DBMM Forum
General Category => Rules Questions => Topic started by: william on February 10, 2009, 07:30:57 PM
-
??? Riddle me this B represents a terrain feature called a Boundary, a boundary is ' a major hedge and /or ditch or dry stone wall seperating parishes, townships, grazing territores or farm land from waste '.
So is a Boundary an area or linear feature, if it is an area feature and depending on it's placement dice it may have to be placed well away for other features it is supposed to bound, it could also not be placed on a gentle hill ( defining the border of different grazing areas ).
If it is a linear feature ( which seems to be more apt ) how do you dice for it ( as it may not be long enough to put between some sides of the table).
William
-
the commentary says it is diced for as if an area feature IIRC - but I don't know the whys or therefores of that.
-
??? Riddle me this B represents a terrain feature called a Boundary, a boundary is ' a major hedge and /or ditch or dry stone wall seperating parishes, townships, grazing territores or farm land from waste '.
Yes.
So is a Boundary an area or linear feature, if it is an area feature and depending on it's placement dice it may have to be placed well away for other features it is supposed to bound, it could also not be placed on a gentle hill ( defining the border of different grazing areas ).
It's an area feature, as implied on page 19:An area feature must fit into a rectangle 1200p x 800p...Only a boundary or gully can have a maximum width less than 120p or be longer than 3 times its maximum width.
The way I'm reading it is that you're thinking of the boundary as a simple drystone wall between fields. My apologies if this is incorrect. I suspect the terrain feature should be depicted as thick with shrubbery and 5-metre-tall trees, similar to what I've sometimes seen in the English countryside on "Time Team". These are major terrain features. However, I agree it's odd that it can't be superimposed on gentle hills.
If it is a linear feature ( which seems to be more apt ) how do you dice for it ( as it may not be long enough to put between some sides of the table).
William
No, it's an area feature, so it's subject to the same placement rules as other area features.
-
;D Thanks to Mike and Peter
William
-
Page 19.
Terrain features are either area features, or a linear feature such as a water feature, road or frontier wall.
So it's an area feature. ;)
-
Page 19.
Terrain features are either area features, or a linear feature such as a water feature, road or frontier wall.
So it's an area feature. ;)
;D You are of course correct, except that the quote says or a linear feature such as a water feature, road or frontier it does not rule out other features as linear features ( even though I think this is what's implied ), just gives examples of linear features.
Then there is the issue of a frontier wall that is a BUA (f?) therefore an area feature and being a linear feature at the same time.
But then again Boundary is listed area features as it can be classed by going and terrian type, then again most linear features can as well ( except roads ).
TBF I will be taking a Boundary as an area feature even if I think it ( and Gullies ) should be more the linear type and be able to be placed next to other or on certain other terrain pieces but that could used by unscrupulous players to close off the entire table.
;) Thanks again
William
Hey I have found the joy of online dictionaries and pasting, just ahve ot remember to use them ( and when ).
-
Then there is the issue of a frontier wall that is a BUA (f?) therefore an area feature and being a linear feature at the same time.
Oh! I hadn't noticed that one. Still, I'm not the sort to skulk behind a Frontier Wall! :-)
TBF I will be taking a Boundary as an area feature even if I think it ( and Gullies ) should be more the linear type and be able to be placed next to other or on certain other terrain pieces but that could used by unscrupulous players to close off the entire table.
Pardon. Could you explain that, please? How can you close off a table with a Boundary? It's difficult terrain, not impassable.
-
Pardon. Could you explain that, please? How can you close off a table with a Boundary? It's difficult terrain, not impassable.
:-[ Well not so much as to close a table off just make it very difficult to move arround.
One of the things I like about DBMM is the terrian placing system and there will always have to be a least 1 element wide gap between most ( but not all ) features allowing troops and columns to move through ( into nasty ambushes etc. ), another good thing is the lights deployment section on the flanks allowing certian light contingents the ability to ' get around ' heavier army types.
But if B could be placed up against other area types it could create a difficult going barrier protecting an entire side table edge or frontage at least slowing an oponent down especially with a few well placed Ax defending these features. Ax because they would also stop march move.
I am still not sure what the benefits are of defending terrian ( don't think there is any combat bonus, one does not have to conform ).
Sorry for any confusion caused ( confuse myself most of the time ),
William ;D
-
Pardon. Could you explain that, please? How can you close off a table with a Boundary? It's difficult terrain, not impassable.
:-[ Well not so much as to close a table off just make it very difficult to move arround...if B could be placed up against other area types it could create a difficult going barrier protecting an entire side table edge or frontage at least slowing an oponent down especially with a few well placed Ax defending these features. Ax because they would also stop march move.
Sorry, I still don't follow you. The maximum length of a Boundary is 1200 paces, or 60cm (in 15mm). Well, I suppose that's still a reasonable length, but Boundaries can't be any longer than any other terrain feature.
I am still not sure what the benefits are of defending terrian ( don't think there is any combat bonus, one does not have to conform ).
The only effect is the possible -1 or -2 for fighting in difficult terrain, which can apply to both sides. In other words, you don't stand in it; you stand behind it in good going and let the other guy try to fight his way through it.
Sorry for any confusion caused ( confuse myself most of the time ),
No worries.
-
Sorry, I still don't follow you. The maximum length of a Boundary is 1200 paces, or 60cm (in 15mm). Well, I suppose that's still a reasonable length, but Boundaries can't be any longer than any other terrain feature.
Yes but if they were linear terrain they could be placed in conjunction ( and a joining ) with other terrain, say a BUA and a difficult hill linking them up ( I know would depend up edge dice but it is not far fetched ).
You could in one way consider a Boundary in the same as a long element of FO ( except you do not have to spend AP on it ), and after see recently FO being used defended by Ax(S) it may be worth while to take.
Even putting a 1200pc in one of your own flank sectors ( with those few Ax in it ) will make it bit more pip intensive for an opponent to flank march or 'get arround you' on that side.
The only effect is the possible -1 or -2 for fighting in difficult terrain, which can apply to both sides. In other words, you don't stand in it; you stand behind it in good going and let the other guy try to fight his way through it.
Or in the case of Ax 10 paces into it. The boundary is only 20p wide and as most element depths are bigger than that ( Ax being 40p ) so part of the base is going to stick out and making mounted enemy ( or heavy foot ) having to go in to clear you out seems risky for him.
;) William
-
Hi William
I too asked this question on the Yahoo group - "why is a boundary an area feature?????"
I agree you should at least be able to superimpose a boundary wall on a gentle hill or even a field, or have it abutting a field or a BUA. We just have to wait patiently for a rule change, or if you and I ever play we can agree to this 'local' rule! :) But yes the correct treatment, using the current version of the rules, is to treat the B like an other area feature.
I agree with your thoughts on how to use it - try to secure a flank with a strip of DGo which your elements stand behind. However, the downside with static defences is that they can be walked/driven around (i.e. the Maginole line). Do you use the Gallic list?
Andrew
-
;D I do have Gauls just do not play with them often as I have only minimum warband yet and not enough chariots.
Yes I did notice B was only available in Gaul ( could that include Gallic based Roman armies and settling tribes { Franks, Visigoths etc } or even some passers through.
And in France and England ( dates for the start of these Hmm ).
I am still trying to get Sp to work ( in between playing with expendables and Lh(S) ) before I even think about huge warbands.
And yes I do think the combination of Ax and boundry could be good ( maybe a English army with some sort of Welsh ally but have not thought deeply about it ).
;D William
-
Even putting a 1200pc in one of your own flank sectors ( with those few Ax in it ) will make it bit more pip intensive for an opponent to flank march or 'get arround you' on that side.
Yes, but you've got to be able to put it on the table. A long thin terrain feature might be tricky to place in a useful location, especially as it's placed quite late in the sequence. In fact, I wonder whether the inability to superimpose Boundaries might be a deliberate decision to make it hard to place in a way which would be tactically useful for the defender.
The only effect is the possible -1 or -2 for fighting in difficult terrain, which can apply to both sides. In other words, you don't stand in it; you stand behind it in good going and let the other guy try to fight his way through it.
Or in the case of Ax 10 paces into it. The boundary is only 20p wide and as most element depths are bigger than that ( Ax being 40p ) so part of the base is going to stick out and making mounted enemy ( or heavy foot ) having to go in to clear you out seems risky for him.
Why put the Ax 10 paces into the Boundary? What does that achieve? The troops which get quick kill against Ax need to be in good going. The location of the Ax is irrelevant - whether you're in the Boundary or in good going, all that matters is what the enemy's going is. If you stand in good going just behind the Boundary, your opponents are going to have to fight you while being in difficult going. Doing that removes their quick kill. And if the enemy sends in Bd, he still takes a -1 in combat, making his combat factor the same as yours.
I just don't see why you need to move your Ax into the Boundary. Apart from anything else it's costly in PIPs.
-
I agree with your thoughts on how to use it - try to secure a flank with a strip of DGo which your elements stand behind. However, the downside with static defences is that they can be walked/driven around (i.e. the Maginole line).
I agree with that sentiment. You might get something which protects you to your front, in which case the enemy will attack the other flank, or flank march around it. Or do what Claudius Nero did at the Metaurus when his troops faced Gauls sitting on top of a large steep hill: ignore them and march around behind his own army to attack the opposite enemy flank. And the Gauls just sat up there scratching their backsides.
The next problem with relying on terrain is that it requires you to always be the defender - if you're unlucky enough to be the invader, you're in trouble, unless you can manufacture something out of the enemy's terrain list. Now I used the same trick a lot in DBM with Hellenistic Greek Aitolians: Aggression 0, lots of terrain, and lots of Ps (S). But the difference here was that I didn't rely on a single type of terrain. I used all the difficult going I could lay my hands on.
The last problem is what you do if the terrain dice are unfavourable and the Boundary either doesn't appear or ends up somewhere you can't use it? Hopefully you have a Plan B.
No, the idea of using terrain defensively like this doesn't appeal to me. It smacks too much of handing the initiative to the other guy, with little opportunity to put pressure on him. I always used the Aitolians aggressively - the terrain simply gave my fragile little Ps (S) the protection they needed to swarm around the flanks of enemy formations without being in much danger from mounted, while the heavier troops filled the gaps between the terrain features.
-
Agree with your sentiments - it is trying to give you something to anchor a flank upon. No point leaving an open flank with a free run to the Baggage while your centre pushes forward......
On two occasions of playing Gauls, I got the B down once and being late in the terrain placement sequence, it was pretty constraining regarding how much flank protection it gave me. That said, it gave me a place to hide the PsI, but they never came into the game anyway (something has gone wrong if you are fighting with the PsI in the Gallic list).
The issue with taking lots of difficult terrain is that now DGo is really really difficult. In my last game I caught my opponents Ax in the DGo in a column - being Irregular Thracians they were even less manoeuvrable and it wasn't a pretty sight for the Thracians! IMO DGo is purely for Psiloi unless you are able to march something through in a column. Otherwise you can't get the PIPs or make the moves you want to make.
Cheers
Andrw
-
Agree with your sentiments - it is trying to give you something to anchor a flank upon. No point leaving an open flank with a free run to the Baggage while your centre pushes forward......
On two occasions of playing Gauls, I got the B down once and being late in the terrain placement sequence, it was pretty constraining regarding how much flank protection it gave me. That said, it gave me a place to hide the PsI, but they never came into the game anyway (something has gone wrong if you are fighting with the PsI in the Gallic list).
The issue with taking lots of difficult terrain is that now DGo is really really difficult. In my last game I caught my opponents Ax in the DGo in a column - being Irregular Thracians they were even less manoeuvrable and it wasn't a pretty sight for the Thracians! IMO DGo is purely for Psiloi unless you are able to march something through in a column. Otherwise you can't get the PIPs or make the moves you want to make.
Cheers
Andrw
IMHO most Dgo is purely fro Reg Ps, and of course dismounted Reg Cv and Lh Generals.
William
-
Whilst on the topic, and in the context of my forthcoming 100YW English:-
1. Do posters find B useful/playable terrain-types?
2. How best are they deployed and are there any particular terrain-picking strategies that you find help getting them where you would like them (for example, in combo with other picks, selecting a side/rear edge as your "6" edge and/or length of B)?
3. Any particular advice on modelling B for the tabletop? I think that I have seen cut-up brillo-pads suggested??
Tim Child
-
I can recommend the low stone walls made by Javis of Stockport. I found some when I was last in the UK at a local modelling shop. They are used for railway modelling but they certainly look the part on the ancient battlefield. The description on the box says : Javis of Stockport 0161 480 2002, "Countryside Scenes", Ref JRDSWOO, "00" gauge rough dry stone walling. Each section is 150mm long by about 16-17mm high, each long section interlocks with the next, and there are two end-pieces without any interlocking. IMO they look good.
I have tried using B a couple of times without much effect. I need to explore it more fully before I can conclude whether or not it is worth it. I tend to try to use it to anchor a flank - it was effective in one game and didn't actually matter in the second.
Andrew
P.S. Link to product : http://www.javis.co.uk/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage_norm&product_id=3394&category_id=19&manufacturer_id=0&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=116
From memory the sections were quite cheap, about 80p / 150cm.
-
:) Hi Tim
1. Do posters find B useful/playable terrain-types?
Have not used them yet but I think the could close flanking troops down and be a good defense ploy accross the middle of the table with some thing like Ax(S) or Bw, bit like fixed obsticles you do not have to pay for.
2. How best are they deployed and are there any particular terrain-picking strategies that you find help getting them where you would like them (for example, in combo with other picks, selecting a side/rear edge as your "6" edge and/or length of B)?
I feel that they do go down fairly late so may not go down at all.
I have noticed in most games I have played across the water that players only nominate the terrian they will take not present it first, it would be good ( if very cheesey ) if one had adjustable B's to fit. I think the best combination would be with a water feature giving a nice safe rectangle for Bw(I) to hide behind. Flank positioning to slow armies that want to get around you ( your recent foray's into Nikes ), centre of table to slow down massed irregulars ( Wb(O) and Kn(F) ), and of course kill pursuing expendables.
3. Any particular advice on modelling B for the tabletop? I think that I have seen cut-up brillo-pads suggested??
This is why I responded ( you can ignore the rest above ), I like the idea of thin 10cm strips of door mat, I have seen them used in 28mm for corn fields etc. ( looking a small bit like the border hedge surrounding the Shire I like to imagine ),one may consider them a bit tall but I think of B as those lovely estate walls that can be seen through out the British isles, 9 or 10 feet tall ruuning along external roads, dry stone of course with about 10 yards or so of trees on the inside keeping the riff raff out of the hunting grounds.
Yes I did consider railway walls, two of them with a gap between, filled with moss type flock ( that stuff I have never found a use for { though to be fair I can not paint and model so very rarely } ) signifing dry stone ditches with trees and scrub growing on and in ( bit like the country borders of our own garden ).
But the issue is they can not be rectangular (????), so must be fairly rounded at the end ( achieve that in 1cm ), and as 1 cm wide it will be a miracle if any thing straddling the B stays on top, so it may have to be 'naff' felt. ;D
Thomas used some lovely log sections for fixed obsticles in Munster this year if there is any pictures going around.
;D Sorry I forget to shut up sometimes
William
-
I think the intention of Boundaries were they were more substantial than a mere hedge or wall, and that is why the geographic limitation, as they should be more like the Bocage in Normandy or traditional English 'Hedgerows'.
Unfortunately, one of the artefacts of scale is they will never 'look right' in 15mm. as they should really be not more than 10-20 paces wide, but should be modelled to look like a significant obstacle.
-
I do like the look of the dry-stone wall models and may well go for them. Bocage is probably more accurate (or those big hedge and banks you see lining all the roads in the West Country :o) ), but I can't see quite how I'd get those to look right with the figures. However, I'll probably put together some strips of green and brown foam rubber to go underneath them, so that we can remove the terrain models and put troops on the foam rubber terrain when/if they're actually being crossed.
Interestingly, B do not block visibility (see p.25, B is not in the list of visibility-restricting terrain). I think that this might also point toward the idea of a stone wall, which gives a major obstacle but necessarily so high that you can't see over it properly.
I've been mucking about with actually getting the thing on table, doing some "dummy runs" with terrain-placement. As William points out, they're placed so late that you are at serious risk of not getting them down at all. With that in mind (and the fact that they block your troops crossing them as much as they block enemy coming through them) I think I'll try and keep them to the 800p minimum, rather than hoping to find space for a full 1200pp. 800p is 10 elements wide, which ought to be enough to satisfy most people.
My major concern with the B is that it might become a static focus, fixing my own troops in place and therefore handing the initiative to the opponent. I'm intending this for a 25mm 400AP 100YW English army, for the open period games at Campaign on an 8' x 5' table (40 elements wide). I'm hoping that with powerful troops like Kn, Bd(S) and Bw(S), combined with Reg troops and Reg generals (but sadly no Reg Baggage :o) ) I'll be in a position to take the initiative, rather than just dig in and hope that my opponent is stupid enough to impale himself on my army.
Tim Child
-
Interestingly, B do not block visibility (see p.25, B is not in the list of visibility-restricting terrain). I think that this might also point toward the idea of a stone wall, which gives a major obstacle but necessarily so high that you can't see over it properly.
Tim Child
They also do not provide any defensive modifier ( like FO ), being shot at or in combat across except the attacker is more than likely in DGo, but still a little odd.
If defenders get + 3 behind fortifications, +1 for being behind B or PO does not seem an aweful strech.
One for the distant future.
William
-
Yes 800 paces is preferable to 1200.
Unfortunately the rules on defending the edge of a terrain feature don't apply - I believe these should be relevant for B but it appears they are not. Given B is an area feature (and not a linear feature - how odd!) any defenders cannot claim the 'defending the edge of a terrain feature' benefit of ignoring enemy TZ's and avoiding being pulled out of shape by an enemy group making corner contact.
-
Yes 800 paces is preferable to 1200.
Unfortunately the rules on defending the edge of a terrain feature don't apply - I believe these should be relevant for B but it appears they are not. Given B is an area feature (and not a linear feature - how odd!)...
Well, we discussed this earlier in this thread. There is a bit of logic to it.
...any defenders cannot claim the 'defending the edge of a terrain feature' benefit of ignoring enemy TZ's and avoiding being pulled out of shape by an enemy group making corner contact.
Why can't you defend the edge of a Boundary? Yes, you'd have to be in it, and so you'd take the -1 or -2 in combat, but there's nothing to stop you standing in it if you wanted to. My preference, however, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, is to stand close enough behind it that the enemy will be in it when he contacts you. Not only does he take the -1 or -2 in close combat, it also costs him some quick kills. also, I'm pretty sure he has to stop moving on reaching the Boundary, and won't be able to contact until the following turn.
-
Why can't you defend the edge of a Boundary? Yes, you'd have to be in it, and so you'd take the -1 or -2 in combat, but there's nothing to stop you standing in it if you wanted to.
My assumption was the TF was thinner than the element such that you couldn't be entirely within the area feature. Page 19 : a boundary is depicted as 20 paces wide which is thinner than the base depth of an element of Pike or Blade. To claim the benefit of defending the edge of a terrain feature the enemy element has to be at least partially on the opposite side of the terrain features edge (page 20) which, assuming my maths is correct, would be a physical impossibility for even the smallest element in DBMM.
I'm pretty sure he has to stop moving on reaching the Boundary, and won't be able to contact until the following turn.
The B is difficult going so any movement to contact elements on the other side of the B would be constrained by the DGo movement rate. Although if the enemy is in DGo movement range, they could still make a group move (in a formation other than a column) to initiate combat.
Andrew
-
Well I can safely say that B worked just fine for me the other day. The B looks dubious on paper but I thought I would give it a go anyway last weekend.
I used a Gallic list (2.11) and used the Northern Italian option with the Ligurian allies and a low aggression. The Vikings invaded and opted to bring a Sea with them (there were 6 longboats my opponent wanted to try out). I had selected my rear edge as side #5 and by good fortune I got the 800 pace boundary onto my rear edge. I then placed it parallel to the sea and touching my rear edge, with a 4 element width gap away from the sea. This proved to be very useful defensively given I had my Ligurians AxS standing behind the wall, which encouraged the BdF on the longboats to disembark further up the table away from my rear edge. It was very fortunate and worked out very well.
So I guess B isn't as bad as it looks on paper! It was a deterrent for my opponent to disembark his troops elsewhere.
Cheers
Andrew