"Orders of Battle for DBR?" Topic
10 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 be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the De Bellis Renationis Rules Board
Areas of InterestRenaissance
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Workbench Article
Featured Profile Article For the time being, the last in our series of articles on the gates of Old Jerusalem.
Featured Book Review
|
| Field Marshal | 31 Oct 2007 3:50 a.m. PST |
Has anyone put together some orders of battle for TYW and ECW fro DBR?…..Interested in seeing what people come up with while i wait for army book 2 to arrive in the mail! |
| Grizwald | 31 Oct 2007 3:59 a.m. PST |
Marston Moor: Royalist Army
Royalist Strength DBR(c) Organised
Left Wing
Horse (Goring) 2500 8 41 troops
Foot (c. muskets) 500 1
Centre
Foot (Newcastle & Eythin) 10000 25 22 regiments
Horse 1500 5 25 troops (in reserve)
Right Wing
Horse(Pr. Rupert) 2100 7 35 troops
Foot (c. muskets) 500 1
Artillery 20 3 Allied Army
Parliament Strength DBR(c) Organised
Left Wing
Horse (Cromwell & Leslie) 4500 15 75 troops
Foot (c. muskets) 600 2
Centre (Leven)
Foot 11000 27 28 regiments
Right Wing
Horse (T. Fairfax) 4500 15 75 troops
Foot (c. muskets) 600 2
Artillery (Hamilton) 25 3 |
| Grizwald | 31 Oct 2007 4:00 a.m. PST |
Rats! Formatting is no good here.
First number is actual strength, 2nd number is number of bases for DBR (Condensed scale) |
| Field Marshal | 31 Oct 2007 4:02 a.m. PST |
You are a gentleman and a scholar Mike! Thank you….its a good start… |
| a1companion | 31 Oct 2007 4:37 a.m. PST |
Hi Morgrim, Have you seen these?
De De Bellis Civile 1644-1645 ?
auction
I would disagree with some of the the authors troop classification but on the whole a useful little book.
(despite the maps being difficult to read) |
| Grizwald | 31 Oct 2007 5:01 a.m. PST |
"De Bellis Civile 1644-1645" I have the previous volume for 1642 – 1643. Lots of errors, confusion, maps difficult to read, scale inaccuracies …
Not recommended. The second volume for 1644 – 1645 may be better? |
| Connard Sage | 31 Oct 2007 5:28 a.m. PST |
The second volume for 1644 – 1645 may be better? Not much. Your comments regarding the first volume still apply. |
| a1companion | 31 Oct 2007 7:21 a.m. PST |
I incorrectly associated the early volume with the later one, linked. I have the early one.
It is a shame to hear the same faults echoed by other readers (of both volumes).
Still, worth a read for £5.00. |
 Bobgnar  | 31 Oct 2007 9:54 a.m. PST |
For all the effort that went into DBC books, you'd think the author would have gotten some play testors who were not involved with development. Our group tried a few scenarios but could not decipher much of what was going on. Map scales, and troop lists did not match. Is it Normal scale or Condensed, 15mm or 25mm??? Maybe use the army lists but make up your own battlefields. Perhaps I am just too dumb to understand the books. |
| WargamesRoom | 01 Nov 2007 12:23 p.m. PST |
The books are all in "Normal" scale. I would think that in theory you can use either 15mm or 25mm as what map scaling is given in paces. |
|
!