B is for Boundary

[william]

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

[Tim Child]

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

[andrew]

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.

[william]

  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.

Thomas used some lovely log sections for fixed obsticles in Munster this year if there is any pictures going around.

  Sorry I forget to shut up sometimes

William

[Doug M.]

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.

[Tim Child]

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  )  ), 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  )  ) 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

[william]

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

[andrew]

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.

[Barritus]

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.

[andrew]

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

[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