Having ( at last ) completed painting armies for Alexandrian Macedonians and Later Achaemenid Persians, I have played my first game of De Bellis Antiquitatis, better known as DBA. I rather enjoyed it, I will admit.
30+ years old - finally getting used! |
The Macedonian army comprised the following, in DBA terminology :
1 x 3 Kn Companions, 1 x 3 Cv Thessalians, 1 x 3 Cv Greek Allied Cavalry, 1 x 2LH Prodromoi
4 x 4 Pk Phalangites, 1 x 4 Ax Hypaspists, 1 x 4 Sp Mercenary Hoplites,
1 x 2 Ps Agrianians, 1 x 2 Ps Archers
Macedonians |
and the Persian force was as follows:
1 x 3Kn Heavy Cavalry, 3 x 3Cv Medium Cavalry, 2 x 2LH Light Cavalry
2 x 4Sp Greek Mercenary Hoplites, 2 x 4Ax 'Kardakes'
1x 4Bw 'Sparabara', 1 x 4Bw Light Archers
and Persians |
I should explain, for anyone who has not used these rules, that the types as described in the rulebook, are as follows :
Kn = 'Knights' - horsemen that charged at first instance without shooting..breaking through and destroying enemy as much by weight and impetus as by their weapons
Cv = 'Cavalry' - the majority of horsemen, primarily armed with javelins, bows or other missile weapons but combining this with sword or lance
LH = 'Light Horse' - who skirmished in dispersed swarms with javelin, bow or crossbow and would not charge unshaken enemy
Sp = 'Spears' - close formation infantry fighting collectively with spears in a rigid shield wall
Pk = 'Pikes' - close formation infantry fighting collectively with pikes or long spears wielded in both hands
Ax = 'Auxilia' - foot able to fight hand-to-hand but emphasising agility and flexibility rather than cohesion
Ps = 'Psiloi' - dispersed skirmishers on foot with javelin, sling, staff sling, bow..
Bw = 'Bows' - foot who fought in formed bodies with bow, longbow or crossbow and relied on dense shooting, light spears, stakes, pavises or shield bearers for survival at close quarters instead of skirmishing or evasion
My apologies if the above is too much information : I hope it gives a hint of the famous 'Barkerese' language used in the rulebook. I did have to re-read a few sentences repeatedly to 'get' the sense of them, but on the whole I found them fine. It's worth mentioning that after the definitions of troop types, basing, terrain etc, the actual 'Battle Rules' section occupies just three pages of the booklet - I can't fault them for simplicity.
initial setup : Macedonians left, Persians right |
You can see the initial game setup above - I used my 3 feet square table (with ground scale 1 inch = 50 paces) , and opted for completely clear terrain to keep things as simple as possible. To decide deployments, I borrowed from Neil Thomas' Ancient and Medieval Wargaming book, which gives suggested battle formations for the respective armies. As a result, the Persians concentrated their heavy and medium cavalry on their right flank, with infantry in the centre and Light Horse covering the left flank. The Macedonians put their Pike Phalanx in the centre, with Hypaspists and then Companions to their right, and the right flank covered by Psiloi and Prodromoi Light Horse - while deploying the Thessalian and Greek Allied cavalry plus Agrianian javelinmen, on their left, hoping to hold off the powerful Persian cavalry.
All set, and away we go - a roll of the dice determined that the Persians moved first, and for Turn One another roll allowed them to move six units (known as 'elements' in the rules) or groups of units. Accordingly the Persian cavalry advanced in a body on their right, similarly the Light Horse on the left, while their foot Archers unit stepped forward, though not yet within shooting range of the enemy. No combat, as yet. In response, the Macedonians were allowed 5 moves - their Pike phalanx, Hypaspists and Hoplites started to rumble forward, while the Promodroi and Psiloi skirmished with the Persian Light Horse on the right, and the Thessalian and Greek Cavalry rather optimisitically charged against superior numbers of Persian horsemen.
In each player's bound, after movement comes ranged shooting by eligible units of both sides. The Persian Archers let fly at the Macedonian phalanx - to no effect. No less than four close combats then ensued - these are decided by pretty simple opposed die rolls, with each element adding modifiers according to its type and that of the opposition, plus some bonuses for rear support and reductions if 'overlapped' on a flank. Highest score wins, loser suffers effects based on their type and their opposition, and things are much worse if the winner's score was double the loser's. Very simple, and quite subtle. the first few dice rolls favoured Macedonia - on their right, one Persian Light Horse units were 'recoiled' ( retire one base depth, facing forward ) and the other rolled so badly ( against only light foot archers ) that it suffered a 'flee' result, turning tail and retreating 600 paces in disgrace. On the other flank, the Greek Allied cavalry rolled a '6' to the Persian Purple Cavalry's '1' - which destroyed the Persian unit. First blood to Alexander!
end of Turn 1 : Persian LH flee in shame
On Turn 2, Persia rolled 3 moves - their foot archers backed away from the Macedonian phalanx, as did the remaining Light Horse on their left - but the Heavy Cavalry saw a chance, and charged at the Greek hoplite unit covering the left of the Macedonian pike block. Meanwhile on their right, their remaining cavalry units tussled with now equal numbers of opponents, having lost their numerical advantage. The Cavalry fight was inconclusive, but the Heavy Cavalry rolled low against the Hoplites, who doubtless raised a cheer as the armoured horsemen were forced to recoil.
Macedonia rolled '6' for moves, alllowing plenty of manoevering, The Phalanx and Hypaspists kept advancing in the centre, while on the left the Agrianians bravely pitched into the cavalry fight. On the right, the Companions, Promodroi and Archers advanced, and finally the Greek hoplites decided to follow-up their advantage by attacking the Persian Heavy Cavalry. The forward movement allowed both Persian 'Bows' units to shoot - the Sparabaras' fire forcing a 'Recoil' for the Hypaspists. In close combat, the dice favoured the Thessalians and Agrianians, and both Persian cavalry also Recoiled - but the Hoplites' optmism was misplaced, losing their combat with the Heavy Cavalry. Checking combat results - 'Spears' losing a combat against 'Knights' are destroyed - that left a nasty gap in the Greek line, threatened by a very nasty unit of heavy cavalry!
Turn 2 : Unequal fights on Greek left..
Turn 3 - Persians rolled '4' for moves. The Heavy Cavalry took full advantage, charging into the rear of the Phalanx ( though the pikeman could simply turn about to face their assailants, if I read the rules correctly). On the left, the 'Red' and 'Blue' cavalry continued fighting against Thessalians and Agrianians, while on the right the Persian Light Horse having re-grouped, came whirling back and skirmished against the Promodroi from front and flank. In the shooting phase the Persian Archers and Sparabara kept up their volleying against the phalanx, but the dice were not with them - no effect. Close combat followed - the Persian right-wing Cavalry did better, initially, forcing the Agrianians to 'Recoil', but the Thessalians 'rolled high' and the Persian Blue Cavalry was destroyed - very bad news, Macedonians gaining the upper hand on that wing. The Greeks continued to do well, the Phalangites shrugging off the Heavy Cavalry attack and forcing it to Recoil, while the Promodroi did the same to one of the Persian Light Horse units. Overall, no joy for Persia!
Turn 3: looking good for Persian LH
..while Heavies hit the Phalanx
Macedonians again rolled '6' for moves - the Dice Gods certainly seemed to favour Alexander. His Pike Phalanx charged the Persian infantry line with all four units, joined by the Hypaspists attacking Sparabara, and Companions crashing into a unit of Kardakes. On the flanks, Psiloi and Promodroi kept up the fight against Persian Light Horse, while Thessalians attacked the sole remaining Persian Medium Cavalry. No shooting, but fighting all along the line, no less than seven close combats.
The main event - Companions, Hypsaspists & Phalanx charge in!
The player who's 'bound' it is gets to choose the order of the combats, which can be quite advantageous if the gods are with you. In this case I simply worked from the Greek right flank to left, with results as follows :
- Promodroi forced Persian LH to Recoil
- Psiloi ( archers ) vs Persian LH - a draw, no effect
- Companions defeated Kardakes - being beaten by 'Kn', the Kardakes were destroyed, and being 'Kn' the Companions advanced one base depth in pursuit - which put them in contact with the Sparabaras flank, and..
- Hypaspists defeated Sparabaras - now 'Bw' defeated and in contact with any mounted enemy are also destroyed, so they went as well!
- Right-hand Phalangites (2 units) were beaten by the Persians' Mercenary Hoplites (who rolled a '6'), so the Pikes 'recoiled'.
- Left-hand Phalangites (2 units ) defeated Persian Archers, who Recoiled
- Thessalians and Greek Allied Cavalry narrowly beat Persian 'Red' Cavalry, who Recoiled.
The Macedonians didn't win every opposed die roll, but only lost a couple, and combat modifiers worked to their advantage. The Companion cavalry were particularly effective, and rolled a '6' - even though their Kardakes opponents also rolled '6', the Companions as 'Kn' got better modifiers than their 'Ax' opponents, and most foot defeated by 'Kn' are destroyed. The resulting pursuit resulted in the destruction of the Sparabara too.
end result; left-centre shattered, Persians defeated
Victory conditions are simple - if you destroy 4 of the enemy's 12 elements, and do not lose as many of your own, that's a win. At the end of Turn 3 the losses were Persians 4, Macedonians 1, so a clear Macedonian win, in some style! We may imagine Alexander at the head of his Companions, running amok among the Persian infantry line, which has been 'pinned' by the advance of the Phalanx. Almost textbook?
That was rather fun - I'll spare you any more detailed analysis, but I thought the rules worked pretty well, giving a simple and quick game that 'felt' mostly right. The dice gods were certainly with Alexander, I felt that if the Persians had rolled better dice they might have given Alexander a much harder time, especially with that powerful right wing of cavalry. Which is a good enough reason to give the game another spin...
I'd better leave it at that for now, we are fast approaching the table-top Xmas Truce and 'tis the season of over-eating.. Some more thoughts on DBA next time, perhaps.
Meanwhile, I'd like to wish everyone who reads this a very Merry Xmas and a Happy gaming New Year! Thanks for reading, and for all your brilliant friendly, supportive and informative comments over the past year - hard to believe this is the fourth year of this blog. Have a great break, if you are having one, and keep well, everyone.
A good start, worth the painting and preparation. Well done to both armies but the poor Persians need a lucky/cleverer commander to stand up to Alexander.esp in an open field.
ReplyDeleteAncients were my real intro to the hobby in the 70's with WRG 3rd Ed Ancients and Airfix.
I used to play a fair amount of DBA in the 90's, then some of the later versions and various new rules.but the time of the ancients has passed for me. (Apart from playing in other people's games and reading battle reports!)
Thanks Ross, indeed a good start and I will persevere with ancients, I sort of missed out on them back in the day! DBA is a nice introduction. We all 'move on' with our interests; glad you enjoyed my report anyway, and a very Merry Xmas to you!
DeleteGlad the game went well and Merry Christmas to you and yours.
ReplyDeleteI look forward to reading more of your adventures in the coming year.
Alan Tradgardland
Thanks Alan, and a very Happy Xmas and New Year to you!
DeleteA fine end of year encounter, with new armies, DBA and Neil Thomas (I do like that book) all coming together nicely.
ReplyDeleteThere was a bloke, I think from the Ancients Society, who used to attend the Phalanx wargame show each year with a selection of 8 armies for DBA and the punter could choose an army and play through a game with him - hugely enjoyable and I saw that as always the loser :-).
I have never really had a problem with what is commonly described as Barkerese, but I think that might be because I grew up with WRG rules, I quite like his descriptives.
Happy Christmas and I hope to see your toys in the New Year :-)
Thanks Norm, glad you enjoyed that. I realised I had not run a game in months, needed to do one before the end of the year.
DeleteDBA certainly has the advantage of being quick and simple, and I thought it worked well - shame it took me 30 years to get to! I can understand the thinking behind 'Barkerese', it's carefully written for exactness - and of course he knows his stuff very well. Just don't get into an argument, I suspect!
I am certainly going to give Neil Thomas' Ancients rules a try, too.
Thanks for all your great comments and inspiration, have a very Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year!
David,
ReplyDeleteI was an "ancients" player in my teens through to mid twenties , playing WRG. I got disillusioned with the competitive type play and after a series of particularly annoying unhistorical campaign games (against a classics student who should have known better), I abandoned the period and literally gave away my armies.
A chance discovery of DBA v1 at a trade show resurrected my interest and I built up several 15mm armies. I seem to have accumulated the various editions (V1.1, V1.2, 2.1, 2.2) up to the most recent, V3. They have got progressively more wordy and obsessed with loopholes. I don't recall my last DBA game but it must have been nearly 10-20 years ago. I did like the simplicity, but there's always the urge for bigger and bigger armies....
I'm now more taken with the idea of Commands & Colors Ancients with figures....
Neil
Neil, I am with you! Playing CCA with figures is a great way to go.
DeleteA friend of mine is Getting Dawn of Battle for Christmas which I believe is like CCA … plus! I know the Bill Banks design is in there somewhere, so it will be interesting to see that on the table.
DeleteThanks Neil, that's an interesting 'personal journey' through the period, I am not sure if the complicated rules were a response to over-competitive rules-lawyering, or vice versa..
DeleteI entirely agree, DBA is clearly a good game but the 'armies' look a bit small.. I think I need more figures! And 'CCA' with figures is a pretty good idea..
A very Merry Xmas to you!
Glad to see that you managed to get a game in, which is of course good. I think I had a copy of DBA 2.2 and there was an online pdf you could download, that explained what was intended with the 'Barkerese' text. However it was longer than the rulebook IIRC! I could never quite get my head around it all, so quite happily sold it on years ago.
ReplyDeleteMerry Xmas and a Happy New Year to you and yours too!
Thanks Steve, that's a good story - clearly Mr Barker worked hard to be concise, others needed much more text to explain the same thing.. I found DBA v.1 pretty straightforward to understand, I think - assuming I got it right, of course! I think it has been a good 'entry' into the period, especially as the numbers of figures required are pretty small. But I suspect I will move on - and get more troops!
DeleteMerry Xmas to you too!
As you know I always use my own version of DBX rules - I like them, although I like to have bows able to fire for a distance. Never worried about Barkinese, partly because I would just send him a letter and ask if I had a query! He usually replied by sending you letter back with his answer next to the question.
ReplyDeleteThanks Rob, you are clearly a fan of the system. I admit I too was slightly confused at first by the inability of Psiloi, Light Horse etc to use 'ranged' shooting even if bow-armed. But I guess they are in effect just doing skirmishing from fairly close range, but avoiding actual 'close combat'/melee.
DeleteThat's really interesting about Phil Barker, good for him!
David, great to see your newly-raised Persians getting straight into battle. I only played DBA a few times many, many years ago so I cannot contribute much on the merits Barkerese or the play of the game. I do recall finding the booklet hard deciphering.
ReplyDeleteMerry Christmas and Happy New Year to you! Hopefully I will see you back at the gaming table in the New Year.
Thanks Jon, I see from above that you prefer 'CCA' with figures, and I can well understand that.
DeleteA very Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to you too, and I look forward to joining your game(s) in 2024!
Glad that worked out well David. Thanks for the explanation of the different troop types. Apart from 3 or 4 Macedonian/Greek types, even the non-Barker names are unknown to me.
ReplyDeleteAll the best.
Chris/Nundanket
Thanks Chris, glad that was useful. I do suspect that many of my readership already know all that, having 'done' DBA many years ago! But I am just catching up..
DeleteEnjoyed the report David. Not everyone's taste, but I think that DBA (I only have 1st edition) fulfills a role for the quick and simple game that operates on the troop types function... despite the "barkerese".
ReplyDeleteThanks Richard, if nothing else it has been a good 'way in' to the Ancients period, and it as encouraged me to go further - now I want a 'proper' phalanx, i.e bigger!
DeleteTop looking battle David. Love your figures and painting.
ReplyDeleteI especially loved the photo of the two lines clashing. Super. I have seen other games of DBA descend into a series of one on one or one on a few combats which does not have a good look, for mine.
Regards, James
Thanks James, glad you liked this. I think I may have been lucky that the Greeks rolled '6' for numbers of units moving on that last turn, allowing the line to charge all together. I can see that the 'individual combat' tendency doesn't look so good - I think Command and Colours has the same tendency. Allowing some sort of 'group move' for a whole line of units would seem a good rule..
Delete