Old DBM armies and new DBMM armies

[frondpetalson]

where does it say that single-base wedge bases are deeper?
the text, as I read it, doesnt seem to say that at all ...

also:
where can I find the rules pertaining to wedges & their flanks ...

Some or all of the Alexandrian Kn (F) are now wedges on a deeper base.

[Barritus]

where does it say that single-base wedge bases are deeper? the text, as I read it, doesnt seem to say that at all ...

See Element basing on page 13: "Depth of element base if:...Elephants, Expendables, all Chariots, Knights in wedge unless double-based..."

also: where can I find the rules pertaining to wedges & their flanks ...

Overlaps on page 35: "Other than when STORMING FORTIFICATIONS...overlaps are ignored if:...The overlapped element is Knights based in a required wedge, unless (F) fighting Light Horse."

So you can't be overlapped, but you *do* take a -1 if an enemy element is in front edge contact with your flank.

Other things to note about Single Based Wedges of Knights are:

- They don't get quick kills against Cavalry, unlike other Knights (page 38); and

- They're impetuous if they're Regular Kn (F), and therefore subject to spontaneous advance unless moved or halted (page 30).

They're generally considered to still be good value.

[frondpetalson]

thanks Barritus 

ah for the days that TGM discovers section numbering, indexing and (heavens forfend) CROSS-REFERENCING ... but thats all a bit too cyberspacey for we old-school kriegspielers isnt it ...
what an outrageous suggestion - next we'll be wanting the pages STAPLED together, like some kind of REAL book! ... HAH! ... to hell with these new fangled notions! 
Rules should be utterred in obscure koine hexameter and only recorded in goats blood onto the walls of remote temple-BUA's ! 

hmmm... so the Alexandrian Imperial (#2.15) list looks to be a real challenge to play now

its ENTIRE 'punch' factor is now (oddly) impetuous Reg Kn(F) ... and as Kn(F) they cop some serious grading disadvantages, and some of their QK's and are bizarely impetuous ...

meaning that one is almost certainly REQUIRED to keep their C-in-C with them (whilst most generals should avoid contacts), and to spend the AP's to have Alex as 'brilliant' AND to keep the wedges hidden behind that Pike Wall .... and then one must PRAY that there's an opportunity for them to make any kind of impact against the walls of Wb, Bw(S) & triple-armed Bd everyone else will be running! ... and no hope of flank marching them of course ...

list#2.15 has LOST its wonderful Bw(S) indians (downgraded to (o)) and the Greek Merc Hoplites arent worth having (Sp? hah!) ... so its a not-so-huge wall of (o) pike (with just the one 4-block of Pk(S) hypaspists) hinged with quite small numbers of rather ordinary light foot ... and a "half-a-punch" crowd of expensive & fragile Kn(F) ....
[well, there's also those scant few Macca Elephants (and maybe some indians if you run 'em), and options of a couple of Art's and a trikonter or two for the mesh-stocking brigade]

*sigh*

perhaps i should dust off my Sassanids and see what the Kn(X) can do ...

_______________________________________________________________________

where does it say that single-base wedge bases are deeper? the text, as I read it, doesnt seem to say that at all ...

See Element basing on page 13: "Depth of element base if:...Elephants, Expendables, all Chariots, Knights in wedge unless double-based..."

also: where can I find the rules pertaining to wedges & their flanks ...

Overlaps on page 35: "Other than when STORMING FORTIFICATIONS...overlaps are ignored if:...The overlapped element is Knights based in a required wedge, unless (F) fighting Light Horse."

So you can't be overlapped, but you *do* take a -1 if an enemy element is in front edge contact with your flank.

Other things to note about Single Based Wedges of Knights are:

- They don't get quick kills against Cavalry, unlike other Knights (page 38); and

- They're impetuous if they're Regular Kn (F), and therefore subject to spontaneous advance unless moved or halted (page 30).

They're generally considered to still be good value.

[Aloysius the Gaul]

The whole idea is that Alex will HAVE to be Brilliant, so you will have one of the most manouvreable hammers in town - if you're up to using it.

Alex did take some terrible risks, and Phil believes that most "ordinary" gamers are probably not up to the task of using him and his companions properly.

That said it certainly does look like hammers with eggshells!!

[frondpetalson]

it certainly does look like hammers with eggshells!!

indeed it does - indeed it does  ... eggshell-armour, fairy-floss spears and merry-go-round horses ...

unlike the EIR's who seem to enjoying YET ANOTHER rennaissance, PB has been steadily grinding Alex.Imp into the dirt ever since their glory days under WRG.5th.Ed

so ... when do we get a HOTT version of DBMM (DBFF?) ... perhaps my Longbeard Dwarven Bd(s) (under Durin III) will last a tad longer under these "rules"

[Aloysius the Gaul]

Where have you been playing??

Macedonians have been bovine excrement forever in WRG rules - a sentimental favourite that is only any good in hte hands of the very best players.  All that's happened to them now is that those very best players have been given a tool to make them even better.

EIR renaissance?  when/what/where??  When was the last time EIR had a renaissance?  when were they ever more than another sentimental favourite??

[Hammy]

All the Punic War armies are in book 2.  I'm not aware of any major changes except gauls under Hannibal will be Bd(I) instead of Wb.

Apart from Early Carthaginian for a starter which is in book 1. There are probably some more Punic armies in book 1.

[Aloysius the Gaul]

Early Carthaginian is not a Punic War army tho - it ends at 275BC IIRC, and the 1st Punic War starts in 255 BC