Tactics for Chariot Wars?

[Sarduri II]

After a years delay (arrival of my son, moving house...) I am finally ready to introduce my long term gaming buddies to DBA. We have a date set in May for a whole days play. Six players each playing each other player once, a kind of mini league.

All of the players are experienced gamers - mostly Napoleonic (our own rules, but DBx influenced), naval games and strategic board games, but none of them with any particular knowledge of the ancient period.

I've managed a single "training" game with most of them, and one or two may recall the odd game under edition 1.0 (!) some years past, but I don't expect a problem with them picking up the rules (I have prepared Q Ref and unit ID sheets for each army).

What I would also like to be able to present my fellows with some tactical advice/notes for their given army re-various opponents. I would therefore be delighted if any fellow fanatici would care to contribute any thoughts.....

The armies are:
I/8(b) Makkan [Cav Gen , using Camels option]
I/39(b) Urartian [using Spears option]
I/42 Neo-Elamite [HCh Gen]
I/43(a) Kimmerian [Cav Gen, using 2Ps+Aux]
I/51 Neo-Assyrian Sargonid
I/53 Saitic Egyptian [HCh Gen]

I don't have the full range of options for all the armies (as indicated).
Terrain will be preset(I don't have enough terrain to cover all options, and I believe it will be fairer this way - comments welcome) and we'll being using 29 inch square boards (Ok in should be 30, but 29 is what I happen to have.
I am undecided as to whether players should roll for invader/ defender or just alternate over the day (again comments welcome).

Any help/advice/critisism greatly appreciated.

[Bill Hawkes]

Hi,

Glad to see someone else playing DBA in the Biblical era. Here are my comments on each army:

I/8(b) Makkan [Cav Gen , using Camels option]

Most of your army is warband so read carefully all rules concerning them. They get a quick kill against spears or blades but your opponents have very few of these troops types, except for the Saite Egyptians who should treat you with respect! Wb are vulnerable to chariots, especially the HCh variety, and they do NOT want to stand in front of bows and be shot at for long. Use the second move option (WB may make a 2nd move in a bound if into combat) to come to grips with enemy infantry. The bows and camelry are superior to enemy mounted troops and should handle them.

I/39(b) Urartian [using Spears option]

This army has a decent mounted arm but the rest of the army is somewhat light. The spears should be used in open terrain, the Ax and Ps are good in bad terrain. The Hd is vulnerable to shooting and to HCh. Beware the HCh general, he can win a combat, be forced to advance after combat, and find himself cut off and surrounded or at least overlapped. This army is outclassed in the open by the Egyptians and needs to be wary of the Elamites and Assyrians. The Makkans and Kimmerians are less of a threat tactically.

I/42 Neo-Elamite [HCh Gen]

This is arguably the most dangerous army in the group! The number of bows available should destroy mounted troops in range and can also pick apart foot. The ability of the LCh to dismount is dangerous too, try to get them into an annoying position using the speed of the LCh before dismounting. Of course, LCh are useful for their speed and you may not want to dismount! Beware the HCh general, he can win a combat, be forced to advance after combat, and find himself cut off and surrounded or at least overlapped. Concentrate your bowfire: use 3 elements for each shot whenever possible. The Saite Egyptian army will give this army trouble but with a little luck this army can outshoot any other in the group and leave opponents feeling like Custer at the Little Big Horn!

I/43(a) Kimmerian [Cav Gen, using 2Ps+Aux]

This army is the most unusual army in the group. The LH are difficult to use well. The foot troops should find bad terrain and hide in it, avoiding enemy chariots and bows if possible. The LH must use their speed to outflank the enemy. In particular, they are in a very bad position against bow heavy armies such as the Elamites. The LH have a quick kill against HCh, and can hurt the Assyrians sometimes that way. Overall, the Kimmerians are more likely to scare their opponents by threatening fast moving outflanking attacks than to actually kill them.

I/51 Neo-Assyrian Sargonid

This is an interesting mix of troop types that suffers only from the high number of Ps included. The HCh can trample most foot troops under their wheels in good terrain and the cavalry and spears can deal with bow armies such as the Elamites. The Ax and Ps can control bad terrain areas on the board. Consider using the Ps as a group, on the first bound of the game (only) they can make multiple moves. This provides an excellent chance to race ahead and sieze some crucial piece of terrain from which to dislocate the enemy's advance. This army has decent prospects against any opponent in the campaign, but beware the Elamites' massed bows.

I/53 Saitic Egyptian [HCh Gen]

A spear heavy army with some support troops, the Saites can handle bow armies such as the Elamites with relative ease but need to have some care around HCh because these can quick kill your spears. The bows, LH and HCh can handle enemy mounted troops and the Ps can occupy bad terrain. Be careful about sending the spears into bad terrain however, they will get a -2 in combat and are inferior to Ax there. Overall, in good terrain I would choose the Egyptians to defeat any opponent in this group, but beware the Assyrian HCh!.

Enjoy your games, and give us a battle report afterwards!

Bill

[ April 23, 2004, 14:08: Message edited by: Bill Hawkes ]

[Sarduri II]

Thanks Bill, I'm grateful to have someone elses advice for them to chew over, rather than just my own musings.

I've now come up with a method of dealing with terrain for the day, but I'm curious as to how this gets handled in competition normally? Do organisers usually place rstrictions, or is it generally a free for all?

[Hannibal Ad Portas]

As far as setting terrain goes, you should let that be done by the system in the rules. The aggression factors and army compositions work hand in hand.

In a recent tourney I played in, I had an army with very low aggression and quite a few rough terrain troops. Therefore, I needed to be able to get rough terrain to get the most out of my army. Every game I played was on pre-set terrain and that really put me at a disadvantage against all the power armies on boards that had little rough terrain. The army lists have aggression factors and army compositions for a reason....so let the players use them! If the terrain is set up by the organizer of the convention, chance plays too much of a role in the games (because now, not only is the terrain set outside of the player's control....the random choice for the boards to be used each round by the players puts things even more out of their control). Your tourney has armies in it that were historical opponents. This is a perfect fit for using the terrain/aggression rules already in the game!

[Ed Dillon]

I agree that terrain in tournaments is usually best handled by simply using the rules. If you want to do something "different", "interesting", or "unique", then let everybody know well in advance. I still appreciate that mastery of terrain use that Mark Pozniak displayed as he dismantled me at Historicon last year. In an open board, my Kn would (should) have run over his heavy foot. Instead I got quite a lesson. Mark is such a nice guy that it's hard to imagine anyone like that doing to opponent's armies what he does... :confused:
Ed

[ April 24, 2004, 21:24: Message edited by: Ed Dillon ]

[Sarduri II]

Thanks again for the replies gentlemen, but if I may,to quote 'Hannibal'

"The army lists have aggression factors and army compositions for a reason.."

Surely this is about (percieved) historical accuracy. The aggression, composition and home terain make no concession to playability or ballance.

A terrain sensitive army with a low aggression might be favoured by using "the book" set up, but that does little to assist a high aggression army which is terrain sensitive.
Facing a high aggression (light) Cavalry force like the Cimmerians (or Mongols if that's more your taste),why would one not simply choose to bury the board in bad going knowing they couldn't cope.

Conversely, you don't say what your rough terrain army was, but, if you do wind up as attacker, why would a (good going army) not deploy 1 Waterway and two roads (legal for Arrable) and give you no bad going at all?
That doesn't even consider the plight of a high aggression bad going army!

Obviously in an open tournament there no reason
why anyone should use such armies, but that restricts the variety and colour of our period. I assume some organisers have given thought to the question of ballance in the terrain, so as to leave the way open for a wider selection of possible armies.

I myself, am not overly concerned with the requirements of a tournament. My participants, all new to the game, are unlikely to be looking for that kind of extreme loophole to exploit -though it's not as if they're lacking in native cunning- but by presetting the terrain I can streamline the play for the day, and ensure that all 6 of the armies are at least in with a shout.

My current thinking involves having 3 relatively similar battlefields (29" x 29") each with 3 small to medium, difficult or water featues,(none central) and 1 easy feature (road/ gentle hill).
The defender will be allowed to move, remove, replace or add one feature from a small stockpile of additional terrain. I hope this will give the players variety, and some scope for cunning, without stacking the odds too much.

Finaly, congratulations 'hannibal' on your success in adversity.

[Hannibal Ad Portas]

"Finaly, congratulations 'hannibal' on your success in adversity."

Yep....I actually did quite well that day. Using Bosporans, I went 2 and 1 and was part of the 3-way tie for first....despite only getting enough rough terrain for my auxilia in only one game. In that game, I faced Early Burgundians :eek: and emerged "victorious" in a 7-6 bloodbath!!

[Hannibal Ad Portas]

"Surely this is about (percieved) historical accuracy. The aggression, composition and home terain make no concession to playability or ballance."

Surely balance must have been in the designer's mind when he made all the armies 12 elements each. Of course, not all elements are equal! The aggression factors go a long way in producing some equality...although some armies have bad combinations of aggression/elements and "thems are the breaks" and that is why they are not often seen in tourneys. I can see your idea as useful in aiding those armies, but only at the detriment of others.

Looking at the list of armies for your tournament, I see several with high aggression: Urartian with Agg 3, Neo Assyrian with Agg 4, and Skythian with Agg4. The Urartians and especially the Neo-Assyrians are nicely balanced...so they don't need to set the terrain to be competitive in your mix. The only army that could use special terrain rules is the Skythians, because they have mostly mounted....but with the option to field 2 Ps and 1 Ax, they aren't hopeless (but they could use your best general in command that day!). In fact, they have another benefit in your tourney, because of the 29-30" wide boards you are using and the Skythians have the light horse to exploit that. Now, your terrain system would benefit these armies, but at the detriment of the low aggression guys in your list who really need their terrain to be competitive: Makkan (with camels and warband), Neo-Elamite with lots of bows, Saitic Egyptian with all that heavy foot and not much mounted for their flanks and not enough bad going guys (that littoral landing trick could be helpful for them and putting down a waterway could also help cut down their vulenerable flanks...they might be able to do this if they get to use their Agg 1 rating).

If you are short on terrain, then felt can be used for some of the features and that is cheap and quick to use. Not beautiful, but functional. If you work on flocking/detailing the felt, then you can get some really nice terrain pieces on the cheap. I would be glad to show you some pieces our group made and give you an explanation of how they were done.

[cpagano]

About twice a year our local club holds an informal DBA 'tournament' like the one you are planning. We like to use preset terrain with no rivers or BUAs. We find that this is helpful for those who are new to DBA and it speeds things up a little. The more experienced players preset the army pairings and the terrain on each board with play balance in mind. I wouldn't claim that this method is superior to others, but it has worked well for us.

-Chris P.

[Martian]

Rather than giving each player an army to use for the day why don't you match pairs and have the players rotate army and opponent each round?

You pre-set the attacking army.
You pre-set the terrain.
You pre-set board edge.

Option:
First round players roll and set terrain as normal but then it remains set 'as is' for the event.

Each player plays a diferent opponent and at least one side of each battle.

The idea is to be the player who does the best with an army compared ONLY to players who also played that army.

Something like the Duplicate at Historicon but without the duplicate armies.

I'll see if I can dig up a rotation that will work for you. I have one for 6 players for 3 rounds I can email you.

Marty

[Sarduri II]

Once again thank-you to those who have replied.

I hadn't considered the idea of fixing the pairings and rotating the players through them, I wish I had. I would have painted up 3 very different historical pairs - (which would have pleased me) and given the new players a better range of "the DBA experience".

However as I've (now) carefully assembled 6 contemporary enemies (or very nearly so), I'm inclined to just go with the "league" approach and get everyone to fight everyone else. I sincerely hope that the resulting days fighting wil be sufficient to tempt my comrades-in-arms back for more "ancients".

Bearing in mind that all concerned (me included)have gamed a lot, but have little or no playing experience with DBA, I've been mulling over the likely odds on some of the match ups....

Saitic(if defenders)sure to beat Elam attacking.

Saitic favoured to beat Urartu attacking

Elam to beat Cimmerians with their eyes closed.

Makkan to beat Saitic.

Cimmerians favoured to beat Saitic.

Neo-Sagonid Assyria to do poorly, or very well across the board.

Urartu (likely me) favoured to roll lots of 1's.

[Bill Hawkes]

The comments regarding aggression levels and who is the attacker and defender are well taken and I endorse them.

Please send us some results from your league action when it is completed!

Bill

[Sarduri II]

Only 5 players could make it.
Final scores;
Elam - won 4
Saitic, Makkan,+ Urartu - won 2 each
Assyria got a duck.
The Cimmerians were not used.
See post in "Battle Reports" for more...

[John Meunier]

Originally posted by Ed Dillon:
I still appreciate that mastery of terrain use that Mark Pozniak displayed as he dismantled me at Historicon last year. In an open board, my Kn would (should) have run over his heavy foot. Instead I got quite a lesson. Ed,

Could you elaborate on this some more?

I'd love to see some graphics or photos (by anyone) demonstrating terrain tactics.

John

[Ed Dillon]

I wish that I could, but I was too dazed to really take it in. smile.gif
Mark would be the guy to ask. He had very carefully set up his terrain and made excellent use of it to protect his camp. I forgot to dismount my Kn and got splintered to the point that I needed about 7 PIPs pre turn. These all seem to be standard tactics in WADBAG. I keep tellng myself that I shall learn from these experiences...

[David Kuijt]

Originally posted by Ed Dillon:
These all seem to be standard tactics in WADBAG. The WADBAG fundamental tactic is to always have more pips than the opponent. To achieve this we had to sell our respective souls to a variety of netherworld entities. Except Chris, who wasn't there on "Sell Your Soul" day, which explains both his spotty luck using this tactic and the fact that he is a nicer guy than the rest of us.

[Chris Brantley]

Originally posted by David Kuijt:
The WADBAG fundamental tactic is to always have more pips than the opponent. To achieve this we had to sell our respective souls to a variety of netherworld entities. Except Chris, who wasn't there on "Sell Your Soul" day, which explains both his spotty luck using this tactic and the fact that he is a nicer guy than the rest of us. Actually I perform a very important function for WADBAG, balancing the high rollers and ensuring that our group's PIP and combat die adhere to the statistical mean, so as not to attract the wrath of the Dice Gods.

Besides, if I had more PIPs to work with, I'm sure I'd use them all....much to my disadvantage.