"WAB vs DBM" Topic

Which set of rules are best to play.
Is Warhammer Ancient Battles just Warhammer Fantasy without magic ?

The games play so differently they cannot really be compared. Both are good and both have large followings. It depends what you want in game.

If you explain what you want in your games I'm sure you'll get good guidance on which suits your taste.

What i'm after is a game that models the way ancient armies fought , easy to play with realistic army lists.

I agree with Boone in the difference part. Also a factor is the scale of your castings. 15mm is played more by DBM and more WAB games are in 25mm

I would say either are good for that (I like both). WAB is one figure = 1 man and DBM is one stand = many (20-100 IIRC) so it depends what sort of thing you are after.

What i'm after is a game that models the way ancient armies fought , easy to play with realistic army lists.

The answer, tentatively, is neither rules are particularly realistic to any one period, preferring to abstract out certain specifics which could be put into more period-specific rules sets. What they do have going for them is large followings, which makes finding players much easier.

"What i'm after is a game that models the way ancient armies fought , easy to play with realistic army lists."

Well the answer is that neither are realistic. But IMHO WAB makes for a better game. In the most recent issue of Slingshot (the house journal of the Society of Ancients, societyofancients.com ) Phil Barker mentions the problems he has with the current version of DBM and I agree with him. It went from being a rather die roll dependant game to being the wargames equivalent of watching paint dry. So perhaps a proper comparison is WAB vs DBMM (the new rules coming out).

However if you want to do real battles can I suggest Alea Iacta Est (for which I applogise in advance for not supporting better), see

3vwargames.co.uk/rules2.htm

get an historical order of battle, set the troops up and fight. None of this points stuff!

I'd echo the above, with the proviso that if you are used to WHFB then WAB will seem more "accessible", It is a 'ground-up' set of rules, with the emphasis on individual figures and units. The DBx system is 'top-down' i.e. from the point of view of a general in chief who is more concerned with grand tactical decisions.
DBx is usually played in 15mm, WAB in 25mm so the models you have available could determine your choice of game. Of course theres nothing to stop you playing and enjoying both.

Oh dear! I see a flame war on the horizen.

Quote "Is Warhammer Ancient Battles just Warhammer Fantasy without magic ?"

At first the answer would have ben yes. However, Warhammer Fantasy Battle 6th ed came out in 2000 ( another Version, which in all likleyhood will contain a handfull of minor revisons is in devolpement) and this has changed the game . WAB also includes some other changes( auto break and quick kill abilities for some units), so whilst the two systems use the same core mechanisms for shooting, and combat they are very different in the way they play. WAB tends to favour BIG units.

Warhammer is a game dominated by powerfull caracters and monsters, in WAB the characters are usually less powerfull and tend to have less of an impact on the game.

DBM and WAB take different approches, DBM attempts to simulate large scale battles and to provide a level playing field for armies seperated by vast expanses of technology and military tactics, this is achieved at the expense of period feel. WAB takes the opposite approach and tries to simulate the different tactics used and really make the armies stand out from one another, this does mean quite a few special rules, and some out of period game balance issues.

In terms of scale WAB does not have a fixed scale and this is determined by the limits of your imagination. Some players take a 24man Roman unit as a cohort others as a legion, its up to you.

As ever the best thing is to try both,with WAB you can usualy l;earn toplay from the rules as they are quite easy to pick up, although at times you need to be coperative in resolving issues that arise. With DBM, learning how toplay from the rules is diffiult as the rules writer insists on writing in a turgid and incomprehensible style.

Be aware that this subject attracts strong opinions from players of both systems.

I play DBM not WAB so I won't even try to compare the 2.
I enjoy DBM and you can play it in either 15mm OR 25mm.
A typical Heavy infantry stand of pike, blades or spear
represents in the neighbourhood of 600 – 1000 men. Light foot around 50-300 debending on what it is. You have to select your your troops from an army list (300 to choose from) to what ever point value you plan on playing and then sub-divide them into a number of commands, typically 3. Each under the control of a C-in-C or sub-general. Terrain gets pick based on defenders location and then randomly distributed by dice. Elements can move alone or in large groups by allocating a movement pip and each element has its own combat factor, movement rates and abilities based on type. Using historical combat methods works best for each troop … pike line up to 4 deep to obtain best additional factors … light horse can move far and fast to grab flanks and cause great confusion. Knights can go spono after targets with you losing control of them crashing and quck killing troops … lots of fun
I enjoy it, but yes … find someone who knows the rules. They really are fun to use just hard to decifer so you need someone to show you. You then say … hey these are easy to play! 3 dice, no charts or tables. Just measure roll and play.

I play all sorts of rules including WAB and DBA/M, but also Armati. I have played others in the past, but not recently enough to give opinions

It is pretty key to decide which ancients armies you want to use as much as scale etc.

I find DBA/M really good for the period from the Punic Wars to the fall of Rome, but less enjoyable for the earlier wars of the Greeks etc

Armati OTOH is good for those Greek-style phalanx clashes, but for the Roman period the legions can be too powerful for a fun game (my opinion)

WAB is more geared to smaller scale, character-led battles (although is enjoyable to many people in many ways). I find it best for the Arthurian/Dark Age setting, where the heroics of a single leader can turn the battle. A related set is "Battlestandard Ancient Rules": BAR, which seem to give a similar look to the army, but are possible better suited to giving that feel of commanding a large army. As I haven't played them (yet) I can't say any more.

..and then there is Warmaster Ancients which I have just picked up and looks really good…again for the "big battle" feel. The conversion info for 15mm is helpful and as I am currently building up triple DBA armies I should have the right sort of figures to give these a go in the near future!

I don't have any chariot-period armies so can't comment on rules for them.

So my 28mm stuff will work for WAB/BAR depending on the scale of the battle and the 15mm will work for Armati, DBA/M or Warmaster Ancients

This is what I have found anyway, hope it helps.

cheers
Steve

To add to comments above- it depends what you want. DBM is "top down", WAB is "bottom up". I find DBM works well for Hellenistic games, Bibilcal warfare, Punic Wars, etc. (15mm). I love WAB for Dark Ages, Early Medieval etc.(25mm). If you're looking at Warmaster the rules look fine but in my humble opinion the Army lists stink. (I'm thinking of adapting DBM armey lists for these!).

Well, since nobody's said anything,

<shameless plug>
mj12games.com/ftm
</shameless plug>

The game works with 15mm and 25/28mm equally well. Try out the demo, it's free! And we have tons of support (heh) plus we're a lot better looking than any of the other designers too.

Um, if you play our rules, you'll lose weight.

Also, once you start playing Majestic Twelve Games the most attractive members of the opposite sex seem to find their way to your table at the cons. (except that one time when ALL the hotties at the con went to the guy with the HANDWRITTEN napoleonics rules instead of my table. I haven't been back to that con since)

And, um, we don't have any cool shirts 'cause the shirt might look pale compared to the coolness of someone carrying about a full and complete set of Majestic Twelve Games.

I think I'm out of sales pitch now, check us out, no, seriously, check us OUT.

jim

I'm not a sock puppet, that's really me!

Why not try to get a game of each in, and see what you prefer. Opinions on these two games are often very polarised, where some people you meet will boast about the one they play and disparage the other. They are both very popular, so there is a good chance that both are played regularly in your local club.

K

"What i'm after is a game that models the way ancient armies fought , easy to play with realistic army lists."

Neither of these rules sets models the way that ancient armies actually fought – they are not "simulations" they are truly games. If you are looking for a rules set that models the way the armies actually fought, look elsewhere. Otherwise – both games are relatively fun to play and have large followings. The others above have given you ample ammunition to decide which style of play each game takes so you can make a relatively informed decision.

Well, I was going to offer suggestions, but after seeing some of the utter crap posted above, there's little point. The original poster is going to have a hard time sorting truth from fiction.

WAB is one figure = one man? Horse puckey.

"X" is a better set of rules—but you've never frakin' played it?

Come on, people.

Kroeseus has the best advice. Find out what local people play, and try it or them.

Allen

Allen, got out of the wrong side of the bed?

I think there are examples of truth in the above, example
"In terms of scale WAB does not have a fixed scale and this is determined by the limits of your imagination. Some players take a 24man Roman unit as a cohort others as a legion, its up to you."

So perhaps the best thing is to pipe up and show the way to truth and light.

I will go out and find out about DBMM but am short of time at the moment.

Y'know, 1standonly, check the board back lists. This topic has been beaten to death more times than I (or most of TMP) really wants to recount.

Do your homework.
What period?
What armies?
What scale?

Unclear questions deserve fractious answers.

The big problem with DBM in 25mm is that the basing scheme is really hurt by the scale creep of miniatures. Four close order infantry in 30mm just often don't fit on a 60mmx20mm base. The vast majority of DBM gaming is in 15mm. WAB, stemming from WFB, is largely a 25mm game, and uses basing that is friendlier to scale creep issues.

WAB is one figure = one man was the intention of the designers IIRC (they may have changed thier tune).

Certainly people use it differently but that doesn't make the original design goal "horse puckey". We use it about 10men to a figure ourselves.

As far as periods go the general DBM earlier/WAB later sentiment is pretty much the same one I came to especially the closer to the end of the high medieval period you get.

As far as basing goes I use the DBR scheme in 25s – it fits much better.

You might want to give Battlestandard Ancient Rules a try.

battlestandard.com

Pretty easy set to learn and they have a good deal on the rules due to a printing error. Nothing really wrong with the print, except some of the illustrations didn't come out very well. Only $12 USD while supplies of the misprint version last, which is a good price on a decent sized rulebook.

Liam

Like Liam said we have a few copies left at $12.00. They are all Black and White and we have about 25 of the full color books left at the regular price of $20.00.

AsS it pertains to this thread. Battlestandard Ancient Rules, or BAR as it is generally known, is almost right in between the DBM world and the WAB world. It accomodates both mounting systems. Plays with the historical feel of DBM but with the beer and pretzels feel of WAB. It actually accomodates larger armies than WAB and plays faster. It is a D10 system as opposed to D6 and the point system is open and is included in the rules so you can make your own army list if you wish. If you want a game where you can play a substantial battle in an afternoon than BAR is for you.

The rules came out one year ago and we have sold nearly 500 copies thus far so it is getting a decent number of people playing.

A lot of people participated in the creation of the rules including a number of the movers and shakers in both the DBM and WAB communities.

One of the things many people like about the rules is the very historical approach to cavalry and skirmish combat. It has many novel ways of resolving combat that we have all talked about but never actually got put into rules.

Armies list look a lot like WAB list but have the greater options of DBM/WRX list and the point balancing is good. You will not find a warrior costing 17pts in one place and the exact same warrior costing 24 in another.

You might find them to be the perfect solution for you if elements of both of the dominant systems appeal to you but the systems are not quite your cup of tea.

Jeff

"WAB is one figure = one man was the intention of the designers IIRC (they may have changed thier tune).

Certainly people use it differently but that doesn't make the original design goal "horse puckey". We use it about 10men to a figure ourselves."

That's odd – I've been on the WABlist since as far back as when Jervis J. was still posting, i.e. c.1998, and I've never heard of that intention or 'design goal' before.

Allen, you've been on the WABlist for at least as long – have you ever heard of this?

Cheers,

Skeptic

Thanks for all the suggestions, I think the only way to resolve this is try both systems. Some people have mentioned some other rules …. are there any other good sets out there ?

TMP link

This began as a joke , 50 posts later it finally dies, An early post called "Sell me on WAB" ran to over 100 posts. Allof these posts got quite heated.

Its amazing how worked up peopel get when iot comes to playibng with dice and toy soilders.

I have played both sets and, without question, prefer WAB. However, I realize this is a matter of personal taste or, in some cases, due to the natural reluctance to give new rules a fair try.

I have never played Warhammer Fantasy so cannot say that it is the same minus the magic. Instead, the WAB rules and supplements are well researched and, being a history buff, I feel that they maintain the historical flavor of the periods and nationalities with their special rules. To me that is a plus.

The basing system allows greater flexibility, though you will probably find yourself buying and painting more figures to make full use of that freedom. To me, that is also a plus.

As I stated above, of the two systems, I definitely by far prefer WAB. But if all of your colleagues resist, you may do better using the system that will locally get you the most games and opponents.

Hope this does not confuse the issue further.

Well, at least we have gotten beyond the "realism" thing. I have not seen a single post claiming DBM is a realistic simulation. That is progress.

The truth is that comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges. Both games have their strengths and weaknesses. Both games have pretty ardent followers. I personally, think they appeal to different personalities and gaming styles.

As a practial matter most of the DBM gaming world plays with 15mm and most of the WAB playing world with 25mm. If you have 15mm figures you will probably play DBM more than WAB and if you 25mm figures, you will probably play WAB more than DBM. But there are always exceptions.

Finding WAB tournanents in 15mm is sort of like finding big foot — it's a mytholgical creatures. Seeing a 25mm DBM tournament outside of one of the big east coast shows is a similar mythological beast.

I'll go for the system that doesn't use the metric system.

I have played both and must admit I like WAB better … not my first game of choice either I must add, but I will play it.

I think I'll probably use it for some 20mm punic war stuff but add a push back house rule to the combat which is fairly 'static'.

So if it is any help I have played both, will play WAB again and DBM has been relegated to the shelf.

RJ

I have played both. Both gave enjoyable games and I would play either again if I had a convenient opportunity. Neither are my first choice for wargaming, but there are people who prefer DBM and people who prefer WAB. Why not try to get in contact with some local wargamers and try a variety of ancients/medieval rules?

Other rules that might work for you include Armati, DBA (my personal choice), Warmaster Ancients, Warrior.

What are the Armati rules like ?

It is a while since I played Armati so I hope that some kind Armati enthusiasts will reply to you. Things I do remember include:

There are 2 types of troop in the army list – those whose loss affects morale and those whose loss doesn't. You can loose as many skirmishers as you like but once you start losing too many legionaries, tough luck.

You can use DBA/DBM elements. There are 3 different standards for how many bases represent a unit, depending upon how many figures and how big a table that you want to use.

There are restrictions on movement but restriction is done in a different way from the PIP system of DBA/M. Can't quite remember how at the moment.

Armati can be used into the Rennaissance period.

One of my concerns was that there were too few army lists. However, I understand that there has been a new edition since then so that may well have changed.

I rate it as worth playing if that is what your opponents want to play. For some people it is the bee's knees.

In case the expression "bee's knees" is not an expression used worldwide it means excellent.

I have never played DBM but I have dabbled in DBA. The nice thing about DBx and WAB is that the games are so fundamentally different, that you can play both, enjoy both and not get horribly confused between them.

Find out what those around you play and play some fun pick-up games with them.

Ralph

As a few others have mentioned; You might do well to look into a system other than WAB or DBM(M).

Battlestandard looked pretty decent when I looked at it while at Historicon. If you are interested in a purely Crusades period set of rules, then Shattered Lances…

Personally, I am a fan of Hoplon. It is a system that arose from what you may call "The ashes of the DBx system". It has many similarities, but just as many differences.

It can be used with the basing standards of DBx or WAB.

It takes a bit of time to get some of the rules down, but it is simpler to learn than DBx, but probably more complex (in some regards) to WAB.

As others have pointed out. WAB and DBM are pretty fundamentally different. You could probably find a way to play both, but I would recommend going to a system OTHER than DBx as an alternative to it. DBx seems to be collapsing these days under its own weight.

Again, personally, I think that Hoplon does what DBM attempted to do when it first came out much better than DBM (Allowing for the play of MANY different periods using a single set of rules). Hoplon also comes a little bit closer to being a "Simulation" than DBx. Please note that this does not mean that it IS a simulation. Just that you will find that the rules will produce results that are more similar to those achieved by the original counterparts in the materials/sources where you find them discussed (ie the ancient authors describing the battles).

I have always wanted to try some of the other systems that are out there too, but I have not been able to find plaers for them. It is a big world. If you can find players, that ma be the biggest influence on which system you choose.