"Commands and Colors or DBA?" Topic

I set up a post about using C&C with miniatures. From that thread I figure that the only way to do that would be with 2-6mm figures (I want to use the board included in the game).

I have the original (v1) of DBA and I like it. Might try 2.2.

What are the pluses and minuses of each system? Please lets not get into a "bash DBA" type discussion.

Do both! The 40mm bases for DBA will fit in the CnC hexes. You can use anything from 15mm down to 2mm. I would do DBA in 15mm and CnC as well.

That said I am not a huge fan of the card system for CnC. It can make a game feel very disjointed and random. You can also feel like you lost to the "cards" and not your opponent. The pip roll in DBA can do the same but feel s less capricious to me.

Your plan using 2-6mm figs on the original board should work just fine. Our group plays both systems with 15mm figures. The figures are based on the standard 40mm frontage as per DBA, but we use them with 4" hex mats when playing Commands and Colors. Normally, you will need about 3-4 DBA bases of the same type to make one C&C unit. This works pretty well, and gives one the flexibility of playing either system. We also use 4" Styrofoam hexes for the hills, and thinner green ones for the woods. This gives more of a 3D effect to the terrain. I'd recommend that you try the 3.0 version of DBA.

Both systems are good. I tend to prefer DBA because it seems a bit more believable. I know, it's not historically accurate, especially on a tactical level. But it does give a fast playing and enjoyable game on the level of the larger battles. C&C is also geared more towards the grand battle. The command and control system is different, but still forces one to make choices about which groups to move. I guess that, if there's anything I like less about C&C, it's the gaps between the units. But the speed of the hex movement tends to make up for that. C&C is a much faster-playing game, so good if playing time is limited.

I like both.
C&C is good for beginners and those only slightly familiar with history. DBA is better for those that are already playing miniatures and have some idea of ancient combat.

BTW, the current DBA is version 3.0.

Joe Collins

Both! Do try DBA 3.0 though. It's even better than the previous versions.

Do both.

The answer is…YES!

I agree with others. Try both. You can then decide and may even like both. There is no rule that says to have to stay with only one game system. You can play multiple systems, or just stick with one.

One other thing to consider is the painting. You need quite a few figures to do C&C:A if one base represents one block, so there's far less painting to do with DBA.

But if you are happy to use one base to represent a unit and markers to show losses then you can cut down on the painting significantly.

I've got a couple of review type pieces up on my blog if you have not played CCA yet and want to take a look.

A general overview:

link

A slightly cringe-inducing review from a long time ago but I still hold to the main points:

link

And a report about introducing my old man to the game:

link

Whatever you do, have fun :)

Cheers,
Aaron

I play and promote both games (and others.) You can do both with either 6mm or 15mm figures and use the board itself using the standard 15mm DBA basing convention of 40mm wide stands.

Of course, if I knew more how you were going to play (solo, with friends, only selected armies/periods) then I could

I play both and will list out their strengths as I see them.

C&C: Ancients-Ten Strengths

1- Can play in an hour, Epic version with 6 players in 90 minutes to 2 hours
2- Tons of historical scenarios (and battlefields) are provided both in the games and for free on line at
link
3- Historical scenarios are not balanced and the only way to balance the game is to play it twice (part of the way the Commands & Colors System works.) You can use the game to play army against army as seems to be popular among ancient gamers, but the system is built around historical battles.
4- Living rules can be downloaded on line and previous FAQs are integrated into the rules
5- Good community of players testing scenarios and rules (benefits of having sold over 12,000 copies)
6- Easy system to teach kids and new players. Can be used to attract board gamers and new players to playing miniatures. (Hexes for movement and the 1 unit per hex limit, makes this an argument free game.)
7- Card system is easier for new players than for wargame grognards. Playing your best cards in some combination seems to come easily to kids and newer players than other variable impetus systems. I have seen this over 15 years teaching this system. I personally like the left/right/center break up of the battlefield. The card system seems to even out over a night of games and even can reverse fortunes in the middle of the game. (Clearly I like it better than Mark.) Can make for a good solo system too.
8- System is bloody and quick. Usually requires you to kill 6 to 8 of the 14-18 units on the other side. I love the flag/retreat result on the dice. In my opinion, very elegant way to put morale in the game. (good troops get to ignore a certain number of flags)
9- All light troops have missile capabilities and it takes a while to get a hang of avoiding retreating off the board. Evading is important and gives a nice feel for light troops versus heavier troops.
10- Leaders are very important as they add to the troops fighting results around them and ignoring retreat results. Using them will helps you win and also lends to the story line of the battle. (I couldn't resist taking a picture of Alexander running away after all his cavalry had been killed at Hydsaspes.)

DBA-10 Strengths

1- Can play in an hour (12 vs 12 elements.) Big Battle version has 36 elements per side and we have used it to do some interesting historical battle. Many prefer the Big Battle DBA just like they prefer Epic CCA.
2- Army lists are very comprehensive and once you get on top of the ‘code' (what's a Ps, a psiloi and how the hell do you pronounce it) it is an excellent way to understand troop capabilities across the whole era and it is also helpful in understanding other ancients systems. (Accounting is the language of business and DBA is great for learning the language of ancients gaming. OK I admit I am an accountant and yeah there is a bit of pain in the learning.)
3- Great on line community with Fanaticus and new Fanaticus. Figure makers make DBA armies so you can build them right out of the box (usually for under $60. USD)
4- DBA covers all of ancient and medieval history (CCA only goes up to 500 AD.) so lots of variety with learning one rules set.
5- While the game is designed to have the battlefield terrain determined randomly for each game, you can find historical setups and orders of battle for earlier versions that are easy to adapt to 3.0. (I admit to having a hard time liking the terrain determination rules. I think this is because I feel I learn more getting my clock cleaned playing a historical scenario badly. Maybe my imagination is a little shy here.)
6- Lots of DBA players out there, so opponents should not be a problem. Since DBA is often played in a tournament setting, the average level of knowledge of the rule is high.
7- 12 element armies with a few more for options, means you can easily field opposing historical opponents.
8- DBA combat uses opposed die rolls so both sides are actively engaged all the time during combat, and you get those emotions of winning and losing combats.
9- Pip die command and control system is easy to learn and group movements get the game moving along.
10- I really like the visual of the recoils and advances. There really aren't that many different factors so the combats move along quickly without too much ‘head math.'

As above, I also do both. My DBx armies serve very well as CnC ones.

No, you don't need to model each block as a figure base, just use a single base for each CnC unit and track hits with markers.

Of the two, DBA is probably the better simulation, but CnC is fun to play and has historical scenarios. I have learned to live with and even enjoy some of its more silly aspects.

Aaron,

Those are excellent articles on your blog. I really like the way you have captured the essential fun of C&C Ancients. Love the one about your dad.

After teaching the guys M44 with an Overlord scenario, we were done so quickly they were surprised and someone aked what do we do now? After being told to switch sides and get organized, they all jumped into it and had a lively and very close second game. Over the next two months I had a number of the players come up to me and say, "You know I keep thinking about that Omaha Beach game we played and how much fun it was."

Bill

You guys have not helped one bit. As I think about C&C v. DBA my hope was to decide which of the two games I wanted to invest in. All you have done is convince me that I should go for both.

Allen,
Then their work here is done :)

The problem is both are good games.

Seriously, if you don't already have miniatures painted up to play DBA, then pick up C&C and play with the blocks, it's a good game….

Start collecting miniatures and painting them… Then use them to play C&C or DBA and as your collection grows any number of other great games out there.

I have done both using 6mm miniatures on 40mm bases and a third set that has about the same number of units – Lost Battles or its earlier version Strategos.

C&C is the most fun I've ever had wargaming. However, I've never used miniatures only the blocks included. . It is even more of a 'game' than DBA, which I mostly play often solo. I think C&C is less good as a solo game, as you'll know what the opposition cards hold.

DBA is a wonderfully elegant and well thought through system. DBA 3.0 is definitely the best version IMO. The 'How to Play DBA' book by Sue Barker will get you the rules in a cheaper version, and as a e-book even though you don't get all the hundreds of army lists in the main rulebook.

As had been said previously you'll need many more figures for C&C if you want to play it as a miniatures game than you would for DBA.

"I have done both using 6mm miniatures on 40mm bases and a third set that has about the same number of units – Lost Battles or its earlier version Strategos."

LOL. I also use my DBx based stuff with Lost Battles.

Less so these days, it just feel such a slog compared to CnC Ancients.

Martin I agree with you. C&C: a fun game to play, but with little historical accuracy and the most expensive with all the add ons. DBA: more historical than C&C, does allow tactical maneuvering, much less expensive than C&C. Lost Battles: most historical of the lot, but with one odd game play mechanism (lead unit) and probably least expensive if buying only the book. It can be used for non historical battles with players choosing armies and terrain features instead of just playing the scenarios included.

It all depends on what a person wants in the games they play. Regardless of any claims, they are all still games.

Battle Cry Bill – your '10 strengths' analysis is very good, and I'm not at all surprised those fellows enjoyed the games you put on.

Wishing you many such games more!

Cheers,
Aaron

Hobhood4,

Glad you have had fun with C&C:A. I have a couple of solo solutions for you. (Although I seem to be able to play both side straight up and never have any trouble with either system – voices in my head?) First, you can have a 'hand' of 3-4 cards that are common to both sides. These can be played instead of the hidden hand, which at 1-3 cards you can pick from the deck each turn and then discard at the end of the turn. Second, you can use a combination of cards to indicate sections and a die roll to determine number of units.

For C&C:A you only need a couple more stands than the standard 12 DBA stands to play with figures on the board that comes in the game, assuming that you are willing to track casualties. So with the normal extra troops that I have for my DBA armies (and the occasional ally borrowed), I have never had a problem with enough stands.

I will post some pictures and you can see if it looks good enough for you.

Bill

williamb,

Glad we agree these are all games, but sorry, I don't agree that C&C:A has little historical accuracy nor is it all that more expensive with all the 'additional add ons.'

I won't argue the historical accuracy part, that is always a dead end if not done in person. (Although my sense would be I would enjoy the discussion with you.)

As to the cost of C&C:A – Buy the core game ($50-65 ) vs. $40 USD for the full DBA rules book. Then buy Roman and Gaul DBA army packs with a couple more packs and you are all in under $150. USD All the rest of the rules and the scenarios for C&C:A are available on line.

You can use the DBA armies for C&C:A with marking for casualties. Then you can draw your own conclusions about historical accuracy. (I have argued historical accuracy merit FOR both DBA and C&C:A.)

Anyway, as per the beginning of this question: DO BOTH.

Bill

Lots of pictures here.

I keep trying different casualty tracking technology. Rocks and little number needs and casualty figures have all been tried and work, but I am still searching for the ultimate way to track casualties.

link

On the cost, C&C:A provides a good game right out of the basic box, Rome vs Carthage. Of course that is using blocks instead of figures.

The primary reason for buying the C&C:A expansions is to get the additional army blocks. Rules and scenarios are available online.

For DBA the primary expense is buying figures and the time to paint them. DBA is widely played and the basing standard for DBA works very well with the majority of Ancients rules out there.

I have the full set of C&C:A, but bought them as they were released. Buying them all at once is not something I would recommend. The stickers alone will kill you…

I play mostly solitaire and find myself enjoying C&C:A more than DBA these days.

Neither DBA nor C&C. :-)

Neither is particularly "historically accurate". DBA even includes game incentives to use tactics that are decidedly the opposite of history in many cases. Command and Colors lacks historical depth.

Of the two, C&C is easier to understand having been written in english.

DBA is literally written as a computer program relying heavily on conditional statements for the basics of combat resolution. C&C, like most games, is numbers-driven and thus easier to understand.

Both feel very random with their abstract command and control systems. I'm all for C&C systems in wargames, just not ones that too often make the player a spectator subject to wild swings in pure luck (literally in the case of DBA) rather than a participant managing risk and reward.

For Command and Colors, you might try the Battles of Westeros card system which seems to have improved the card-driven C&C system.

Command and Colors has one clear advantage over DBA in that units can be worn down over time as they engage in combat. DBA's elements can engage in combat after combat without becoming less effective.

A good alternative to DBA is "L'Art De La Guerre". It's DBA-like in its use of "elements" and has an option for small armies. It also addresses many of the complaints about DBA that historical gamers have had. Most importantly, units actually get worn down in repeated combats. We've only played a couple of games but enjoyed it far more than DBA. And for a very reasonable $40 USD you get the full rules, QRS, and all army lists for ancient to medieval!

You can find L'Art de la Guerre at link below. It many ways it's DBA that's more historical and more reasonable.

link

Both DBA and C&C :)

Both are good games based on history. DBA 3 now includes game incentives to use tactics that are decidedly historical in most cases. What constitutes "historical depth" in a game?

DBA 3 and C&C are both well written. Note that the writer of C&C has been an avid DBA player.

Both are game with chance factors.

DBA is a good alternative to "L'Art De La Guerre" DBA has elements and options for small or large armies. I have played one game of "L'Art De La Guerre" and found it much too complicated. DBA is a reasonable $38 USD from on Military Matters. You get the full rules, and all army lists for ancient to medieval! A QRS is not really needed as the rules are simple, but there are some on line.

I know the authors of both DBA and C&C personally, played games with them. Both have produced different but excellent games.