Help support TMP


"Do you game more often using DBx rules?" Topic


De Bellis Antiquitatis (DBA)

19 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 De Bellis Antiquitatis (DBA) Rules Board

Back to the De Bellis Magistrorum Militum Rules Board

Back to the Horse, Foot and Guns Rules Board

Back to the Hordes of the Things Rules Board

Back to the De Bellis Renationis Rules Board

Back to the De Bellis Multitudinis Rules Board


Action Log

02 Jan 2017 7:05 p.m. PST
by Editor in Chief Bill

  • Crossposted to De Bellis Renationis board
  • Crossposted to Hordes of the Things board
  • Crossposted to Horse, Foot and Guns board
  • Crossposted to De Bellis Magistrorum Militum board
  • Crossposted to De Bellis Antiquitatis (DBA) board

Areas of Interest

Fantasy
Ancients
Medieval
Renaissance
18th Century
Napoleonic
American Civil War
19th Century
World War One

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Showcase Article

More 15mm Boxers from Cellmate

Tod gives us another look at his "old school" Boxer Rebellion figures.


Featured Profile Article

GameCon '98

The Editor tries out this first-year gaming convention in the San Francisco Bay Area (California).


504 hits since 2 Jan 2017
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

79thPA Supporting Member of TMP31 Jan 2013 11:40 a.m. PST

I plan and plan and plan my armies, most of which never seem to come to fruition (or come to fruition after years of work). Part of me is thinking about switching gears and going with DBA/HotT/etc. type rules to actually get some armies done, put some figures on the table and actually play/run some games. For those of you who have to have big armies, have any of you decided that you don't have to paint 600-1,000 15mm-25mm+ figs to fight a battle and that a couple of DBA type armies work just fine. I figure you can always go from a single to a double to a triple DBA army (if you want more figs) as painting time allows. Thanks for your thoughts.

Personal logo timurilank Supporting Member of TMP31 Jan 2013 12:03 p.m. PST

I hear you.

As the 3.0 version is nearing puplication, I am near completing a triple sized Ottoman army for the 15th century. Progress can be read at Fanaticus Forum under Painting armies.

With 15 armies done, we can start work on the campaign system. The core set has been posted to the blog some time ago.

dbagora.blogspot.nl

Further, our greatest area of interest is the 18th century. We still use the DBA-HX (Humberside Extension) with DBA 2.2.

Along with the usual west Euuropean armies we are also covered for Africa, India, South America and Asia. You can catch a brief peek at the Prussians and Austrians at the other blog, 18th Century Sojourn.

18thcenturysojourn.blogspot.nl

Fantasy is alive and well and moving with the times. I have contact with someone who will help with maps for a long delayed project, 18th century Melnibonéan Elves. The armies are ready, but with maps complete I can work on suitable terrain.

Lots to do.
Cheers,
Robert

vtsaogames31 Jan 2013 12:08 p.m. PST

I usually game with other rules. Then when we get tired of them, we go back to DBA for a while. I've been going through DBA phases since the first edition came out.

Phillius Sponsoring Member of TMP31 Jan 2013 12:29 p.m. PST

DBA has never really grabbed me, but I like big armies anyway. So a lot of DBMM at the moment, and really enjoying it.

I am beginning to move away from DBR though, and I feel the urge for something different for renaissance/pike&shot/early modern. But I like the element basing system.

elsyrsyn31 Jan 2013 12:48 p.m. PST

The promise of a nice quick game and armies even I can manage to finish (and in 6mm, they still look like armies to me even on 15mm scale bases) keep bringing me back to DBA, and the nature of the rules keeps shoving me back away. This has gone on with me, as vstaogames, since version 1. The drafts I've seen of 3.0 seem to eliminate some of my quibbles with the rules, so I'm looking forward to trying again.

Doug

SECURITY MINISTER CRITTER31 Jan 2013 1:25 p.m. PST

Almost never since FoG came out.

Toy Soldier Green31 Jan 2013 1:59 p.m. PST

79thPA the reasons you stated are the reasons I returned home to DBx, the first set I ever started with.

religon31 Jan 2013 2:28 p.m. PST

I bought into various DBx rules expecting the ease of painting armies would increase my painting output. It really did not impact me in the same way as others report. I have come to think of collecting, painting and gaming as rather independent hobbies.

The path to more painting and gaming for me came from just gaming from what I already have painted. I don't paint to game. I collect what I think I'll like to paint. I don't consider the rules. I paint what I feel like on that given day.

Normally, I only have a vague idea about what rules I'll use the figures with as I am painting them. When enough painted figures of the same army pile up, I start looking for rules. I never choose DBx rules although I have a multitude of those type rules. Recently it has been homebrew, Richard Borg, Rick Priestly or Alessio Cavatore games that see the table.

John Leahy Supporting Member of TMP31 Jan 2013 8:38 p.m. PST

I am constantly drawn to the Humberside variant. However, I use actual orders of battle instead of 10-15 stands. I really like the Scenarios that Bruce McFarlane did for Humberside. Including the exhaustion levels for commands is a great touch. I also like his limited recoils and Command variants. Great additions.

Thanks,

John

RudyNelson31 Jan 2013 9:06 p.m. PST

I have a friend who travels to a lot of conventions and all he plays is DBA 2.0 He has no plans to switch to 3.0
Almost all of his painted 15mm are DBA armies and a few HotT.

79thPA Supporting Member of TMP31 Jan 2013 10:04 p.m. PST

John, is the Humberside variant readily available on the internet or not?

John Leahy Supporting Member of TMP31 Jan 2013 10:48 p.m. PST

I have it as pdf's. I'll send it too you.

Edit****
Sent.

Personal logo timurilank Supporting Member of TMP01 Feb 2013 12:43 a.m. PST

For those readers wishing to explore DBA-HX, these are available at the Fanaticus Resource page under the Horse and Musket Period:

link

Cheers,

KTravlos01 Feb 2013 3:33 a.m. PST

Most of my land miniature gaming over the last 2 years has been DBA. The relative speed for collecting the game pieces (miniatures) and for playing the game, is a winner for me. The variety is gaming styles due to the different composition of the armies also is something I like.

ZULUPAUL Supporting Member of TMP01 Feb 2013 8:46 a.m. PST

Really prefer the DBA-HOTTS rules for many of the same reasons, small armies easlity completed. Plan on sticking with DBA 2.2 myself & HOTTS.

artslave01 Feb 2013 11:19 a.m. PST

I think DBA works well, and has allowed me to gather many different armies in a short period of time. I like the creative touches that can be added with camps. From a game mechanic standpoint, I think gamers want to have too much control over a whole battle. The way DBx does a variable command pip makes sense to me especially in the ancient time period. This makes a game feel right. You can't always do everything every turn, and doing things out of command radius forces even more difficult. This makes the commander very important, and command and control a huge issue.

What I don't like is the "cheese". It seems amazing to me that such a simple rules system can get so screwed up by nit-picking players who want to play tricks to win games and care nothing for actually simulating warfare in that time period. Some of these issues may be getting ironed out in new versions.

Who asked this joker01 Feb 2013 11:34 a.m. PST

They are my go-to game when i want to solo a game and don't want to break out something more involved. I can set something up in VASSAL on my computer and have a full game in about an hour. No clean up necessary except hitting the exit button.

Dale Hurtt01 Feb 2013 3:21 p.m. PST

To the OP: my plan was always to use DBA-sized armies, in the periods I wanted, then work on doubling it, then doubling again. That way you can play three sets of rule: one element per unit, two bases per unit, and four bases per unit. Anything after that gets to be excessive (at my age).

Have you considered 6mm?

Dale

Personal logo Bobgnar Supporting Member of TMP04 Feb 2013 1:32 p.m. PST

I have use DBA and H OTT for games in many eras. However they tend to be large scenario games not 12 on a side. Ancients and Medieval of course, but also Napoleonic colonial, great wargame, zombies, interwar conflicts. I'm currently building up Army's for the HG Wells war of the worlds.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.