PDA

View Full Version : Army Lists


kontos
02-11-2011, 11:50 AM
Just perusing the lists and some of the subtle list changes, I all of a sudden come across THIS:

II/83 LATER VISIGOTHIC 419 AD – 720 AD
This list covers the Visigoths from the establishment of their Tolosan kingdom in south-western Gaul,
through its extension into Spain (469-478 AD), and the loss of the Gallic provinces to the Franks in 507 AD
to the Islamic conquest and the vassal kings Aquila (711-713 AD) and Ardo (713-720 AD).
Terrain Type: Arable. Reference: Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome Phil Barker
II/83a Western Later Visigothic Army: 1x(Cv or Kn (Gen)), 1x(Cv or LH), 1xBd, 2xAx, 2xKn, 4x(Wb or Ax), 1xPs.
Aggression : 0. Enemies: II/66, II/67b, II/71, II/72b, II/72c, II/72d, II/73, II/80a, II/80d, II/82a, II/83a, II/83b, II/84,
III/2.
Allies: II/58 or (II/72d and/or II/82a) or II/80d or II/81c or II/83b
II/83b Eastern Later Visigothic Army: 1x(Cv or Kn (Gen)), 1xKn, 1xKn, 2xLH, 2xBd, 2xAx, 2x(Wb or Ax or Ps),
1xPs.
Aggression : 1. Enemies: II/67b, II/69, II/71, II/80a, II/80b, II/80d, II/83a, II/83b, II/84, III/1c. Allies: II/23a or II/67b.

THIS is a major overhaul of an army we know relatively little about. On the other hand, an army we have a wealth of information about is kept as bland as baby food and is, I feel, a poor representaion of this army lumped into a 300 year timeframe:

III/29 THEMATIC BYZANTINE 650 AD - 963 AD
This list covers the Byzantine armies from the loss of the East to the Arabs until the tenth century shift to the offensive and
is the period covered by the "Taktika" of Leon VI. Although some full-scale invasions of enemy territory did take place, the
overall strategy was essentially defensive.
Terrain Type: Arable. Aggression: 0 until 744AD, then Aggression: 1. Reference: Armies of the Dark Ages Ian Heath
III/29 Thematic Byzantine Army: 1xCv (Gen), 3xCv, 3xLH, 2xCv, 2x (Pk or Cv), 1x (Ps or Bw).
Enemies: II/57, III/1c, III/14a, III/14b, III/14c, III/16, III/21a, III/21b, III/25b, III/26a, III/26b, III/27, III/28, III/31, III/33,
III/37a, III/37b, III/47, III/48, III/51, III/53. Allies : II/40 or III/1c.


Where are the Tagmatic troops? Did they actually read the Taktika? This army didn't evolve over 300 years? I don't get it. :???

Frank

Andreas Johansson
02-11-2011, 01:43 PM
Just perusing the lists and some of the subtle list changes, I all of a sudden come across THIS:

II/83 LATER VISIGOTHIC 419 AD – 720 AD
This list covers the Visigoths from the establishment of their Tolosan kingdom in south-western Gaul,
through its extension into Spain (469-478 AD), and the loss of the Gallic provinces to the Franks in 507 AD
to the Islamic conquest and the vassal kings Aquila (711-713 AD) and Ardo (713-720 AD).
Terrain Type: Arable. Reference: Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome Phil Barker
II/83a Western Later Visigothic Army: 1x(Cv or Kn (Gen)), 1x(Cv or LH), 1xBd, 2xAx, 2xKn, 4x(Wb or Ax), 1xPs.
Aggression : 0. Enemies: II/66, II/67b, II/71, II/72b, II/72c, II/72d, II/73, II/80a, II/80d, II/82a, II/83a, II/83b, II/84,
III/2.
Allies: II/58 or (II/72d and/or II/82a) or II/80d or II/81c or II/83b
II/83b Eastern Later Visigothic Army: 1x(Cv or Kn (Gen)), 1xKn, 1xKn, 2xLH, 2xBd, 2xAx, 2x(Wb or Ax or Ps),
1xPs.
Aggression : 1. Enemies: II/67b, II/69, II/71, II/80a, II/80b, II/80d, II/83a, II/83b, II/84, III/1c. Allies: II/23a or II/67b.

THIS is a major overhaul of an army we know relatively little about.
No it isn't. It's Sue swapping the Visigothic and Patsy Roman lists around (probably confused by the fact the numbering changed in 'MM).

On the other hand, an army we have a wealth of information about is kept as bland as baby food and is, I feel, a poor representaion of this army lumped into a 300 year timeframe:

III/29 THEMATIC BYZANTINE 650 AD - 963 AD
This list covers the Byzantine armies from the loss of the East to the Arabs until the tenth century shift to the offensive and
is the period covered by the "Taktika" of Leon VI. Although some full-scale invasions of enemy territory did take place, the
overall strategy was essentially defensive.
Terrain Type: Arable. Aggression: 0 until 744AD, then Aggression: 1. Reference: Armies of the Dark Ages Ian Heath
III/29 Thematic Byzantine Army: 1xCv (Gen), 3xCv, 3xLH, 2xCv, 2x (Pk or Cv), 1x (Ps or Bw).
Enemies: II/57, III/1c, III/14a, III/14b, III/14c, III/16, III/21a, III/21b, III/25b, III/26a, III/26b, III/27, III/28, III/31, III/33,
III/37a, III/37b, III/47, III/48, III/51, III/53. Allies : II/40 or III/1c.


Where are the Tagmatic troops? Did they actually read the Taktika? This army didn't evolve over 300 years? I don't get it. :???
How would tagmatics differ from thematics in DBA terms? In the 'MM list they're basically the same, only better, so I, lacking any real knowledge of this army, would expect them not to differ in DBA.

JLogan
02-11-2011, 02:04 PM
I believe it's been pointed out on the DBA Yahoo list that this Visigoth list was confused by Sue B. with the Roman Patrician list. Hopefully, given Sue B. has said Book II comments are closed, we can only hope she picked up this glaring error...............

I'm with you somewhat also on your concerns on the Thematic list (one of my personal historical favourites....); I already made some comments on it on the DBA Yahoo list (which is all that Sue is reading...if even that).

Overall, it seems that alot of these new lists are simple copy/pastes, albeit into the new format.

kontos
02-11-2011, 02:17 PM
No it isn't. It's Sue swapping the Visigothic and Patsy Roman lists around (probably confused by the fact the numbering changed in 'MM).

Well that's a relief!



How would tagmatics differ from thematics in DBA terms? In the 'MM list they're basically the same, only better, so I, lacking any real knowledge of this army, would expect them not to differ in DBA.

Better armed. Better trained. Better morale. Super Heavy Cavalry. Actual HEAVY infantry; not the poor "pike" representation. Thematic troops were used for the local defense of the empire. Tagmatic troops were the "standing army" and used to squash rebellions and take the offensive against the empire's enemies. Their "uses" would be vastly different in my opinion.

Frank

Andreas Johansson
02-11-2011, 02:28 PM
Better armed. Better trained. Better morale. Super Heavy Cavalry. Actual HEAVY infantry; not the poor "pike" representation. Thematic troops were used for the local defense of the empire. Tagmatic troops were the "standing army" and used to squash rebellions and take the offensive against the empire's enemies. Their "uses" would be vastly different in my opinion.
And that would be reflected how in DBA terms? What would you like/expect the list to look like?

Sue is currently soliciting feedback on the Bk III lists. If you post a proposal to the Yahoo list it may be adopted, wholly or in part.

kontos
02-11-2011, 02:56 PM
And that would be reflected how in DBA terms? What would you like/expect the list to look like?

Sue is currently soliciting feedback on the Bk III lists. If you post a proposal to the Yahoo list it may be adopted, wholly or in part.

Would love to but not having a clue about DBMM, I couldn't do the ratio conversion from those lists. I will throw it out there and see what happens. Thanks AJ.

kontos
02-11-2011, 03:35 PM
III/29 THEMATIC BYZANTINE 650 AD - 963 AD
This list covers the Byzantine armies from the loss of the East to the Arabs until the tenth century shift to the offensive and is the period covered by the "Taktika" of Leon VI. Although some full-scale invasions of enemy territory did take place, the overall strategy was essentially defensive.

Terrain Type: Arable. Aggression (Thematic): 0 until 744AD, then Aggression: 1. Aggression (Tagmatic): 3 Reference: Armies of the Dark Ages Ian Heath

III/29a Thematic Byzantine Army: 1xCv (Gen), 3xCv, 3xLH, 2xCv, 2x (Pk or Cv), 1x (Ps or Bw).

III/29b Tagmatic Byzantine Army: 1xCv (Gen), 3xCv, 3xLH, 2x(Kn or Cv), 2x (Bd or Sp or Cv), 1x (Ps or Bw).

Enemies: II/57, III/1c, III/14a, III/14b, III/14c, III/16, III/21a, III/21b, III/25b, III/26a, III/26b, III/27, III/28, III/31, III/33,
III/37a, III/37b, III/47, III/48, III/51, III/53. Allies : II/40 or III/1c.


Just my opinion. Any Byzantine experts out there care to comment? My inclusion of knights into the Tagmatic list covers the klibanaros and their wedge formation attacks designed as the "line-breakers". "Upgrading" the heavy foot to either spear or blade for the Tagmata allows for the better training and integrated archer support. They were also fitted for the appropriate campaign based on their enemy. When a cavalry deterent and rally point, spear would be appropriate. When fighting more traditional foot enemies, they dispensed with the spear upon contact and fought with sword. The front ranks were "heavily armed".

Rong
02-12-2011, 11:09 AM
Unfortunately, I just found 2 errors in book 2. First, ii/4 Warring states. In the preamble, it states that the Ch'in had 1/10 of their army armed as WB, that is one stand, the other 3 should be blade or spear, according to the preamble.
The other is II/41 Han. The Han army based all of its strategy on the infantry anvil and the cavalry hammer. The only time the Han had Aux was early before the dynasty, where the chariot dismounted to fight in bad terrain. Not during the Dynasty phase. The army list should read: 1Hch//bd or Cav//aux, 2 cav, 2 lh, 3sp or bd (the Han were into their version of the Halbred!), 3 Crossbow ( or 2 xb and 1 bw, the Han favored the xb) , 1 ps. There is no record of repeated use of Hordes as army personel except for 1 battle. One battle is not a reason to change the army list. Ron:sick

snowcat
02-12-2011, 08:44 PM
Interesting re Qin. What are the 1/10 Wb meant to be then - the swordsmen?

ferrency
02-12-2011, 09:59 PM
Interesting re Qin. What are the 1/10 Wb meant to be then - the swordsmen?

I don't know what the DBMM or DBA 3.0 army notes refer to, but it sounds different than the DBM army list notes.

In the DBM notes, it suggested that the Qin heavy infantry should be classified as Warband because they were (literally) paid by the head for kills. Other warring states infantry similarly equipped was classified as spear.

Alan

snowcat
02-13-2011, 08:33 PM
Here's the quote:

"Early infantry are depicted carrying long pole-arms and having no shields while archers shoot from behind them, since the peasants were said to need little training as the actions to use the polearms were so similar to those of reaping and hoeing. These long weapons are classed as Bd. By the mid 4th century, the main infantry weapon was the cross-bow; and the spears and dagger-axes used by other infantry were often combined with shields and are classed as Sp."

(This is referring to Warring States infantry, not specifically Qin.)

The quote then adds:
"The “Book of Lord Shang” says that a tenth of the Chi’in infantry were swordsmen and the fanaticism encouraged by his system of promotion
according to the number of heads taken explains their classification as Wb."

(This certainly reads as though it is only the swordsmen who are graded as Wb, but is more likely just poor sentence structure and refers to all Qin heavy infantry as Wb, ie all 4 elements, not just 1. It should have perhaps been written as: "The “Book of Lord Shang” says that a tenth of the Qin infantry were swordsmen. The fanaticism encouraged by his system of promotion according to the number of heads taken explains the Qin heavy infantry classification as Wb." )

Andreas Johansson
02-14-2011, 04:54 AM
The other is II/41 Han. The Han army based all of its strategy on the infantry anvil and the cavalry hammer. The only time the Han had Aux was early before the dynasty, where the chariot dismounted to fight in bad terrain. Not during the Dynasty phase. The army list should read: 1Hch//bd or Cav//aux, 2 cav, 2 lh, 3sp or bd (the Han were into their version of the Halbred!), 3 Crossbow ( or 2 xb and 1 bw, the Han favored the xb) , 1 ps. There is no record of repeated use of Hordes as army personel except for 1 battle. One battle is not a reason to change the army list. Ron:sick

The DBMM list allows Hd (S) (=5Wb) in rebel armies. I sort of fear that the Hd ended up in the 3.0 list as a result of my suggestion that there could be a sublist for rebel armies with a wodge of Wb (Sue is inconsistent about whether DBMM Hd (S) becomes Wb or Hd in DBA 3.0.)

Incidentally, I doubt the Han based all of its strategy on inf anvil and cav hammer, as we hear of all-cavalry armies.

ferrency
02-14-2011, 12:18 PM
Incidentally, I doubt the Han based all of its strategy on inf anvil and cav hammer, as we hear of all-cavalry armies.

I hold with the interpretation that the Han shot first.

Alan

Foge
02-14-2011, 03:52 PM
Han definitely shot first. Then Chewie shot. Then they realized there were too many stormtroopers so they ran away.

Discretion is the better part of valor.

John Loy
02-14-2011, 04:01 PM
No! Every one know that Guido drew first:up

John

El' Jocko
02-14-2011, 04:07 PM
No! Every one know that Guido drew first:up

Revisionist history. A complete whitewash of the truth.

- Jack

ferrency
02-14-2011, 04:21 PM
Revisionist history. A complete whitewash of the truth.

If one man can rewrite history so completely over the course of only a few decades, what hope is there that any historical information about biblical era armies is the least bit correct?

Alan

snowcat
02-14-2011, 06:35 PM
If one man can rewrite history so completely over the course of only a few decades, what hope is there that any historical information about biblical era armies is the least bit correct?



None.


Right, that's sorted. Get out your tiddly winks and marbles!

:D

Lobotomy
02-14-2011, 07:12 PM
IMHO this only goes to show that things are not be proof-read well enough by the authors. It causes me indigestion imagining the misprints in the rules that are being missed by the proof-readers, since it appears much of an inside affair. Yet, I suspect the introduction to the rules will say they were the most thoroughly play-tested set yet. We have seen that claim before in earlier WRG editions, which proved less than a reliable statement on the part of the authors. Eyes are needed outside this "cabal" of testers, but we can be sure that this will not happen. :sick

Our only option may be to perform rendition on Andreas. :eek

snowcat
02-14-2011, 07:40 PM
Go Andreas!

(no pressure...)

:up

David Constable
02-14-2011, 08:11 PM
Your chance of getting history correct are not very good, after WW2 a lot of Divisional histories were produced with pictures of German tanks wrongly identified.

Consider the following.
You read a few bits in a number of fragments from various books which state that:
Elephants were used with five crew.
The tiger was much feared.
The panther was very effective.
The leopard was fast.
What era, what war, if no war is mentioned then what.

Now, in 500 years a dig is carried out at an old army camp, some weapons are found, but the only bit of clothing found is a bikini in camouflage pattern synthetic material, what are you going to describe the soldiers as being like.

David Constable

kontos
02-14-2011, 11:19 PM
Charlie's Angels?

Tony Aguilar
02-14-2011, 11:53 PM
Now, in 500 years a dig is carried out at an old army camp, some weapons are found, but the only bit of clothing found is a bikini in camouflage pattern synthetic material, what are you going to describe the soldiers as being like.

David Constable

Even after 500 years, some things never go out of style.
http://i583.photobucket.com/albums/ss271/TonyAguilar/hotchickswithguns08005.jpg

Now get some sleep, Frank. ;)

peleset
02-14-2011, 11:58 PM
I've not seen that style of Kevlar body armour before, but it looks effective!

kontos
02-15-2011, 09:07 AM
Even after 500 years, some things never go out of style.
http://i583.photobucket.com/albums/ss271/TonyAguilar/hotchickswithguns08005.jpg

Now get some sleep, Frank. ;)

Yeah right! :D
That is effective armor. Who would WANT to shoot that? Maybe some wives. ;)

Snoopy
02-15-2011, 09:28 AM
There is no record of repeated use of Hordes as army personel except for 1 battle. One battle is not a reason to change the army list. Ron:sick[/QUOTE]

When the big change over in rules came in 200?. When BUAs and LH quick kills were now the law of the land, I questioned Phil at the CW he attended. I asked where he got the information concerning LH quick killing pike. His answer was there was "A" battle where the LH annilated a pike formation. So I said "now you are basing the LH quick kill to 3000 years of history because of one battle". His answer of course was yes.

Burt

kontos
02-15-2011, 11:00 AM
And that would be reflected how in DBA terms? What would you like/expect the list to look like?

Sue is currently soliciting feedback on the Bk III lists. If you post a proposal to the Yahoo list it may be adopted, wholly or in part.

Well I followed your suggestion, AJ, and posted my proposal for a Tagmatic Byzantine army list option. That was 4 days ago. Not a bite. Maybe I am just impatient or maybe if you are not part of the "inner circle", your input is out. We'll see. Sue hasn't closed Book III suggestions yet.

Andreas Johansson
02-15-2011, 11:16 AM
Well I followed your suggestion, AJ, and posted my proposal for a Tagmatic Byzantine army list option. That was 4 days ago. Not a bite. Maybe I am just impatient or maybe if you are not part of the "inner circle", your input is out. We'll see. Sue hasn't closed Book III suggestions yet.

Don't expect any feedback from Sue. She'll accept your proposal or she won't - in neither case expect to hear why, or even acknowledgement of having received it.

kontos
02-15-2011, 11:35 AM
Thanks AJ. It would be a shame for us Byzantine "enthusiasts" not to see the Emperor's Army included as an option. The Tagmatic troops were distinctive and somewhat "Elite" troops different from those raised from the themes. I didn't do an overhaul and tried to keep to the integrity of the existing list. I basically allowed the option to change an element or two or three. I hope it flies.

winterbadger
02-15-2011, 12:57 PM
Don't expect any feedback from Sue. She'll accept your proposal or she won't - in neither case expect to hear why, or even acknowledgement of having received it.

Wow, what a hostile and obnoxious attitude. What a great way to chill all input and support from the gaming community. The more I hear about these people, the less I want to support them by giving them any of my money in the future. It certainly makes me more appreciative of those authors who appreciate and interact with their supporters!

ferrency
02-15-2011, 01:10 PM
Wow, what a hostile and obnoxious attitude.
I'd be more likely to characterize it as "quaint."

Andreas Johansson
02-15-2011, 01:15 PM
I doubt she's being deliberately hostile, but yeah, the way she's going about the list revision work is well suited to attract neither affection nor high quality input.

Bobgnar
02-15-2011, 01:57 PM
Wow, what a hostile and obnoxious attitude. What a great way to chill all input and support from the gaming community. The more I hear about these people, the less I want to support them by giving them any of my money in the future. It certainly makes me more appreciative of those authors who appreciate and interact with their supporters!


What a hostile and obnoxious attitude on your part! Many people are sending in suggestions. This is a huge job for Sue, to wade through all the ideas from around the world. How can you expect a personal thank you for your suggestion. This is not all she has to do, in life, writing personal thank you notes. Let's hope she is devoting her time to reading and compiling all the suggestions

The more I hear about how "these people, " that is both of them, are trying to be open and listen to the gaming community, the more I appreciate them. I do not expect any personal thank you or even acknowledgment.

If you want to drop out of the DBA community, feel free to do so.

Andreas Johansson
02-15-2011, 02:05 PM
Phil somehow found time to reply to many of my questions and suggestions during DBMM list work.

winterbadger
02-15-2011, 02:57 PM
What a hostile and obnoxious attitude on your part! Many people are sending in suggestions. This is a huge job for Sue, to wade through all the ideas from around the world. How can you expect a personal thank you for your suggestion.

Since I haven't made any suggestion, I don't expect anything. I have, however, worked with other rules authors with a world wide following, and they hold down full-time jobs and still manage to thank and acknowledge contributions. They also actively communicate and collaborate with the people who play their games.

The more I hear about how "these people, " that is both of them, are trying to be open and listen to the gaming community, the more I appreciate them.

And what is it that you hear that suggests they are being open or listening to people?

winterbadger
02-15-2011, 02:58 PM
I'd be more likely to characterize it as "quaint."

That's because you are a kind and thoughtful young man, rather than a grumpy old codger like me. :)

kontos
02-15-2011, 03:09 PM
What a hostile and obnoxious attitude on your part! Many people are sending in suggestions. This is a huge job for Sue, to wade through all the ideas from around the world. How can you expect a personal thank you for your suggestion. This is not all she has to do, in life, writing personal thank you notes. Let's hope she is devoting her time to reading and compiling all the suggestions

The more I hear about how "these people, " that is both of them, are trying to be open and listen to the gaming community, the more I appreciate them. I do not expect any personal thank you or even acknowledgment.

If you want to drop out of the DBA community, feel free to do so.

Bob, my concern is the process. In DBA, the Army Lists are as important as the rules. If the lists are inaccurate or broken, the game suffers. I would like to believe my list suggestion is in the spirit of the game and historically accurate. Maybe it is; maybe it isn't. Without discussion, input from those in the know or feedback of any kind, who knows what is making the lists? Is someone lobbying for a killer competitive army he already owns? If it makes it to the list without scrutiny who is to know what merits it had to make the list in the first place? Sue is, I suppose, looking over these list suggestions and assuming the authors of these lists actually know anything about them? SO we "wait and see"? Too late. Despite your defense, Bob, this process is entirely flawed and it is disconcerting that the knowledgable DBA leaders here in the US are being left out of this critical process - rules and lists. If the final product suffers, Bob, we may be losing DBA players and the loss of just one such member of this great community is a blow. Let's not be too quick to escort them to the door.

Andreas Johansson
02-15-2011, 03:16 PM
Saying that the "knowledgeable DBA leaders" are left out of the list-making process sounds like someone else is given a better chance to participitate, which AFAIK isn't the case.

Tangentially, a couple Americans who surely count as "knowledgeable DBA leaders" have been added to the playtesting group.

kontos
02-15-2011, 03:20 PM
Saying that the "knowledgeable DBA leaders" are left out of the list-making process sounds like someone else is given a better chance to participitate, which AFAIK isn't the case.

Tangentially, a couple Americans who surely count as "knowledgeable DBA leaders" have been added to the playtesting group.

My mistake, AJ. I should have said some...

Personally I feel most of the DBA leaders around the world should have been included. I'm with winterbadger on thorough playtesting concepts. No insult intended to those playtesting. Jealousy? Maybe? :D

david kuijt
02-15-2011, 04:18 PM
Tangentially, a couple Americans who surely count as "knowledgeable DBA leaders" have been added to the playtesting group.

And Phil added me, too!

I just got the email. Actually, Bob forwarded it, since Phil got my email address wrong initially.

This will make it hard for me to gripe about not knowing what is going on. I hereby designate Tony Aguilar as my official griper proxy; on all griping issues, his vote will count as mine. If Tony should be unable to fulfill the role, I designate Rich Gause to gripe in his (and my) stead. I'd designate Paul Hannah for something too, but he's far too nice a guy to gripe, so the best I can do for you, Paul, is "Miss Congeniality." Sorry, man.

JLogan
02-15-2011, 04:20 PM
Tangentially, a couple Americans who surely count as "knowledgeable DBA leaders" have been added to the playtesting group.

This is good news if so. Either way, given the wider DBA community are not being involved by PB (in complete contrast to DBMM development), and seem unlikely to be so until it is too late, could I please ask Andreas, Doug (in whom I have complete faith) and the couple of Americans just added (whoever they are....?) a favour? That is, whatever the changes/innovations being considered for DBA 3.0, that you use feedback/input back to PB to encourage clearing up/improving the area's in existing 2.2 (which is otherwise extremely good as it exists) that this forum has identified over the years as causing most debate. I realise that your influence on PB may be very limited; but it is more than the rest of us will have;)

For me personally, top of the list would be ZOC/movement within the BWD, and especially how that interacts/reconciles when groups are involved. I'm sure there may be a few others; but if only that were improved, I would likely consider DBA 3.0 a success. Note that I'm not talking here about pet peeves, such as say, LH QK on Sp,etc. Whilst many might wish to see it removed, at least as a rule currently it is clear and unambigous; some people just don't agree with it. What I'm talking about are those reasonably well known area's that need clearing/tightening up (e.g. "move to contact/move towards contact").

My biggest concern around a DBA 3.0 is that the very few well known issues (to this community) of DBA 2.2, which is otherwise excellent as is, will not be addressed. This is where PB's failure to take the same approach on DBA 3.0 as he did with DBMM of involving the wider community runs the greatest risk, that is, of not addressing current players (few) concerns - simply because he is not aware of them. FWIW, my second biggest concern is, as others have expressed already, that new idea's/innovations PB may be planning to introduce do not get thoroughly and widely playtested. BW movement and changes to relative movement rates being a prime example.

Thanks.

John

JLogan
02-15-2011, 04:24 PM
And Phil added me, too!

I just got the email. And this is even better news, given my previous post just a moment ago.:)

John

Tony Aguilar
02-15-2011, 04:27 PM
And Phil added me, too!

I just got the email. Actually, Bob forwarded it, since Phil got my email address wrong initially.

Good news indeed.
Now, if you don't mind wearing this vest with a large target painted on it... ;)

Tony Aguilar
02-15-2011, 04:30 PM
This will make it hard for me to gripe about not knowing what is going on. I hereby designate Tony Aguilar as my official griper proxy; on all griping issues, his vote will count as mine. If Tony should be unable to fulfill the role, I designate Rich Gause to gripe in his (and my) stead. I'd designate Paul Hannah for something too, but he's far too nice a guy to gripe, so the best I can do for you, Paul, is "Miss Congeniality." Sorry, man.

Thanks for the promotion, DK. :)

With you on the playtest committee, however, seems I would be better served relegating myself to figure & painting advice and posting pics of Chicks with Guns. :D

winterbadger
02-15-2011, 04:40 PM
And Phil added me, too!

I'm very glad to hear it. If there's any one person I trust to see potential ways that well-intentioned changes can create unintended consequences, and how to fix them, it's DK.

kontos
02-15-2011, 05:05 PM
Thanks for the promotion, DK. :)

With you on the playtest committee, however, seems I would be better served relegating myself to figure & painting advice and posting pics of Chicks with Guns. :D

Stick to what you know, Tony. Chicks with guns. :D

david kuijt
02-15-2011, 05:39 PM
Now, if you don't mind wearing this vest with a large target painted on it... ;)

It's not the Target Vest I mind -- my writing style brings adequate practice vilification. It's that now I'll have to be circumspect and eliminate all my rampant-speculation posts. That's hard, hard.

Tony Aguilar
02-15-2011, 05:54 PM
It's not the Target Vest I mind -- my writing style brings adequate practice vilification. It's that now I'll have to be circumspect and eliminate all my rampant-speculation posts. That's hard, hard.

FWIW, your inclusion has calmed the waters in Florida, at least. That is until you throw up your hands in frustation and start rampantly-speculating again. ;)

Good luck to you, Sir. :up

kontos
02-15-2011, 06:20 PM
It's not the Target Vest I mind -- my writing style brings adequate practice vilification. It's that now I'll have to be circumspect and eliminate all my rampant-speculation posts. That's hard, hard.

To be replaced with rampant frustration posts? Let's hope not. To begin with, DK, you may want to change your signature to reflect your weighty responsibility to the DBA community. No pressure. ;)

Paul A. Hannah
02-15-2011, 06:47 PM
And Phil added me, too!

The growing cadre of playtesters is indeed impressive. Very encouraging.

And Phil added me, too! -- I'd designate Paul Hannah for something, but he's far too nice a guy to gripe, so the best I can do for you, Paul, is "Miss Congeniality."Aw, shucks... :o I'm flattered. I think. (Grins.)

When a near-final draft is ready, I will gladly offer my rather anal editing skills to point out spelling and grammatical boo-boos, such as the one on the last line of Page-9 in 2.2.

david kuijt
02-15-2011, 07:36 PM
To begin with, DK, you may want to change your signature to reflect your weighty responsibility to the DBA community. No pressure. ;)

Good thought, Frank.

kontos
02-15-2011, 07:42 PM
Good thought, Frank.

Nice! I like it. :up

Lobotomy
02-15-2011, 10:49 PM
This will make it hard for me to gripe about not knowing what is going on. I hereby designate Tony Aguilar as my official griper proxy; on all griping issues, his vote will count as mine. If Tony should be unable to fulfill the role, I designate Rich Gause to gripe in his (and my) stead. I'd designate Paul Hannah for something too, but he's far too nice a guy to gripe, so the best I can do for you, Paul, is "Miss Congeniality." Sorry, man.

I'm hurt man! I can be just as incoherent as you when griping. :eek

david kuijt
02-16-2011, 01:32 AM
I'm hurt man! I can be just as incoherent as you when griping. :eek

The main reason I didn't choose to give you my proxy is for contrast -- I gripe when I can, but you gripe... err, how to say this ... continuously. In Larry-world, griping is so constant that the question is not "what is Larry griping about", but rather "what is Larry griping about NOW."

No insult intended by not choosing you, though. In the category of incoherent griping, you are without equal. Ask anyone.

Martyn
02-16-2011, 05:31 AM
And Phil added me, too!

That is excellent. With three of you in different continents Phil is spreading his wings.

Any indication of who the mystery Americans are?

I assume that Phil has requested self control on the release of any information, but anything that you are able to divulge will be gratefully received. :)

david kuijt
02-16-2011, 10:11 AM
Any indication of who the mystery Americans are?


Andreas probably meant me as one of them; Canadians playing DBA with dual US citizenship living in the US being a small category rarely differentiated by itself -- might just be me in that category.

I've already outed Bob Beattie by mentioning that he was the one who noticed Phil had my email address wrong -- sorry if you wanted to remain anonymous, Bob.

Can't tell you any more -- I don't recognize the other emails beyond Andreas and Doug. I think Bob, like me, was a Valentines Day (i.e., two days ago) addition. Gives you a whole new feeling for the Hallmark Holiday.

david kuijt
02-16-2011, 10:20 AM
I assume that Phil has requested self control on the release of any information, but anything that you are able to divulge will be gratefully received. :)

I must now don the robes of being a good playtester, which means respecting Phil's wishes on this. To use this forum (where Phil does not attend) as a sounding board for any point in which I disagree with Phil on his design would not be acting in good faith. I promise to resume bitching and whining once 3.0 is released, if there are any remaining points on which I disagree with Phil's design.

So basically, I can tell you three things.

1) some of the playtest version looks cool.
2) some of it still needs work (better wording and definition)
3) with some of it I have significant concerns.

and 4) it is still a work in progress.

pozanias
02-16-2011, 10:22 AM
And Phil added me, too!



This is great news! I already feel much better about the 3.0 process. Maybe one or two more key players from around the world and I would think Phil will have it just right.

Martyn
02-16-2011, 11:29 AM
I must now don the robes of being a good playtester, which means respecting Phil's wishes on this. To use this forum (where Phil does not attend) as a sounding board for any point in which I disagree with Phil on his design would not be acting in good faith. I promise to resume bitching and whining once 3.0 is released, if there are any remaining points on which I disagree with Phil's design.

So basically, I can tell you three things.

1) some of the playtest version looks cool.
2) some of it still needs work (better wording and definition)
3) with some of it I have significant concerns.

and 4) it is still a work in progress.

David, thank you for the back ground, at least there is some that you think is good which is a relief.

From what Andreas and Doug have said in the past there is clearly a constraint on what any of you can, or even consider appropriate to, divulge which is understood and respected.

Please ignore any further demands for information which may emanate from this corner of the world. If there are occasional bursts of frustration please feel free to tell me where to take them. This offer is open to all four of the playtesters, not that anybody on this forum normally needs an invitation. :silly

Rich Gause
02-16-2011, 12:25 PM
Having David be a playtester is a great relief. My griping level will go way down. If there is anybody who can spot potential problem areas in the 3.0 rules and hopefully convince Phil that they are problem areas it would be him. I am petty sure that if any bad ideas make it through the playtest process it is unlikely that it is because nobody noticed and told Phil..............

Bobgnar
02-16-2011, 12:54 PM
Andreas probably meant me as one of them; Canadians playing DBA with dual US citizenship living in the US being a small category rarely differentiated by itself -- might just be me in that category.

I've already outed Bob Beattie by mentioning that he was the one who noticed Phil had my email address wrong -- sorry if you wanted to remain anonymous, Bob.

Can't tell you any more -- I don't recognize the other emails beyond Andreas and Doug. I think Bob, like me, was a Valentines Day (i.e., two days ago) addition. Gives you a whole new feeling for the Hallmark Holiday.

I had not thought I was anonymous :) The original message was sent on Feb 11, but it went to my spambox which I checked on Monday, and noticed David was mis-mailed. I too, only recognized those 2 names that David did. Also, as he says "3) with some of it I have significant concerns." These will need much playtesting so I hope this process will open up to more, active players.

I cannot get to Cold Wars, so maybe David can get permission, perhaps with non-disclosure documents being signed ( :) ), to have some playtesting there.

If it is not published by Historicon, I will do the same for that venue. I asked if we could do a large event, like we did for 2.0, with 15-20 players. Lots of good feedback then. Nobody liked BUA's then for what that was worth.

Andreas Johansson
02-16-2011, 01:17 PM
Indeed, Mr Kuijt was one of the "Americans" I refered to. I'm tempted to argue I was using the word to refer to inhabitants of the American continents rather than US Americans specifically, but the plain truth of the matter is that I had forgotten his Canadianness. :o

John Loy
02-16-2011, 02:32 PM
The TSA hasn't;)

John

david kuijt
02-16-2011, 02:34 PM
but the plain truth of the matter is that I had forgotten his Canadianness. :o

The moustache should have been your first clue. Haven't you ever seen a picture of a Mountie? Even the female Mounties are required by law to wear a moustache.

http://www.4data.ca/ottawa/archive/2003-CanadaDay/Mountie.jpg

As you can see from the above picture of Royal Canadian Mounted Police Sergeant Dorothy McKenzie.

winterbadger
02-16-2011, 02:39 PM
The moustache should have been your first clue. Haven't you ever seen a picture of a Mountie? Even the female Mounties are required by law to wear a moustache.

Paul Gross didn't have one in Due South, but he was a Mountie on detachment in the US, so he may have been adopting incognito. :) Plus, he had a wolf, and if you have a wolf, a moustache is just gilding the lily (or, for Quebecois, the fleur de lis).

david kuijt
02-16-2011, 02:45 PM
The TSA hasn't;)


The TSA has nothing on me, John. The constant body-cavity searches are more to do with looking like a mad-scientist derelict smuggler fiend, and less to do with citizenship.

peleset
02-16-2011, 08:30 PM
This discussion is going down many unexpected avenues. Bearded ladies, cavity searches, whatever next?

kontos
02-16-2011, 09:03 PM
This discussion is going down many unexpected avenues. Bearded ladies, cavity searches, whatever next?

I can assure you it won't be what's in the playtests! Rightfully so. We will have to wait on disclosure. ;)

Do us proud playtesters! :2up

Paul Potter
02-16-2011, 09:30 PM
if any one is keeping a list my wants for a dba 3.0 would include:

Do away with all deep bases (nothing more than 40mm deep in 15mm).

Remove bua's from the game.

Don't change terrain placement.

Make 30" boards optional.

Remove none historical war wagons from the lists.

If changes are made in the lists leave elements of the current list as options so that current armies can continue to be used (except in the case of none historical war wagons)

Don't convert movement from paces to base widths. current movement works just fine. -Paul

David Constable
02-17-2011, 11:39 AM
The TSA has nothing on me, John. The constant body-cavity searches are more to do with looking like a mad-scientist derelict smuggler fiend, and less to do with citizenship.

New, Improved Postings! High Fiber, less than 20% Content-Free, and full of Weighty Responsibility!

The weighty responsibility is true, you will be loved or hated by DBA players in the future.

You might let us have your shoe size in advance, the new model concrete boots might be in stock at my local shop.

David Constable

Andreas Johansson
02-17-2011, 11:51 AM
Luckily, I've never been able to figure out how American shoe sizes work.

Filippo S.
02-17-2011, 11:52 AM
Remove none historical war wagons from the lists.

OH yes, please... like in Communal Italian, Demetrius, etc... WWG in front line were so rare. At least make them as an option

There's no way to remove HORDES too? :???
I didn't follow the forum for a while, maybe it's already been done.

ferrency
02-17-2011, 11:56 AM
Luckily, I've never been able to figure out how American shoe sizes work.

They don't :)

Alan

david kuijt
02-17-2011, 12:46 PM
The weighty responsibility is true, you will be loved or hated by DBA players in the future.


Good, good. No change, then.


You might let us have your shoe size in advance, the new model concrete boots might be in stock at my local shop.


Everything in 3.0 you like, I will take credit for. Everything you don't like, is Andreas' fault.

pozanias
02-17-2011, 01:19 PM
Quote:Originally Posted by David Constable
The weighty responsibility is true, you will be loved or hated by DBA players in the future.



Good, good. No change, then.





Not true. You may go from being hated by all, to being hated by some and loved by others. That's not bad.

Tony Aguilar
02-17-2011, 01:25 PM
Not true. You may go from being hated by all, to being hated by some and loved by others. That's not bad.

...unless Larry is one of the "lovers." :silly

david kuijt
02-17-2011, 01:31 PM
Not true. You may go from being hated by all, to being hated by some and loved by others. That's not bad.

Ouch. You are revenged for my bringing up your sordid Sumerian past.


...unless Larry is one of the "lovers."

Not likely. Larry is nearly as recalcitrant as I am. The only way Larry might love something I did, is if everyone else hated it -- in which case, Larry's positive regard would just add a second reason to pour myself concrete shoes.

Tony Aguilar
02-17-2011, 01:36 PM
Not likely. Larry is nearly as recalcitrant as I am. The only way Larry might love something I did, is if everyone else hated it -- in which case, Larry's positive regard would just add a second reason to pour myself concrete shoes.

Why can't you two get along? :)
http://i583.photobucket.com/albums/ss271/TonyAguilar/ChampPagan.jpg

david kuijt
02-17-2011, 01:44 PM
Why can't you two get along? :)
http://i583.photobucket.com/albums/ss271/TonyAguilar/ChampPagan.jpg

He's argumentative, forceful, impatient with the faults of others, and quick to speak his mind. We could be twins; we are too similar.

Except that I'm taller, Canadian, and I have hair on the top of my head -- and those are all sources of envy on his part.

But the real reason is that he's a Penguins fan and I'm a Caps fan. We were destined from birth not to see eye-to-eye. Except, perhaps, in hating Detroit or the Flyers.

ferrency
02-17-2011, 02:09 PM
Why can't you two get along? :)
But how fun would that be for everyone else? :)

Rich Gause
02-17-2011, 08:43 PM
It is kind of funny how I havent seen much if an griping about 3.0 and how Phil is going to ruin DBA since DK got invited to the playtest group.................... Its almost like what could have happened if King George III had suddenly decided that the 13 colonies could send elected representatives to parliament in 1774:silly

Lobotomy
02-17-2011, 10:24 PM
The main reason I didn't choose to give you my proxy is for contrast -- I gripe when I can, but you gripe... err, how to say this ... continuously. In Larry-world, griping is so constant that the question is not "what is Larry griping about", but rather "what is Larry griping about NOW."

No insult intended by not choosing you, though. In the category of incoherent griping, you are without equal. Ask anyone.

In my world, it is known as kvetching. That has an entirely different meaning. :silly

Lobotomy
02-17-2011, 10:27 PM
The only way Larry might love something I did, is if everyone else hated it -- in which case, Larry's positive regard would just add a second reason to pour myself concrete shoes.

Threat or promise? :2up

Lobotomy
02-17-2011, 10:29 PM
Except that I'm taller, Canadian, and I have hair on the top of my head -- and those are all sources of envy on his part.

I have hair on the bottom of my head. I think that counts.

But the real reason is that he's a Penguins fan and I'm a Caps fan. We were destined from birth not to see eye-to-eye. Except, perhaps, in hating Detroit or the Flyers.

Oh, so true.

Martyn
02-18-2011, 04:44 AM
It is kind of funny how I havent seen much if an griping about 3.0 and how Phil is going to ruin DBA since DK got invited to the playtest group.................... Its almost like what could have happened if King George III had suddenly decided that the 13 colonies could send elected representatives to parliament in 1774:silly

From my point of view, the inclusion of DK and Bob in the play testing is the first time that players outside the DBMM fraternity have been included.

I am aware that Andreas has been heavily involved in the development of DBMM and assume Doug was as well. Phil had approached them presumably because he was aware of their track record and was comfortable with the sort of reaction that they may give. I am certain that both have given valuable feedback to Phil on v3.

It is comforting to know that Phil is expanding the play testing so that he receives a range of advice. Let’s hope he is listening to all the feedback.

David Schlanger
02-18-2011, 11:55 AM
It is kind of funny how I havent seen much if an griping about 3.0 and how Phil is going to ruin DBA since DK got invited to the playtest group.................... Its almost like what could have happened if King George III had suddenly decided that the 13 colonies could send elected representatives to parliament in 1774:silly

I can just complain directly to DK now, why post to the forum??? :)

DS

kontos
02-18-2011, 01:53 PM
I can just complain directly to DK now, why post to the forum??? :)

DS

So we can all share. Why should you alone bear such a burden? ;)

Lobotomy
02-18-2011, 11:18 PM
I can just complain directly to DK now, why post to the forum??? :)

DS

DS, get it right. That's kvetch!!!

winterbadger
02-19-2011, 12:49 AM
DS, get it right. That's kvetch!!!

I don't think DS uses his hands enough for it to count as kvetching! :E