"The Top 5 Reasons to Dislike DBMM" Topic

What are your major objections to DBMM?

None at all

x42

Paid $25:00 to find out Ax(X) is now Pk(F)

The my-bound your-bound clauses for combat resolution crippled it for me.

Chrome added for no good reason.

Wall to wall figures.

Every millimeter matters.

DBA's a nice challenge, though.

I dislike it as a game as when I tried it I could see far too far ahead what was going to happen. The random element was not strong enough for me.

I would be playing and it was apparent it was going to end very badly, but it would still take a long, long time to come to a resolution with almost no chance of saving the day. There is no fun in that.

I prefer my games far more chaotic, and with a chance of a last minute reprieve. DBMM is too slow motion and stately.

(It's why I much prefer poker and backgammon to go and chess.)

I dislike it as history because armies in the ancient eras fought in units.

You can rationalise the element system up down and sideways, but ancient armies still fought in units.

You can rationalise the element system up down and sideways, but ancient armies still fought in units.
---------------------------------------------------

Not really a fan of DBMM (played lots of DBM) however I think this comment really misses the mark. Units are Arbitrary…..DBMM and DBM have the element as the unit representing something like 250 men. You can RATIONALIZE your larger multi-element units all you want, however it's still rationalization whicever way you go.

Tried really hard to like but each game increasingly felt like sitting an accounting exam.

Secondly, the game looked and played nothing like I would expect of an ancient battle. Add in the lack of formed units.

I prefer FOG, still if others like it good luck to them, I now always decline offers to play with DBMM, some players I know have gone back to DBM (which I dislike for the same reasons as DBMM).

1. The grading system is complicated
2. You have to know how to read English using punctuation
3. Sometimes you realise you have deployed badly and only a miracle will save you
4. A couple of rules need to be clearer
5. Too few people play it

I'm surprised by Mark P's comments because my experience is exactly the opposite. And he has the right to think that all armies in the ancient era fought in units. He'd be wrong but….

And for raylev3, millimeters mattered in DBM, but not so much in DBMM.

JohnG

Well, my comments are biased because I like so much the game: I have no objections to DBMM.
Lorenzo

tagmata.it

And he has the right to think that all armies in the ancient era fought in units.

But they didn't fight in 'elements' either.

The reason I dislike it is because the rules submitted to Barker's seemingly insatiable urge to tinker with a system until it collapses under the weight of its own exceptions, parses and modifiers. DBM was similar, and sadly HFG has gone the same way.

I've never played DBMM, only DBA i'm afraid…

I like DBMM2 very much.

DBMM is a boardgame, nothing more

@raylev3 mm are far more important in DBA than DBMM. The buttocks of death is gone.

@platypus01au:
2. You have to know how to read English using punctuation

I agree and I can. This is a problem with the rules and while Phil has to shoulder some of the blame, so do competition gamers from the DBM era who focused on gaming the rules rather than the opponent. I prefer to just get on and play and fortunately my opponents do too.

This is my only beef.

What do I dislike in DBMM? Ones and sixes! Where I get the ones and …

Personally, I like it, and play it, it gives a really great game, BUT, the presentation and writing are a major obstacle.

1. I play DBA.
2. My customers play DBA so i custom make DBA army bags for it.
3. I play FoG
4. My customers play FoG in the USA South. After they played several sets of rules to decide which one to use for the tournament circuit.
5. I worked on a couple of the last FoG army lists.

I have no objections to DBMM, but a lack of opponents has me playing BBDBA most often.

I've played DBA and read DBMM 1 and this is a criticism for all DBx games. Armies never get tired. You can be pushed completely accross the board without ever being depleted. Elements are either alive or dead. Yes there are rules for being "spent" for DBMM but that still amounts to the unit being removed from play (aka dead).

Despite that, I still like DBA. Never could get my head around DBMM1. I might give DBM a whirl.

The writing.

DBA has as much Barkerese as I can fathom. It gets exponentially worse as the number of rules increases.

DBMM is too complicated for me. I dont see how I could ever remember that combat factors table. Or any other table. Or any of those tables that are implied in the rules, but not put into a table but rather into two or three very long sentences.

I played DBM and DBR and found the flaws in the element system. I watched a game of DBMM at a local club and found it completely uninspiring.

Hi

I really enjoy DBMM, especially v2 which has IMO significantly improved play balance.

FWIW acarhj said:
"I've played DBA and read DBMM 1 and this is a criticism for all DBx games. Armies never get tired."
Actually they do, by getting broken up during the game, this slows the armies down since only the same number of PIPs are available to move a great number of groups of troops.

Gennorm said:
"I watched a game of DBMM at a local club and found it completely uninspiring."

I agree that most games are no fun to watch…but to be honest I think that is true for most wargames. I think that you can really only judge by taking a command or at least playing a 100AP (DBA-sized) game.

Oh well, its horses for courses. Some people like it, some don't – good luck to them all I say. DBMM is currently the dominant Ancients ruleset here in Ireland and we are having fun…just planning our next 100AP campaign night now, have tournaments both this month and the next, club meetings every week – if I had the time I'd be playing it even more!

rgds
rob

1. The writing
2. The writing
3. The writing
4. The writing
5. The blandness

I have no objections. I've never played it. Until I looked it up in the Glossary, I did not even know what it was.

I stand corrected. I read it as DBM, which I have played, and missed the extra M for DBMM, which I have not played….sorry 'bout that. Now if I could only delete my original post! Oh, well.

I think that DBA was brilliant, but that both DBM and now DBMM are flawed by the amount of chrome added to them to make a highly abstract and simple small game system a 'realistic' big battle game system. On one hand I agree philosophically with the idea that the element of approximately 250 men is the smallest battlefield, as a game mechanic it does not work for me. There are other rules sets which I find much more accessible while providing a historical results with a fun game experience.

I'm curious, why pick on DBMM? Why not FOG, Impetus etc…

> I'm curious, why pick on DBMM? Why not FOG, Impetus etc…

1. Phil's rules are hard to understand because they are written in long, joined sentences instead of the expected dot-points and/or numbered, indented sentences.
2. He tends to tinker with the rules he writes. But to be fair this is often due to the punters demanding it.
3. He's probably the most successful ancients rules author, and smart-arses find it pleasurable to knock his work (in Australia it's called the Tall Poppy Syndrome).
4. People think it is DBM and don't realise we're talking about a different game.
5. DBMM (and the rest of the DBx series) are not a traditional style of unit-based, buckets-of-dice, with orders, rule-set and makes many people uncomfortable, so they find it easier to criticise than understand.

I'm sure that some people knocking the rules on this forum have never played it and don't intend to, so knocking the set is a game rather than serious criticism. Also Phil is an irascible, politically-incorrect pensioner and often rubs people up the wrong way. So for some it's personal….

Cheers,
JohnG

OR

It could be because this thread was meant to balance another thread which The Editor also started. Namely TMP link

Compare the time stamps in the first posts on both.

Move along, no hidden agendas to see here.

Somewhere between DBA and DBM/DBMM there's a set of rules and army lists for ~36 element armies (each element base size being identical) for games that take about two to three hours, written in plain language with the right level of complexity to keep the old guard happy and yet interest a new generation of gamers.

It is a fine upstanding rule set with many good points.

Its only downside is that some can't cope with the language – English with correct grammer and punctuation.

Far too many exceptions and special conditions trying to make a silk purse from a sow's ear and failing.

Fixing the 'issues' with DBM that people who actually knew how to play either liked or didn't care about and introducing a whole raft of new issues along the way.

Being playtested with significant chunks of the final product missing so that the playtesters assumed that the DBM version of the missing bits applied then discovering they weren't there.

Phil insisting on making last minute changes that further broke the system and not testing them in the slightest.

No significant realignment of the points system despite very significant changes in relative troop effectiveness.

Hi Hammy

I think these criticisms (perhaps with the exception of your first two which are very much in the eye of the beholder IMO) are very much directed at DBMM version 1. Version 2 benefits from several years of playtesting and is a careful evolution of v1.

rgds
rob

Version 2 may well be better but for me the first two are still 100% valid reasons for me not liking the game. As the initial post asks "What are YOUR top 5 reasons" I felt they were valid.

Also there had not been much movement to my knowledge on the points issue either (OK, the rules might have changed to make the points less broken but that is the old DBM 3.1 cart pulling the horse problem).

Having stopped playing DBx I can honestly say that I don't miss it so the chance of me playing DBM or DBMM again in the near future is pretty low.

Its only downside is that some can't cope with the language – English with correct grammer and punctuation.

*I* can't cope with the language, and I am a professional technical writer with several 500-page documents to my internal credit. There is a vast difference between writing an English paper with correct grammar and punctuation (or legalese) and writing for intelligibility.

Don't you mean 'eternal' credit?

Nope, I mean internal credit, since the document was not signed by me.

I have read a lot of threads about these rules being badly written in comparison to field of glory and other rule sets.

I still decided to buy these and will see how hard they actually are to understand on arrival. I doubt that they can be as overcomplicated as field of glory, which I was assured where simple to learn before I spent my cash on them. Well two years on and I am still scratching my head!

Been playing FOG for over 2 years but still don't feel like I have grasped everything even though I have read the book umpteen times.

I am looking forward to receiving DBMM V2.0

Its only downside is that some can't cope with the language – English with correct grammer and punctuation.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Though ironically of course the above – in, I'm sure, not seeking to be superior – contains a spelling mistake!

Hi Iron Chicken,

one of the main features of DBMM is that the rules are very dense so there are only about 20 pages of core rules compared to FOG's c100 *but* they cover approx the same (or broader) scope. This makes a compact reference but is not sparkling prose to read and digest how the game actually plays.

The best way to learn is via an experienced player but failing that if you have zero experience of DBx rules systems then IMO it is probably best to download DBA PDF link
and to have a crack at that to get the core concepts of PIPs for movement and how combat works.

OTOH it is possible to play based on reading the rulesbook and setting up a few small games (100AP, 1 hour rules are given at the back of the book). The dbmm forum is also helpful for new players – dbmm.org.uk

rgds
rob

Hi Rob,

Many thanks for your post, any help is greatly appreciated as I am sure it wont be the easiest thing to pick up a new rules set. I do have DBA and have played a few games but I am convinced DBMM is much more complicated.

I will check out your link and also the dbmm forums.

All the best

Iron Chicken – If you have a good grip on DBA, DBMM just adds more layers – for example inferior, ordinary, superior and exception gradings on top of the existing DBA troop types. There is also a DBx board here on TMP where you can look for help.

Too much Barkerese to parse and remember.

DBA is a great game despite the writing style, and the most of it that I can cope with.

The feeling that I'm reading a piece of legislation rather than wargames rules.

Perhaps I would not play as there are not enough tanks and helicopters.

O dear, sounds like a few folks are not fans.

none the less we soldier on. I am not versed in the term Barkerese so look forward to that.

I am due to receive the rules tomorrow but probably won't start reading them until the weekend.

I'll be sure to be posting my comments afterwards…….

Phil Barker (whoever he is) doesn't speak English.

I don't know who wrote those rules, but they sound like someone just stuck a bunch of words in a blender and poured the results onto a page.

Does that mean what "Barkerese" means???

And I don't know who thinks he is writing in "Proper English with correct punctuation," but I don't believe it.

After reading other rules, and then reading DBMM, (I could barely understand DBA, and it is like three pages of rules)… I figure if that is Proper English, then I don't want to read rules written in Proper English.

I have played another system that is like DB(x), and it wasn't bad (but I would still rather play FoG).

But I have been informed that mentioning it will be met with sneers of derision.

Do all gamers like to sneer at other games?