Home Forums Ancients 1/72 Egyptians

This topic contains 8 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by Autodidact-O-Saurus Autodidact-O-Saurus 1 month, 2 weeks ago.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #72274
    Cameronian
    Cameronian
    Participant

    Added another seven elements to an old DBA army:

     

    #72276
    Mike
    Mike
    Keymaster

    Do you know of any clear DBA game reports that give a blow by blow of the mechanics?

    The idea of having just a few bases for an entire army appeals, but there is the whole issue of people saying the rules require arcane knowledge to decipher.

    #72300
    Cameronian
    Cameronian
    Participant

    The best source of information is the web site:

    http://fanaticus.boards.net/forum

    It has information on all aspects including battle reports.

    As to the rules themselves I’ve never really had a problem getting my head around them; OK there are some points which need to be read over a few times slowly to get the gist but most of what is said about it is mythology.  I’m using v 2.2 and 3.0 with the v2.2 army lists although the DBM (son of DBA) army lists are much more informative.  There are several aspects of the system I’m not happy with but as a solo player I change things to suit myself, a rules lawyer I’m not.

    #72301
    William Harley
    William Harley
    Participant

    An excellent army, thanks for sharing.

    #72302
    Guy Farrish
    Guy Farrish
    Participant

    DBA is fine Mike – I still play version 1 solo or with consenting adult friends and have no problem understanding what is meant.

    Some tournament players like to ‘stretch’ interpretations to allow their super army/tactic to be included ,but I guess you won’t be doing that so you won’t have any problems.

    #72304
    Not Connard Sage
    Not Connard Sage
    Participant

    DBA is fine Mike – I still play version 1 solo or with consenting adult friends and have no problem understanding what is meant. Some tournament players like to ‘stretch’ interpretations to allow their super army/tactic to be included ,but I guess you won’t be doing that so you won’t have any problems.

    Though it would probably be even betterer if Barker hadn’t kept dicking about with it 😉

     

    "I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad. It's... depressing."

    #72310
    Guy Farrish
    Guy Farrish
    Participant

    Yep, I wrote another very long and boring piece saying that and binned it.

    You did it far more succinctly!

    Many rule writers would be advised to stop trying to placate individuals with axes to grind.

    You’ll never make them happy and you’ll just **** up your rules.

    #72571
    Ochoin
    Ochoin
    Participant

    Do you know of any clear DBA game reports that give a blow by blow of the mechanics? The idea of having just a few bases for an entire army appeals, but there is the whole issue of people saying the rules require arcane knowledge to decipher.

     

    This might help:

     

     

    donald

    #72591
    Autodidact-O-Saurus
    Autodidact-O-Saurus
    Participant

    I rather enjoyed DBA when it first came out. The mechanics are relatively simple and the bar is set rather low financially. You don’t need tons of figures to play the game and you can generally afford to collect various time periods. Given the magpie attention span of many gamers that’s an attractive feature. The game is, however, designed for a fairly high level of abstraction so you do lose the nuances of specific periods.

    I personally never had much of an issue with ‘barkerese’ but then I’m comfortable writing computer code, too. Just keep in mind that the language is more about defining the logic of events rather than being elegant prose.

    Self taught, persistently behind the times, never up to date. AKA ~ jeff
    More verbosity: http://petiteguerre.blogspot.com/

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.