DBMM 100 Generals' cost

[Orcoteuthis]

The "extra" cost of a DBMM 100 general is halved - does this mean only the cost of Brilliance/Inertia (explicitly mentioned), or also the basic general cost above the base element cost? Would, frex, a Reg Kn (S) general cost 35 or 25AP (assuming him to be neither Brilliant nor Inert).

[william]

  Don't take this as concrete ( everyone else seems to be busy ), it seems to be as in your example, regular general cost's 10ap, irregular 5ap in addition to the cost of the element type. This is definitly the way it is done in DBMM 200.

William

[toby]

That is the way that we have always done it as well. Reg +10, Irr +5, Brilliant +12, Inert -37. Although in DBMM 100, there is an argument for costing Irr and Reg generals exactly the same, since there is no difference.

[Orcoteuthis]

Thanks guys. 

[Valentinian Victor]

I have heard that you cannot use the Brilliant or Inert option in DBMM 100 games?

[DaveMather]

I suspect you are confusing the use of stratagems in DBMM100 with brilliant and inert generals

Brilliant and inert are permitted in DBMM100 -

Stratagems are not permitted in one variant of DBMM100 (there are 2 in the rules)

Milton Keynes Wargames club (UK) run a DBMM100 comp throughout the year which is good fun - check out the details over on http://mkws.org.uk/index.php?id=59

The results of last year http://mkws.org.uk/index.php?id=71 and this year http://mkws.org.uk/index.php?id=93 so far

Its successful enough that people travel to Milton Keynes (which is rare in itself ) from as far flung places as Birmingham and the wilds of Kent

One ammendment from the rules (which are stated as guidelines anyway) is that you dont pay for the general (other than his element cost and at reduced value his brilliant or inertness if appropriate)

Reason being as Toby has pointed out there is no advantage in being a Regular general so why pay 5 AP more  - if anyone can work out an advantage please shout.

We currently have a couple of "new" players playing DBMM100 down our club at the moment as that is a good introduction to the game - they certainly seem to be enjoying it anyway.

Kind Regards


David Mather
 

[mekkis]

I wonder if it was intentional to make a DBMM 100 army disheartened after it has lost a quarter, as opposed to more than a quarter, of its original ME?

Dave.

[Platypus]

I doubt it is intentional.

You have to remember that these are more like guidelines than actual rules.....

You can see that the 100AP game was supposed to look more like DBA (square boards, no weather, etc). I've run 2 100 AP DBM tournaments (years ago, based on Dave Brown's ideas), and they used 3'x4' boards, weather, etc. Had this odd deployment mechanism where you throwed 2D6 and deployed that number of elements, opponent did the same, repeat until deployed.

Moved up to 200AP (using the Irish rules) for subsequent tournaments because the 100 and 200 AP games seemed to take the same amount of time! At least in DBM it did.

The 200 AP game is pretty much based on the Irish DBM200 rules (which IIRC was based on an American idea), The 100 AP game is straight Phil. I'd be interested in how people are finding the 100 AP game. For DBM it didn't really work, but DBMM might be different.

G^is,
JohnG