Help support TMP


"DBR Lists" Topic


De Bellis Renationis

2 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.

Please don't make fun of others' membernames.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the De Bellis Renationis Rules Board


Areas of Interest

Renaissance

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

Battles in the Age of War


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Battle-Market: Tannenberg 1410

The Editor tries out a boardgame - yes, a boardgame - from battle-market magazine.


Featured Workbench Article

Painting a 15mm Tibetan DBA Army: The Infantry

wodger Fezian begins his series on how to paint a 15mm DBA army well, in a reasonable time frame.


Featured Book Review


1,027 hits since 14 Jan 2017
©1994-2022 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Father Grigori14 Jan 2017 5:47 p.m. PST

Thinking about getting back into DBR after a long absence, in particular the 80 years War between Spain and Holland.
Looking at the Dutch Revolt list, it seems impossible to field ships before 1577. The naval elements (bar fireships) are crewed by Sh, but the only Sh available between 1568 and 1577 are landsknecht elements, which canot move away from their pikemen. And post 1577, taking naval means mucking up the Pk/Sh ratios of the foot regiments. A problem….In most other lists, there are crews available for any boats listed, but not for the Dutch. The Sea Beggars cannot exist for the the first half of the 1570's when they were most active.

A lot of things in the DBR lists always made me think the lists had been produced a little too quickly, ad needed some refinement. Now that DBR has been republished, are there any plans to review and revise the lists and sort out any anomalies like the Dutch Sea Beggars?

Tony S14 Jan 2017 8:56 p.m. PST

I was a bit disappointed too that Barker did not take the time and opportunity to even correct the typos in the lists when he allowed the compilation to be reprinted. Let alone some of chronology and logical errors like you have mentioned.

As far as I can tell, it's just a straight reprint.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.