Author Topic: Wintercon - Canberra: 450-con - 21-22 July  (Read 1119 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Barritus

  • Guest
Wintercon - Canberra: 450-con - 21-22 July
« on: June 03, 2018, 03:04:57 PM »
Entries through: https://www.cgs.asn.au/Wintercon/tournaments/

Armies to consist of 450AP (including troops and stratagems).

Four rounds of 3 hours 30 minutes (+/- 15 minutes).

Armies permitted are those within the date range 450BC to 450AD.

Armies will be available for loan if needed – please ask.

Please send your list to peter DOT barritus AT yahoo DOT com DOT au by Sunday 15 July.

Late lists will be available for viewing.

If you have any questions please email me or post here.

Cheers

Peter

Barritus

  • Guest
Re: Wintercon - Canberra: 450-con - 21-22 July
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2018, 03:38:05 PM »
Disappointingly, there were only four entrants, and one of them could only play on the Sunday. So I restructured the comp into a three-game round-robin, with one game played on the Saturday and two on the Sunday so that the Sunday-only player got two games. I substituted on the Saturday so that everyone else got their full three games.

Results

Karl Hamlyn (Late Imperial Roman (East)): 48
Anton Verster (Samnite): 41
Dave Quilty (Alexandrian Macedonian): 33
{Nick Rodgers (Later Hoplite Greek (Thessalian)): 28 (25 + 3)
{Peter Barrett (Galatian)

The games were played with excellent spirit, and there were few rules problems to deal with (of which more below).

Unfortunately, despite my conviction that 450AP games could be played to a conclusion in 3 ½ hours, this turned out not to be the case. Of the six games played, only one game was finished – the game I played: Karl defeated me 22-3, but all the other games ended unfinished with scores of 14-11 or 13-12.

So why was my conviction so wrong? In the months preceding the event I played several games at 450AP and most of them reached a conclusion. Perhaps what was significant was that all the practice games which reached a conclusion involved large numbers of irregular troops – Irr Kn (F), Irr LH (S) or Irr Wb (S/O). By comparison, the four main armies in the comp were mostly regular.

But there were a couple of other factors. Time of day was an issue in one game, as the start time of the game was only an hour before sunset, and things straggled on through dusk and into the night before time was called. Also, none of the armies featured game-breaking troops – there were no elephants, no artillery, no irregular knights and no scythed chariots, and only the Romans featured some Wb (O).

I also think, with no disrespect to the players, that all of them played more cautiously than I do. I was the only player to attempt a flank march (and it didn’t arrive). It would have been interesting to see how much it would have shaken things up if someone had brought a Celtic or Germanic army with large numbers of Kn and/or Wb – I suspect the threat alone would have forced players into a more aggressive style of play.

Having said that, Karl made good use of the Change Deployment stratagem in at least two games (having Julian as a Brilliant General).

There were only a couple of rules issues that I remember.

1.       When exactly do you pay an extra PIP for making a 180 turn with a group? Is it always, or is it only if the group moves as well as turning? (I certainly find the rule about PIP costs for Difficult Evolutions hard to follow, particular under pressure of time.)

2.       Is there anything phalanx-based armies can do to force combat against opponents who only place a line of skirmishers in front of the phalanx, and move/deploy their heavy infantry elsewhere?

3.       It frustrated Dave (and I can understand this) that his Pk (O) can be reclassified as Ax (O), but only if he designates them so for the whole competition, whereas eligible Kn (and other troops) can dismount for a PIP payment. Particularly given that this ability to reclassify is granted to the quintessential DBMM Brilliant General, yet he can't use a Brilliant Stroke or stratagem to make his pikemen put down their pikes and pick up javelins...

But the glaring factor which needs to be considered was the lack of interest in the competition. By contrast, another 15mm ancients competition that weekend (Mortem et Gloriam) managed to attract 12 players, including at least four players for whom the comp represented their first games with the rules.

Given the drop in postings to the DBMM email list, the nearly comatose state of this forum, and the rumour that a lot of DBMM players in England are sliding over to MeG, it’s hard to shake the feeling that this will be the last posting to this forum. It’s almost certain to be my last posting to this forum – I’ve given these rules ten years of loyalty, but the players around Australia are voting with their dice, and they’re not rolling for DBMM. It increasingly looks like players are looking for simple rules which are easily updated when problems are demonstrated.

To those of you playing DBMM in viable wargaming communities, I wish you the best, but here in Australia it looks increasingly like DBMM can’t attract a viable playing population.

LawrenceG1

  • Guest
Re: Wintercon - Canberra: 450-con - 21-22 July
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2018, 10:51:01 PM »
The "Northern Doubles League" here plays 450 AP (both doubles and singles can play). They get completed games, which you can see from the rankings site. In a recent one there was only one draw.
http://partridges.org.uk/rankings/index.php/competition/matches/347

You always pay for a difficult evolution when turning 180 with a group.

I'm not aware of any UK DBMM players switching to MeG. A few have switched to ADLG.  MM is a very good game, but it is complicated, difficult to learn and the rules are hard work to read, which does not help recruit new players. One of the clubs here has managed it, though.

This forum has always been quiet and I think a lot of members might have given up on it when it was off the internet due to a hack or crash a few years ago and haven't returned to the new site.

For the Macedonian pike/auxilia option, complain to Mr Barker. I will point out, however, that there are numerous troops that can be one kind or another (e.g. LIR Gothic foot can be AxS or WbO and many armies have "Archers Irr Bw(I) or Irr Ps(O)") so this could be a can of worms.   Back in the days of DBM we used to have some "2-list" competitions where you brought two lists for the same army and chose which one to use when you knew who your opponent was. Coincidentally I was thinking about this a few days ago and it seems to me the format would work well for DBMM as it creates more uncertainty about stratagems after the first round.

Pikes against skirmishers - Barker's advice years ago was to get some skirmishers of your own. Most pike lists can get quite a few Ps S and O as well as LH. If not, pike S and O will eventually (so play faster) spend skirmishers  and if the enemy's heavy troops have gone elsewhere you can send forward one rank of pike and redeploy the others. Easier said than done, of course.