Medieval Armies DBA Page

DBA Resource Page

Commentary on the "Official Amendments" to DBA

This is based upon the July version of the amendments.

Phil Barker has issued a new DBA 1.2 edition as "Official Amendments". Coupled with release of the official amendments is news that Barker plans to release DBA 2.0 sometime after Christmas.

This page is a list of concerns and reactions to the amendments, in an attempt to find and point out possible problems in the "Official Amendments" before DBA 2.0 goes to press.

If you think you have found a problem with the current amendments, please drop a note with explanation to me at kuijt@umiacs.umd.edu, or to Chris Brantley at brant@erols.com. The hope is that this will assist in the playtesting and rewording of the DBA version 2.0 rules.

Commentary on the Amendments

  • Artillery: Artillery now fires every bound it does not move or pivot.
      • Ouch! Although I've heard players complain about the utility of Artillery, I think that is just because they haven't taken the time to learn it. My Later Ottomans have been unbeaten in a dozen games with the old Artillery rules; with the new rules they would be an unbeatable juggernaut. Although I am still playtesting this rules change, my feeling (with six or so games with or against artillery under my belt with the new rules) is that the every-bound firing rule makes artillery too powerful. I liked it the old way.

      If there must be a change (and I prefer it the old way), I suggest the following compromise: In the "Distant Shooting" section, replace the v1.1 text on Arty with: "Artillery shoot only in an opponent's bound."

      This is more powerful than Arty in 1.1, where they could not shoot in any opponent's bound where they moved, recoiled, or pivoted in their own just preceding. But it is still only firing in the opponent's bound, which is half as often as v2.0. The rules suggestion above is also an increase in simplicity over v1.1, as it does not require any memory of what the Arty did on its last turn; and it is a reduction in the total amount of text.

      I am going to continue playtesting the v2.0 Arty system to be sure of my assessment, but I'm pretty sure now that Arty firing every bound is both non-historical (battles don't play out in a vaguely historical fashion) and unbalanced (Arty becomes tremendously powerful).

  • Movement changes: Bow now move 200p (was 300p); Camelry move 400p (was 300p); War Wagons and Artillery move by road 400p (was 300p)
      • I like the change to Bows -- they are formed foot now, as they should be. The Camelry change is not major, and they aren't a common troop type. I think War Wagons and Artillery maybe should move 300p by road, not 400p, but I doubt the change will be earth-shattering.

      I have one anecdote, however, that illustrates my concern about Artillery moving quickly by road, especially in the light of the other Artillery changes. I was fighting a battle where a road made a broad Y intersection in my backfield, with two prongs spreading out into the enemy territory. My forces were largely down the right prong, facing the enemy, and he ran two Auxilia through rough going to the left. I pulled my Arty out of line, put it on the road, and using the road movement and 400p movement, quickly cut off the enemy flanking attempt and (firing every turn) quickly blew both Auxilia into shreds. This seemed a bit too much like a World War II Panzerblitz engagement between a couple of infantry companies and a Hummel 150mm Self-Propelled Gun for my taste.

  • Bows: There are a bunch of changes to Bows, including: move 200p now (from 300p); not affected by rough terrain; can kill Psiloi on a double result; lose their QK on Knights if the bows are hit in the flank or rear.
      • All of these changes are great, as far as I'm concerned.
  • Cavalry: There are a huge wad of changes to Cavalry, including: Spear or Pike routs them, not kills them, on a double; Flee 600p if they lose in bad going (rather than killed); gain a QK on Psiloi in good going.
      • All of these changes seem like good ones to me.
  • Closing the Door: in v1.1 a 15mm heavy foot element did not have the movement to move from an overlap position into a flanking position in one bound, but a 25mm heavy foot element could do so. This was a serious point of contention in 15mm games. The amendments specifically allow that move regardless of game scale.
      • This change is a relief, as all the 15mm players I know have been using this as a house-rule for a long time already.
  • Spear Changes: There are two changes to Spear: the removal of Spear back-rank support by other Spear (except when in a Spear pushing duel), and changes to the combat results against Cavalry (discussed in the Cavalry rules).
      • I don't like removing their back-rank support by other Spear except in hoplite duels. That is an increase in complexity (I hate it when special cases worm their way into an elegant and simple system) and seems to take away part of the specialness of Spear, and their ability to resist Pike and Blades at least for a while.

      Removing the Spear backrank support isn't a change that shakes the earth (it is always better to have an overlap than backrank support) but I don't believe it is a good change. It detracts from the variety and interest of a Spear army, and takes away an interesting, useful, and historical option.

      Comments supporting back-rank support for Spear have been received so far from Jeff Allison, Dave Schlanger, "Gabriele (hawkmoon@iol.it)", and Jim Wright.

  • Auxilia back-rank support: Psiloi may now give back-rank support to Auxilia in all the usual situations for Psiloi support.
      • This rule is a nice addition.
  • Second Or Subsequent Movement: Four special cases are established for extra movement.
      • Road Movement: this change is a great improvement. Roads in DBA 1.1 were basically useless; with this change they can be quite useful, if risky, to use. Useful because they can allow troops to really gain significant tactical movement; risky because such movement must be in column, and coming too close to the enemy in a column is a recipe for disaster.
      Warband second move to combat: a very nice change, allowing some "surprise" or "sudden" rushes to attack by Warbands. And warbands DO need some help, as discussed later.
      Light Horse ending more than 600p from enemy: another wonderful change, allowing the possibility for the sort of swift redeployments that are typical of Light Horse armies.
      Psiloi initial rush: still another clever addition to the rules. This change allows a general with a few first-turn pips to throw his Psiloi forward, either to sieze bad going (an ambush of sorts) or to skirmish in front of the enemy forces and delay them. Both of these are essentially forward deployments, and allow an unpredictable but useful resource for armies with significant Psiloi, without being game-unbalancing -- throwing the Psiloi forward in that fashion can be quite risky, as they will be far ahead of any chance of support.
      One problem is the current wording of the amendment:
        "Second or (unless warband) subsequent moves can be made only by:

        a. Light horse not ending that move within 600p of enemy.

        b. Psiloi in their side's first bound.

        c. Warband ending that move in close combat.

        d. Any troops by road."

      The problem is simple: as worded, Warband cannot move by road more than two moves. A proposed solution is the following wording:
        Second or subsequent moves can be made only by:

        a. Light horse not ending that move within 600p of enemy.

        b. Psiloi in their side's first bound.

        c. (second move only) Warband ending that move in close combat.

        d. Any troops by road.

    Things NOT in the Amendments that I think should be:

  • Knight QK on Blade in good going:

    This is very important, both to make Medieval battles come out more historically (and most DBA Knight elements are in the Medieval period), and to balance the advantages of Blade a bit, especially as Spear has been relatively weakened (no back-rank support against Blades) and Warband not improved.

  • Warband need help:

    I'm not sure what needs doing here, but my playtesting experience is that Warband is by far the weakest overall troop type. They can't fight in the rough against anything; they can't fight in the open against mounted; they are weak in the open against loose-order foot; and against close-order foot (blade, spear, pike) they are pretty much even.

  • War Wagons aren't Tanks:

    War Wagon missile fire range and combat factors makes them dominant against almost every troop type except blades, and not bad against those. This may be vaguely historically correct for Hussite warwagons festooned with light artillery, handgunners, and crossbowmen, but not for any other type in the army lists (Pecheneg, Sea Peoples, Khazar, Communal Italian, Early Hebrew). For them the huge ranged combat factor gives entirely inaccurate battle results.

    I suggest changing one of the Hussite Warwagons into an Artillery element, giving them three of this troop type. With that and entirely removing the DBA Warwagon missile combat ability, the Hussite army should still get appropriate battlefield performance but the other armies with WarWagons will not end up using them as WWII King Tigers.

  • The World Has No Edges:

    The 15mm-scale game is unreasonably constrained by the 24" square map size. The depth is fine -- games played on deeper boards take longer, and aren't much more interesting. But the 24" width of the map in 15mm scale creates a situation where it is often possible for a player to entirely block off the whole width of the map (assisted by a small section of impassable going or other useful terrain). This artifact is not present in 25mm scale games. In 25mm games the recommended board size is 48", which is 20.32 elements width across. The recommended board size of 24" for 15mm games is only 15.24 elements across.

    The constrained board makes it quite difficult to employ flanking maneuvers with light horse or cavalry that are both historical and interesting. The strange "Edge of the World" artifact of the edge of the board is magnified, allowing anti-historical deployments and battle plans that need not worry about protecting the flanks.

    This problem is an easy thing to fix, however. Alter the 15mm recommended board size to 36" wide (still 24" depth). The resulting map is 22.86 elements wide, which corresponds closely to the width in 25mm games. It is impossible for an army to deploy so as to guard both flanks with the "Edge of the World", (although one flank can still be hinged on the board edge). The artificial world edge will have even less of an impact if both players must deploy their camps in the center 24" of the map (i.e., at least 6" from either side edge).

  • Missile Fire and Terrain:

    DBA already differentiates Woods and BUA from other types of Bad Going on page 7 (command range for tactical moves). How about the following rule: (added to the tactical factors at the bottom of page 8):

      +1 if shot at; and the target or the firing element is in Woods or BUA.
    This would allow Woods and BUA to give some cover to distant combat. Note that close combat for bows would still be unmodified, representing the fact that close volleys against enemy assault would still be effective.

    • | Top of Page | DBA Resource Page | Medieval Armies DBA Page |

    Last modified: July 22, 1999. Added the "Edge of the World" and the "Missile Fire and Terrain" sections, plus slightly reworded some other sections.

    File totally reworked: July 19, 1999. The July amendments came out.

    File created: June 29, 1999

    Comments, suggested additions, and/or critiques welcome. Direct them to David Kuijt at kuijt@umiacs.umd.edu or Chris Brantley at brant@erols.com.