Home Forums Ancients Thoughts on "Triumph!" fast play rules?

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #119944
    Brasidas19004
    Participant

    Got my copy of DBA 3.0 a while back, and was barely able to read thru it. It has many lovely features and the explanation of design goals is really interesting. Unfortunately, it has now passed into the level of a medium complexity set of rules, perhaps even high complexity. It reminds me a lot of DBR in terms of design. Did a review upon receipt in 2014…

    http://darkages40and25.blogspot.com/2014/11/dba-30-completely-unbiased-review.html

    …and TRULY intended to play soon but it just didn’t happen. Instead, I got wrapped up in the lovely Kings of War set of rules and did a fantasy 28mm league at the FLGS, and never returned to the project.

    Having played DBA since the beginning, I found I now needed another fast-play set of ancients. I have used my spin on Neil Thomas’ OHW and AMW rules for some time, and that’s been fine for 25mm. But now looking to get the 15s back on the table, and perhaps do some fun competing here and there.

    Anyone have thoughts on the new Triumph! rules? Especially interested if you are playing them, of course.

    Thanks!

    #119953
    vtsaogamesvtsaogames
    Participant

    Played them once and like them. But also like DBA 3.0. It’s gotten more complex but still gives a 60 minute game or less most of the time. Also, our group needs only one set of simple pre-gunpowder rules so DBA wins by default, kind of like VHS beating Betamax, if you’re old enough to recall that.

     

    I found Triumph took slightly longer than DBA 3.0 and more of our club already knows DBA. I also like Basic Impetus.

    https://corlearshookfencibles.blogspot.com/

    #120177
    Shaun TraversShaun Travers
    Participant

    I played Triumph a few times when it was released in draft and did like the unit interactions, probably because there were more different types of units compared to DBA 2.2.  I played the earlier Triumph version and the released version now has a different mechanism for shooting.   I would prefer to play it over DBA 2.2 but I am a ambivalent DBA player anyway! I have DBA 3.0 but not played it but do like the further differentiation of units into Solid/Fast.

    #120211
    Autodidact-O-SaurusAutodidact-O-Saurus
    Participant

    I’ve played Triumph! twice. Several of the authors were leading me down the garden path. I liked it enough that I purchased the rules though I’ve not read them or played lately. I do frequently peruse its army lists on Meshwesh just to see what’s what.

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

    #120310
    Devon StartDevon Start
    Participant

    they run a bunch of demos at hmgs events here in the states. and at historicon they sometimes do a giant lord of the rings game. i have the supplement for that somewhere

     

    #122159
    Devon StartDevon Start
    Participant

    another thread i killed

    #122172
    Tony STony S
    Participant

    I think I also have that superpower Devon!  To kill threads with a single comment!

    #122184
    Autodidact-O-SaurusAutodidact-O-Saurus
    Participant

    Nothing ever dies on the Internet. It’s just sleeping.

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

    #122199
    mark leslie
    Participant

    Or dreams in its house at R’lyeh, til the stars are right.

    #122260
    Brian HamiltonBrian Hamilton
    Participant

    I’ve played in both a Triumph! and a DBA 3.0 tournament and played individual games of each. It’s been a little while since I’ve played either.

    Triumph! feels like a modernized version of DBA. The 3’x2′ play area gives some more room to maneuver, and the 24 point armies give some flexability in what you can take compared to DBA’s set lists. Another cool innovation are the “Battle Cards” which are also available as a PDF. Instead of players choosing the terrain placement for the game, players choose terrain, assign them numbers, and then their placement on the table is randomly generated from the cards or a couple dice rolls.

    There’s also a greater variety of units which you can see on their army list website: https://meshwesh.wgcwar.com/home

    The only mark against them is not taking my suggestion of changing Sengoku-era Samurai’s Horse Bow to Bad Horse!

    If I’m back up your way sometime I’d be up for a game.

    By Brush and Sword, my blog: https://bybrushandsword.blogspot.com

    #124273
    Brasidas19004
    Participant

    Brian, that would be great – hope to see you sooner rather than later!

    #124866
    Piyan GlupakPiyan Glupak
    Participant

    For about a year I changed from DBA 2.2+ being my ancients wargame of choice to Triumph!, although I have since started doing other things.  I really enjoyed the early access versions, but when the final version came out, I had a game with a wargaming friend in another part of the country.  All was going well until his Hittite chariots did not quick-kill a base of my skirmishers (psiloi in DBA terms).  This was new to the final version.  He was not pleased, and I decided to write my own DBA replacement.

    If you like DBA, there is a very good chance that you will like Triumph!, especially if you like versions earlier than DBA version 3.  Although there are aspects that I am not particularly keen on (possibly due to it being written with tournament play in mind) they give a good game, with armies often (but not always) slightly larger than DBA armies.  There are quite a few more troop types.  Some aspects of the troop types really impressed me, although some others not quite so much.  There are very many features of the rules that impressed me.  Triumph! seems to have been written as a serious (but enjoyable) quick-play set of ancients rules.  The authors seem to be supporting the rules well with a forum and an extensive on-line database of army lists.  Many of the features of later versions of DBA that some see as gimmicks are not included.

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