"WRG has begun a video series to explain DBMM" Topic

Here's a link. There are two videos there already with a plan for a new one each week, covering game mechanics etc and generally try to demystify a rule set that is loved by its devotees but seen as impenetrable by others. I think this will be a good service to the hobby.

Disclaimer – I'm in the first category.

YouTube link

I do not judge others and their incomprehensible loves and beliefs.

I think the point is that a higher profile for our hobby and more people playing it, should be a good thing for everyone.

The days when one system (DBA/DBM in this case) had a virtually complete domination of the ancients/medieval gaming scene will never be repeated. It is still in all of our interests that the hobby grow stronger, regardless of the rules any of us personally prefer. I think this objective is generally furthered when we regard promotion of the game positively.

Cheers,
John

But it NEVER had a "virtually complete domination" of the hobby.
There was also WRG 7/Warrior and WAB. This is just from an observer's view of tournament activity at HMGS conventions.

I'm just letting people know that a promotion of DBMM has been posted on youtube. I think that's good for the hobby.

Cheers,
John

Thanks. I am currently trying to creep into the rules, having played twice with Jann, the organizer of the Baltrum tournament where I planned to join in 2020. Somehow when Corona stepped in I lost impetus for that expedition, both ruleswise and with the brush (though the Ming are already built).
Hopefully in 22… I will be able not to just emberass myself with the rules. Add one follower :-)

Corona seems to have had that effect . . .

Good luck getting things underway.

Cheers,
John

"Promotion?" When you said WRG was going to explain DBMM, I was thinking more of an apology and a search for scapegoats--like explaining the Bay of Pigs.

Seriously, given the decline of clubs, this sort of thing is probably a good idea. I just hadn't thought of DBMM as still being played.

While the rule set doesn't seem to have any followers in my area, I don't see how the videos can be a bad thing.

Good luck!

It's always nice to find more players for the games you like to play.
:3

Generally quite good. I wanted to try to play DBMM but couldn't figure it out. I have been playing Dba for 30 years and enjoy it a lot so no reason to change. I'm not one of those who consider DBMM the adult version of Dba :-)

That first show was not interesting with the talking head covered up by a big black spot in the middle. The second one was better with the head out from behind the big black thing. More use of visual cues would be helpful so that it's not just talking but text as well. There was more of this in the second episode, but still too much of heads.

6 mm figures are difficult to follow and don't match the formatting that is typically used which is 15 mm and described in the rules as to the number of figures on a base.

I do prefer when someone uses the words of the rules instead of synonyms, it makes it easier to follow. For example when one element loses to another It is a recoil, it's not pushback, pushback means something else. A flank attack is not a form of overlap. I wish the gentleman would work a bit on his annunciation. Three is not "free." Threat is not "fret."

Full marks to the gentleman for taking the effort to promote these rules, which once were very popular but now in competition with quite a few others. They need all the help they can get.

I've suggested he use larger scale figures and he intends to do that in subsequent videos. His own collection is mainly 6mm but he is planning to use 15mm and possibly 25/28mm as well because the figures will look pretty. I think the 6mm effect is good though – better than I would have expected.

The point about terminology is important, especially since, as you say, 'pushback' has a specific meaning separate from 'recoil'.

Thanks. I'll pass this on.

John

I'm completely new to the DBx games (is that what they are referred to?) and from what I've seen before (I think games of DBA on small 2' by 2' tables) I've decided it is NOT the sort of game I am interested in. If I understand it correctly DBMM is for bigger games without the fixed army lists, right? He mentions a 6x4ft table. So this is going more in the direction of things I'm interested in.

I'm also a 28mm guy, but would actually say in these examples the little neat 6mm bases work very well for demonstrating how the rules work. I'd rather see a base consisting of a couple of dozen tiny little guys representing a unit than three or four 15mm figures which looks to me like the the worst compromise in terms of aesthetics, the only thing it has going for it being low cost to raise an army for these games.

My constructive criticism of the videos is that he is clearly reading a prepared script, whereas I find a looser more conversational approach much more appealing – however the latter can often lead to rambling and pauses and if not concise enough can lead to mind-numblingly tedious, over-long videos. At least his approach gets things covered in short, concise, no-filler steps. I don't personally want to look at someone as they read from a script, so I'd suggest he just keep the camera on the tabletop – Nothing personal but I don't want to look at his face!!!! I've got no problem with his 'annunciation' as has been pointed out above – he can pronounce things however he likes as long as we know what he's talking about as far as I'm concerned (as long as he doesn't ever say 'calvary' rather than 'cavalry', that just drives me mad!!!).

Though DBMM isn't a game I plan to play, I am always interested to learn how over rulesets work, so this is interesting to me, and it looks like I would happily play a game of it if invited to by someone else who was supplying the table and miniatures.

@Charlie, you might want to give DBA a look for playing big battles. In 15mm, single army games are usually played on a 24" x 24" or 30" x 30" square board. Big battle games use more armies per side, typically 3, our gang uses anywhere from 2–5 on longer rectangular board.

I played DBM a few times way back when. Enjoyed it well enough, but realised I would never play it often enough to be able to parse and remember all the rules. Like Bobgnar, I've stuck with DBA since 1990 and find it thoroughly enjoyable for big battles and small.

DBMM never caught on around here, but I wouldn't be averse to sitting in on a learning game.

@miniMo – I'm afraid what you've described is exactly what I DON'T like the sound of!

What's the difference between DBM and DBMM?

DBMM was a response to the feeling by some people that DBM needed more than a new edition. Some went down the 'new edition' route and still play a later version. Some people felt they needed a complete change so went with a different rule set, eg FoG.

DBMM was what Phil Barker and some players he got onboard produced. It uses the basic mechanics of DBA/DBM but included some changes to fix what people felt was 'broken'. Major issues were things like small groups being able to hold up large bodies of troops too easily (the so called "lone psiloi" phenomenon), changes around marching etc. There is more "my bound, your bound" combat factor difference, which is not as bad as it sounds. For me one of the best differences id the introduction of stratagems.

As an often points based game, you can decide to pay points to have the opportunity to employ various stratagems, like Pyrrhus' ploy of swapping his right and left wings after the Romans had got used to his deployment. You can employ scouts, guides to get through difficult terrain, even use disguised troops or exaggerated troop numbers. Feigned flight is another, which has been notoriously hard to achieve in many rule sets. For some this is unnecessary chrome (but you don't have to do it). For me, it adds a whole extra layer of challenge and interest to the game.

Some people don't like the rules, others as it is the best set of rules they have ever played. Each to their own of course but I think it's great that they are finally getting some profile.

When I venture back to my local club I'll probably have to learn ADLG and I'm sure I'll have fun. But I hope more people will give DBMM ago as well.

Cheers,
John

No thank you very much!

It was very popular but I wouldn't say dominated, because it seem to me that it was equally dislike as well.

I used to play DBM back in pre history, and I must say I found it to be one of the better games. Not my fav but up there, I have given up on wargame playing these days I just don't like the modern trends in rules, I hate card activations and rolling a bloody bucket of dice with a simple over this score and you have a hit. I like old school factors, like Troop quality weapon type and armour with just a little bit of the random thrown it for that freak result. Back to the thread I might watch but I fear its too late to save me I'm afraid.

just out of interest my fav rules played are Ancient Warfare by Terry Gore.