DBMM Forum

General Category => Rules Questions => Topic started by: Shiprib on February 17, 2015, 06:52:44 AM

Title: Paying for double-based troops
Post by: Shiprib on February 17, 2015, 06:52:44 AM
I'm looking at putting together an Alexandrian Macedonian list and just wanted to double-check that how I believe double-based troops work is correct.

These are the two relevant lines from the army book:

C-in-C - Reg Kn (F) in single-based wedge @ 31AP                             
1
Companions - Reg Kn (F) in single-based wedge @ 11AP                             
2-6
Prodromoi - Reg LH(S) @ 7AP                             
1 per 2-3 companions

I've gone for the Chaeronea 338BC option and have three generals: Philip as an element of Ax(S), Alexander as Kn(F) and another Cv(O). I've taken one more element of Kn(F) companions, then two Kn(F) companions as rear ranks: one for Alexander and one for the other Kn. That makes three elements of companions in total, which is between the minimum and maximum, and I means I take one element of Prodromoi.

The question I have is, am I right in assuming that the rear rank elements come from the number of elements in the army list? Or do I need two elements of front rank companions?

Sorry if this question is a silly one, I've searched the forums, read the army book notes and the rule book but to no avail (though just my old v1 set, I haven't managed to get a v2 copy).
Title: Re: Paying for double-based troops
Post by: LawrenceG1 on February 17, 2015, 09:39:24 AM
Single based wedge is NOT double-based wedge.

Single based wedge is a single element, NOT two elements on a single base.

"double-based" means TWO elements on a single base (with base depth equal to the sum of the two base depths).

Single based wedge knights have a deeper base than a normal knight (same as a chariot or elephant base). They have the same number of figures but arranged in a wedge formation.

Double based elements area always explicit in the list, e.g. in Maurikian Byzantine list in book 3
Quote
Rear rank kavallarioi archers double-based with Reg Cv (S) kavallarioi - Reg Cv (O) @ 6AP






Title: Re: Paying for double-based troops
Post by: Shiprib on February 17, 2015, 05:49:26 PM
Ha oh dear, so it was a silly question after all. I was so bent on having a cool-looking wedge of knights that I was willing the army list to give it to me. That would explain why I was having so much trouble working it out. :)

Thanks very much for your correction. Now to go fix up my list!
Title: Re: Paying for double-based troops
Post by: Orcoteuthis on February 17, 2015, 07:50:42 PM
Note that single-based wedges (like Alex's companions) are on square bases, so you can easily have them in wedges, albeit three-figure ones (assuming "normal" 25/28 or 15mm basing - you can obviously put multi-line wedges of 6mm figures on 40mm square bases).
Title: Re: Paying for double-based troops
Post by: Shiprib on February 18, 2015, 04:07:46 AM
Huh, I suppose that's a slight advantage as it means your wedged generals are less likely to be engaged in your turn after a recoil during the enemy's turn. I assume that the extra base depth is only there as a concession to the extra space that staggering your models takes up, if so it's interesting how the physical aspect of the miniatures themselves has repercussions for the actual gameplay.

Just one of those things I suppose.
Title: Re: Paying for double-based troops
Post by: Barritus on February 18, 2015, 01:37:19 PM
Quote from: Shiprib on February 18, 2015, 04:07:46 AM
Huh, I suppose that's a slight advantage as it means your wedged generals are less likely to be engaged in your turn after a recoil during the enemy's turn.

Not necessarily: pursuing elements can always pursue up to a base width. As this is the same as the wedge's recoil distance, pursuing opponents will always be able to maintain contact if you recoil. However, other combat results are possible too, depending on what the Kn are fighting.

There are other advantages to wedges, though. One is that with deeper bases, you have a slightly greater ability to inflict overlaps on opposing elements compared with non-wedge Kn. Another advantage of wedges is that they don't suffer from overlaps against them (unless they're Kn (F) wedges overlapped by LH); they do however take the -1 if the enemy's front edge contacts their flank. The disadvantage is that they lose the Kn's Quick Kill against Cv.

Quote
I assume that the extra base depth is only there as a concession to the extra space that staggering your models takes up, if so it's interesting how the physical aspect of the miniatures themselves has repercussions for the actual gameplay.

It could be. I don't remember whether Barker spelled it out. Certainly from an aesthetic point it looks better, in my opinion.

Quote
Just one of those things I suppose.

It is annoying in that some Hellenistic armies have Kn (F) not in wedge, which obviously use the shallower base depth, meaning that unless you use a larger stick-on base of some sort, you can't use the one set of figures to portray both types of Kn (F).
Title: Re: Paying for double-based troops
Post by: LawrenceG1 on February 18, 2015, 03:33:57 PM
Quote from: Barritus on February 18, 2015, 01:37:19 PM
Another advantage of wedges is that they don't suffer from overlaps against them (unless they're Kn (F) wedges overlapped by LH);

This is one of those rules that has to be read carefully because it is easy to get wrong.

It's actually Kn(F) wedges fighting LH can be overlapped by anything.



Title: Re: Paying for double-based troops
Post by: Barritus on February 19, 2015, 10:58:33 AM
Good point. My explanation was sloppy.

I blame this on Cancon, where my Kn (F) wedges kept running into massed LH (S), so not only were they fighting LH, they were also overlapped by LH.