"Improving the Campaign System – fighting against odds." Topic
3 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.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ancients Scenarios Message Board
Areas of InterestAncients
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench Article Dervel  returns from Mexico with a new vision for making palm trees from scratch.
Featured Profile Article
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
| timurilank | 27 Jun 2017 1:21 a.m. PST |
Using the standard DBA 12 element per side game some battles fall short of the image we have of large armies facing smaller disciplined forces. The Battle of Gaugamela comes to mind as we expect vast numbers of Persians should be fighting smaller Macedonian army. In the recent campaigns set in the 4th and 5th century AD I had an opportunity to experiment with disproportionate size armies without resorting to vast numbers of figures. Here are three games with large numbers of German barbarians face a smaller Roman army.
link Next post will cover an assessment of the tests.
Cheers,
Robert |
| advocate | 27 Jun 2017 3:56 a.m. PST |
Several years ago I ran a campaign in which armies could be from 12 to 24 elements, but always operated with one command dice. While larger armies definitely had the advantage, it was happened on a few occasions that 15 bases would defeat 24. |
| timurilank | 27 Jun 2017 4:38 a.m. PST |
Advocate,
That is a nice feeling when it happens. In this case, the distribution of losses needed for a smaller sub-tribe to demoralize demonstrates the fragility of the confederations created to battle Rome. Despite the two Roman victories, they were one element away from breaking which shows how close the games were. |
|
