounted Recoil on ties from non-Fast Foot
10) Knights not "Quick Killed" by Bow except on ties
11) Blades Quick Kill Knights on ties
12) Losing General does not automatically lose game
13) Individual element must conform to group – huge change to prevent geometic tricks'
14) Conforming rules in general improved to promote contact and resolve "line up" problems
15) Threat Zones not blocked by 1mm of an opponents base – now "X-ray"
16) Army lists expanded and much improved (easy to read too)
17) BUAs now work (mostly)
18) Elephants reverse factors (+5 v Foot; +4 v. Mounted)

Major improvement in Distance Combat rules are alone worth the price…

TomT

3.0 got me playing DBA again and in my opinion is a more dynamic game than 2.2. I could never pluck up the interest to play earlier versions of DBA – it was just a bit bland – so stuck to other DBX variants like HOTT. DBA 3.0 is now a firm favourite.

I should also have mentioned:

19) Side support – allows shield wall and Blade support for Bow – a major advancement in DBX mechanics

TomT

20) Psiloi are harder to kill: can't give or receive corner support.
21) Auxilia are better vs mounted.

22. Horde is now a viable troop type.
23. New expanded terrain rules offering a better sim or terrain,
24. Blades and Pike now follow up after combat.
25. Artillery is now a more viable troop type.

Joe Collins

So … of those expressing a preference specifically between 3 and 2.2+, that looks to me like 18 or so vs 5? (and one of the five going for 2.2+ 'because it has the numbers' so that might be an unintended conclusion?)… so maybe 4 to 1 in favour of V3?

Given the editor's stated purpose was to end the bickering/controversy by taking a poll, I wonder whether he has his answer …

I know a lot of players who prefer V3 and a lot who prefer other versions who have not expressed an opinion so I have no idea how credible this random selection of opinion is (and I see the bickering thread is still going strong )

Hey ho …

Phil

Is 2.2+ still going? It seems to have died off in many places, and are the developers still even active with it? I thought they had been talking about some army list updates or edits, but my info may be incorrect. If they do make updates, would it be 2.2++?

Yup, 2.2+ still going strong in the Northeast US at least.
Hudson Valley Rumble coming up in June!

There seems to be an interesting development on the 2.2+ front. It seems the development team is in the process of abandoning it, and promoting their own new design. At least that seems to be what is transpiring on fanaticus.

"Abandoned" makes it sound like a baby that we left on someone's doorstep.

A lot of gamers are still playing v2.2+, so we're making sure that the v2.2+ amendments and other documents are available. You can download them from the WADBAG website:

wadbag.com/V2.2+

But it's correct that we're working on a new set of rules. v2.2+ was a set of amendments to DBA. The new game is called Triumph! and is a standalone set of rules, including a brand new set of army lists.

More information on our web site:

wgcwar.com

I would prefer a version I can send people to a store and PURCHASE. One I can refer a vendor to a national (US) distributor) and keep in stock on his shelves.

I had a young man very interested in the game a couple of years ago, (the reasonable number of figures to paint is a big sell), but he grew frustrated at his inability to purchase or download a copy of the rules, and drifted away.

Meanwhile, where do I BUY a copy of 3.0? It sounds like the game I am looking for, I am enough of a historian that I find some of the concerns and rules lawyering of "2.2+" merely annoying.

Where I live (ten miles from corporate HQ), anything Walmart doesn't sell is unnecessary. The same guys playing with unpainted 40K figures when I moved here twelve years ago are still playing with unpainted figures.

DBA 3.0 is in stock in the US at

onmilitarymatters.com

along with "Start Ancient Wargaming"

In Britain it is available through…

Essex Miniatures
Black Hat Miniatures
and
Amazon UK.

Joe Collins