![]() |
|
#31
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
A couple of things that should stop your prophesy of doom here. 1) The terrain rules to some degree will stop the Wb player from filling the board with bad going with the attacker being able to choose their end so as to deny Bad Going to the Wb - until I get to see the final rules on terrain as to whether Plough gets to count as one of the bits of Bad Going I would not be prepared to say that the Bd cannot put down a billiard table (the Wb might have to pray for rain). 2) Unless you are saying that the extra fast movement allows flanks to be taken too easily then Wb are not totally vulnerable to Bd out in the open given that they have the rear support and the quick kill 3) Given TZ and command and control constraints Wb in Bad Going can only flank attacking Bd if their commander is stupid enough to send in his troops outnumbered - in which case he deserves what he gets. And YES - I do think that Wb (and in fact anything that isn't El, Kn, Sp or Bd) could do with a bump under DBA3 - these are the big winners in DBA3 Cheers
__________________
Because it has my troops all over it. That makes it MINE!!! |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
MacBeth:
I may be just a worry wort on this. One game does not a trend make... You are correct about the terrain rules. The game in question did have a large amount of woods in the most advantageous position. Not all games will feature that. Still, I would like to see Bd and Wb equal in combat in bad going... with the Wb having an advantage in speed. Now Wb rules the woods. We are play testing this Tuesday. We will see how Welsh vs Early Vikings works out. Joe Collins |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Still the point remains. Mono-type Bd armies will have a very difficult time vs Wb. Should this be the case? Will this lead to "stand offish" games? Joe Collins |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|