Home Forums Renaissance Battle of Novarra 1513: A DBA Refight

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #135515
    Whirlwind
    Participant

    Please see here for a refight of the Battle of Novara from a scenarion in an old Miniature Wargames, using DBA and Baccus 6mm figures:

    https://hereticalgaming.blogspot.co.uk/

    #135535
    hammurabi70
    Participant

    Interesting; how about trying it with MAXIMILIAN?

    #135537
    Whirlwind
    Participant

    Interesting; how about trying it with MAXIMILIAN?

    Ooh, I usually have at least heard of rulesets that people mention, but that one has me beaten.  I will scurry off and have a look…

    https://hereticalgaming.blogspot.co.uk/

    #135540
    Tony S
    Participant

    Wonderfully entertaining little write up.  Amongst the seemingly thousands of projects floating about in my head, are the Italian Wars using DBA, or To The Strongest.

    I did comment on your blog; I’m afraid you did get one little rule incorrect.  Advancing troops followup as a column; they don’t split their rear ranks off.

     

    #135546
    Whirlwind
    Participant

    Thanks very much Tony, appreciate it.

    I’m afraid you did get one little rule incorrect. Advancing troops followup as a column; they don’t split their rear ranks off.

    My wrongness is a good thing, since it makes more sense this way.  But, I have a bit of trouble with the interactions of this rule: if the pikes advance as a group (say two wide and two deep) then (I think) that isn’t a column, since columns can only be one element wide.  If one of the front pike elements pursues, does it then become classed as a column?

    https://hereticalgaming.blogspot.co.uk/

    #135553
    Not Connard Sage
    Participant

    Interesting; how about trying it with MAXIMILIAN?

    Ooh, I usually have at least heard of rulesets that people mention, but that one has me beaten. I will scurry off and have a look…

    Black Hat have/had them. I believe they were developed from a set of the same name that was produced by the Pike and Shot Society in the early 90s and given free to members, I have a copy of them. They’re intended to cover the Italian Wars specifically.

    Here’s a review of the published set: https://balagan.info/review-of-maximilian-fast-play-rules

     

     

     

    "I'm not signing that"

    #135557
    Whirlwind
    Participant

    Many thanks NCS, they look quite interesting.  What did you think of them?

    On a side issue, but reading that review of Maximilian has brought it to my mind, where there any rules made which are heavily influenced by DBR but have combined pike and shot units, rather than all those individual bases?  Having to rebase all my C17 infantry has always put me off trying DBR.

    https://hereticalgaming.blogspot.co.uk/

    #135560
    Not Connard Sage
    Participant

    I thought that for quick games they were much better than the ‘DBR lite’ proposed by Barker and Scott in those rules. With 24 elements, plus c-in-c, a side they do look more like armies than those in DBA. Of course this does mean you need a larger battlefield, but that shouldn’t be too much of a problem in 6mm.

    The mechanics being much the same as DBA (but a bit more elegant IMO) the learning curve isn’t as steep either. If you can find a copy, I’d recommend you give them a go.

    The published edition wasn’t too expensive, and I think there was a PDF version too.

    As for the other, the only rules that I know that bung P&S on the same base are Pete Berry’s Forlorn Hope and its successor Polemos system. FH isn’t much like DBA, and I’m not familiar with Polemos. 🙂

    "I'm not signing that"

    #135563
    Whirlwind
    Participant

    Thanks NCS, I’ll add them to the list of rules to have a look at.

    https://hereticalgaming.blogspot.co.uk/

    #135595
    hammurabi70
    Participant

    All correct.  For the period I think them better.  I have a copy of the original P&SS issue and a copy of the reworked version, which you can get at WV:

    https://www.wargamevault.com/product/122057/Maximilian

     

    #135604
    Tony S
    Participant

    But, I have a bit of trouble with the interactions of this rule: if the pikes advance as a group (say two wide and two deep) then (I think) that isn’t a column, since columns can only be one element wide.  If one of the front pike elements pursues, does it then become classed as a column?

    Yes, you’re right.  Ccolumns are only one element wide, but can be as deep as you want.  (Although watch it; two elements columns can recoil; a three or more element deep column that sees the lead stand lose a combat and need to recoil, will lose that stand as it cannot push back more than element and so will shuffle off this mortal coil.  Or become an ex-element).

    So, yes, during combat of the aforementioned group of pikes in a two by two formation, you immediately apply the results of the combat dice roll.  The one pike stand, if it wins, will advance, together with an element behind it.  (Note that it can be any element, not just an element that can support the front element).   Then the other stand will fight, but obviously its enemy will then receive a -1 modifier, as it is now overlapped by the victorious stand that just advanced.

    As for DBA style Pike & Shotte rules, there were at least two Wargames Illustrated articles that had authors trying to adapt DBA to the Renaissance, long before DBR appeared.  They both had a “Pike and Shot” troop type, as an integral single stand.   Not sure which issues,  but definitely before DBR appeared.

    I remember when DBR was published, and Phil went to various conventions introducing players to his new rules, I asked Mr Barker if he had seen those rules in WI, and whether he had been influenced by any of their ideas when he was developed DBR.  He categorically told me “No”.  I think I inadvertently insulted him!  I certainly didn’t mean to!  Then I compounded my insulting behaviour by confusing his demonstration armies’ artillery and dragoons with each other.  In my defense, they were 2mm – so the artillery had slightly larger bumps at the front (the guns), and smaller ones at the rear (caissons) and dragoons had smaller bumps at the front (the dismounted troopers) and larger bumps at the rear (the horses).

    I don’t think he was terribly impressed with me!

    #135608
    hammurabi70
    Participant

    Maximilian

    Previous thread on the subject of the rules.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.