great show! love DBA and variants. i myself am running a napoleonic campaign, which is called napoleon's last war, and which re-creates the massive invasion of france AFTER the 100 days. yes indeed, 800 thousand allied troops are on their way in, and it is quite the story. most people have not heard much about these battles. yet, there is a whole war after waterloo. whether he wins or loses there, that is just the start! i use dba-ish/house rules, and the battles can be quite large. if interested, please check me out at hoser house rules. look for the postings with the "napoleon's last war" subtitle. keep gaming!
Yes, if you're new to historical gaming I'd start with DBA. It's designed for smaller games and is much simpler. The basic mechanisms are similar to DBMM though, so it's a good stepping stone if you do want a more advanced game. DBMM is about piling on historical detail and being to capture nuances that a simpler game can't. Whether or not that's important to you probably depends on how deep your interest in history is.
I have played both and in my opinion DBMM is a far superior system. I started playing when DBM was first introduced back in the late 80s but became disenchanted with it when DBM v3 was introduced. I came back to DBMM when version 2 was released (version 1 was a disaster) and have been enthusiastically playing DBMM ever since. DBMM v2.1 is my rules of choice. I find it a very deep, engaging and accurate wargaming system for the time period covered. I also find that it is not prone to 'gaming' the rules type play. Its main weakness is that it is complex, it is also far more subtle in effect than it appears on the surface and this takes time to understand. People that play DBMM exactly as they play DBM will find it frustrating because the gamey tactics do not work. Instead if you play it like a real battle you have a far more satisfying gaming experience. Of course, preference for wargaming systems is a very personal opinion thing.
Does the "I", "O", "S" really make much of a difference over DBA3? it seems to add a level of complication but if it goes well, it goes well and if it goes poorly, it goes poorly. I'll admit that it adds an accent but does it really make a significant difference? Iw need more videos to decide this. :-)
In my opinion the difference is major and fundamentally improves the game. DBA3 is fun and a great light hearted game but I find DBMM are far more satisfying, deep and more historically accurate game. In my opinion the complexity is worth it. Another advantage with DBMM is that it is very scalable. It is great at 100 points (about DBA sized battles), 200 points and 400 points so you can play a game that matches the number of figures you have and the time available to play a game. Another factor that combines with the element grading (S, O, I, F, X) is morale equivalence of different elements meaning losing some units is far worse on army morale than others. For example, losing an element of superior heavy knights has the same impact on morale as losing four elements of ordinary horde infantry. Once I became comfortable with DBMM (present version is 2.1) I have never felt the desire to play DBA and would only do so to introduce a new player to the DBx system. The biggest downside is that DBMM is its complexity. It is also deep and subtle in effect, which is not apparent and takes time to understand.
Yes, the I O S designations are absolutely crucial. S troops not only fight better but the also stick around longer because of superior morale. But the differences don’t end there.
Is DBMM as difficult to understand as DBM? I attempted to play DBM back in the early 90s. DBM had a very oblique writing style, Barkerese I've heard being described as its style. It was for me the one huge hurtle that needed to be overcome. I never got past that, went on to other rulesets. Still kinda interested, but I'm not going back to decrypt what the hell the author was writing.
@@EnglishBob256 yeah just finished your vid. Looks like an enjoyable game. Thank you. I am really glad that you guys are doing this. If I had an opponent I'd be breaking out my 15s. I still wonder why the Barker's used such an obtuse writing style. Did they not want people to play this game? Did they realise that they were putting obstacles in the path of understanding this rule set? Guess I'll never know.
Oh come on.. OK, these rules are not everyone's cup of tea, and not mine (too "chess-like"), but this video demonstrated how simple the basics are. The rest, unless you're a tournament wallah, are optional. OK, the rules could be better written, but you must really have a low opinion of "young people" if you think they can't master a system like this - or be savvy enough to search around for another set which suits their gameplay.. .
There's a place for simple skirmish games and other games with more simplified rules but also there are Some people who want a more complex experience. There's a place for both types of games and I don't see a reason why we shouldn't enjoy both of them. What's off-putting young people from miniature wargames are the prices, lack of peers to play with and high entry level. And I don't mean the complex rules but the preparation like painting etc. They have video game that put you right into the action. It's cheaper and ready to use. Me myself I grew up with video game because as a kid I simply couldn't afford the armies neither could my friends so we played video games instead. Wargaming isn't dying. It was never very popular. I'd say we're experiencing a revival of board games and with the cheaper entry point ( 3d printers ) there's a chance of getting young people into the hobby. Hell, Warhammer is more popular than ever before even with the bad price policy from gw. The problem that I have is that, if you live outside of the English speaking world, is hard for us to buy the minis in our countries. Like me, i have Access to gw products and warlord games but buying a 15mm figures here is really hard if not impossible unless you want to pay high shipping fees. Wargaming has a huge potential for young people we just need to promote it better.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Great idea! I must admit that I am waiting for more of these videos. Thank you for your work!
Excellent video, that really does make learning this game much easier. Looking forward to you doing more on this topic.
Fantastic! I really appreciate your effort. Hope to see more. :)
~Fritz
Great video on my favorite table top wargaming system.
Looking forward to the next video! Where did you get the cool measuring sticks?
great show! love DBA and variants. i myself am running a napoleonic campaign, which is called napoleon's last war, and which re-creates the massive invasion of france AFTER the 100 days. yes indeed, 800 thousand allied troops are on their way in, and it is quite the story. most people have not heard much about these battles. yet, there is a whole war after waterloo. whether he wins or loses there, that is just the start! i use dba-ish/house rules, and the battles can be quite large. if interested, please check me out at hoser house rules. look for the postings with the "napoleon's last war" subtitle. keep gaming!
Being brand new to historical, how does DBMM match up against DBA? It's more advanced/detailed, right? Would DBA be better to start with?
Yes, if you're new to historical gaming I'd start with DBA. It's designed for smaller games and is much simpler. The basic mechanisms are similar to DBMM though, so it's a good stepping stone if you do want a more advanced game. DBMM is about piling on historical detail and being to capture nuances that a simpler game can't. Whether or not that's important to you probably depends on how deep your interest in history is.
"They're not 4 guys with their feet nailed to a plank". That made my day. Keep the videos coming. Is DBMM "better" than DBM 3.0?
I have played both and in my opinion DBMM is a far superior system. I started playing when DBM was first introduced back in the late 80s but became disenchanted with it when DBM v3 was introduced. I came back to DBMM when version 2 was released (version 1 was a disaster) and have been enthusiastically playing DBMM ever since. DBMM v2.1 is my rules of choice. I find it a very deep, engaging and accurate wargaming system for the time period covered. I also find that it is not prone to 'gaming' the rules type play. Its main weakness is that it is complex, it is also far more subtle in effect than it appears on the surface and this takes time to understand. People that play DBMM exactly as they play DBM will find it frustrating because the gamey tactics do not work. Instead if you play it like a real battle you have a far more satisfying gaming experience. Of course, preference for wargaming systems is a very personal opinion thing.
When's part two coming out?
I'm really excited for it.
Does the "I", "O", "S" really make much of a difference over DBA3? it seems to add a level of complication but if it goes well, it goes well and if it goes poorly, it goes poorly. I'll admit that it adds an accent but does it really make a significant difference? Iw need more videos to decide this. :-)
In my opinion the difference is major and fundamentally improves the game. DBA3 is fun and a great light hearted game but I find DBMM are far more satisfying, deep and more historically accurate game. In my opinion the complexity is worth it. Another advantage with DBMM is that it is very scalable. It is great at 100 points (about DBA sized battles), 200 points and 400 points so you can play a game that matches the number of figures you have and the time available to play a game. Another factor that combines with the element grading (S, O, I, F, X) is morale equivalence of different elements meaning losing some units is far worse on army morale than others. For example, losing an element of superior heavy knights has the same impact on morale as losing four elements of ordinary horde infantry.
Once I became comfortable with DBMM (present version is 2.1) I have never felt the desire to play DBA and would only do so to introduce a new player to the DBx system. The biggest downside is that DBMM is its complexity. It is also deep and subtle in effect, which is not apparent and takes time to understand.
Yes, the I O S designations are absolutely crucial. S troops not only fight better but the also stick around longer because of superior morale. But the differences don’t end there.
Brilliant!
Is DBMM as difficult to understand as DBM? I attempted to play DBM back in the early 90s. DBM had a very oblique writing style, Barkerese I've heard being described as its style. It was for me the one huge hurtle that needed to be overcome. I never got past that, went on to other rulesets. Still kinda interested, but I'm not going back to decrypt what the hell the author was writing.
Similar style I'm afraid, hence we're trying to help with the videos. IMO DBMM is a vastly better game though, so worth persevering.
@@EnglishBob256 yeah just finished your vid. Looks like an enjoyable game. Thank you. I am really glad that you guys are doing this. If I had an opponent I'd be breaking out my 15s. I still wonder why the Barker's used such an obtuse writing style. Did they not want people to play this game? Did they realise that they were putting obstacles in the path of understanding this rule set? Guess I'll never know.
Larkin Gateway
Romaguera Extensions
Thompson Trail
Donnelly Fall
Verna Harbor
Boyer Station
Brendan Loop
Wunsch Manors
Rau Forks
Prosacco Stream
Farrell Bypass
Kuhn Key
too complicated game. Wargame is dying with these games, because young people will not be attracted by this.
Oh come on.. OK, these rules are not everyone's cup of tea, and not mine (too "chess-like"), but this video demonstrated how simple the basics are. The rest, unless you're a tournament wallah, are optional. OK, the rules could be better written, but you must really have a low opinion of "young people" if you think they can't master a system like this - or be savvy enough to search around for another set which suits their gameplay.. .
There's a place for simple skirmish games and other games with more simplified rules but also there are Some people who want a more complex experience. There's a place for both types of games and I don't see a reason why we shouldn't enjoy both of them.
What's off-putting young people from miniature wargames are the prices, lack of peers to play with and high entry level. And I don't mean the complex rules but the preparation like painting etc. They have video game that put you right into the action. It's cheaper and ready to use.
Me myself I grew up with video game because as a kid I simply couldn't afford the armies neither could my friends so we played video games instead.
Wargaming isn't dying. It was never very popular. I'd say we're experiencing a revival of board games and with the cheaper entry point ( 3d printers ) there's a chance of getting young people into the hobby. Hell, Warhammer is more popular than ever before even with the bad price policy from gw. The problem that I have is that, if you live outside of the English speaking world, is hard for us to buy the minis in our countries. Like me, i have Access to gw products and warlord games but buying a 15mm figures here is really hard if not impossible unless you want to pay high shipping fees.
Wargaming has a huge potential for young people we just need to promote it better.
I’m in my 20s and just discovering wargaming and historicals and this is what I’m drawn to specifically