DBMM is without doubt the best set of ancients rules ever written, but it's now thirteen years since version two was published, and seven since the minor update that was version 2.1. With the experience of hundreds of games under our belts we can see ways that the game can be further improved. Since it's extremely unlikely that the author will make any further revisions, then it's up to the community to push forward with new ideas, or watch the game wither and die. Hence this post to start putting some ideas out there.
I started thinking about what changes I'd like to see in a putative version 3 a few years ago, and even tried a few test games. Coming back to it recently, I started thinking about changes again, revisited my earlier notes, made some simplifications, added some new ideas, and got Rolus Asixus Prope Fraxinum to spend Boxing Day afternoon playing a couple of test games with me.
Any new version of the rules should be easier to understand; reduce the learning curve for new players; speed up play; fix oddities in the rules; and of course improve it as a simulation. There are dozens of worthy potential changes in the last two categories, but initially I wanted to concentrate on speeding play and making things easier for new players. So most of the changes we tried were based around outflanking, since my observation has been that new players don't understand how to protect their flanks, and that experienced players spend a lot game time worrying about it. You can look at the full text of the changes here https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ADO8hvhp9lWToO4reD5vw649ZX4MTEwe/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=100864018080607658427&rtpof=true&sd=true, but the summary is.
- Elements must start at least partly behind the front edge of enemy they wish to contact on the flank. This is more in line with other rule sets, makes it easier to approach enemy without having to throw out flank protection, and means that you can contact a longer line without immediately being outflanked.
- An element supporting another via corner to corner overlap must recoil if the supported element recoils or is destroyed. This rule works in conjunction with the above to allow troops who must follow up to charge a slighting longer line without being hard flanked immediately.
- If an element contacts the flank of two or more enemies while the front one is in combat, it slides down to contact the one behind instead. This allows a deeper formation to have some flank protection without the need to throw out flank protection elements.
- Psiloi generally only count as overlap against light troops, and only cause light troops to be destroyed if in contact with their flank when they recoil. Various ifs and buts around this in the full document, but I find that psiloi can have an outsized effect on the clash between heavy troops for such a cheap troop type.
- It's allowable to conform with the flank edge of a contacted enemy while in a TZ unless the element exerting the TZ will be partially behind the flank of the conforming element. Being able to protect a flank from the opposite side of an element just seems daft.
- When an irregular general or ally rolls a one for pips, the C in C receives a "command focus" token. In a subsequent bound he may exchange the token and the use of his usual free pip, for the chance or re-rolling the pip dice of a nominated command. The choice has to made before the pip dice are rolled. This provides a way to mitigate the chance of irregular commands being sidelined by a string of poor pip rolls, and gives the player a little something to ease the frustration of a poor roll.
- Light horse ordinary are regraded as as LHX and LHF are regraded as LHO. The combat and support rules that previously applied to LHF now apply to LHO and those that applied to LHO apply to LHX. This change makes non superior horse archers a bit more durable in combat, and particularly against shooting, while removing the anomaly that LHF move faster than identically equipped LHS. This idea I stole from a discussion on the mailing list, but forget who suggested it originally.
The amendments we tested will be of most benefit to clumsy irregular armies, so we chose to test clumsy impetuous Sarmatians versus well drilled Early Imperial Romans. We played two 240pt games, with some scattered around terrain pieces. This isn't going to be a battle report, but instead I want to illustrate some points in the battle where the amendments applied and what effect they had.
Approaching Enemy Light Horse
Here the two auxillia are able to march straight towards the Sarmatian forces in a very direct play style. Normally this would be suicidal, and they'd have to expand, then wheel carefully to make sure no enemy can attack their flanks, using at least one, and perhaps two extra turns to arrive.
Command Focus
In the first turn the Sarmatian right flank command only rolled a one for pips. Their C in C therefore received a command focus token. In the second turn he wanted to ensure this command got moving, so used his command focus token on it. It rolled poorly again, but due to the command focus could re-roll, this time scoring a four and being able to react to the fast advance of the Romans
 |
Close Approach
Here the Sarmatians are able to close quickly with the Romans, with two elements peeling off to attack and the others lining up a charge next turn. Normally this again would have been a dangerous move with the Romans getting hard flanks next turn, so the Sarmatian player would most likely have had to hold his position out of range until having enough pips to throw out flank guards. Players of other rule sets would also likely be surprised that the above move is dangerous under the current DBMM rules
Overlap Pushed Back
Light Horse
Here the Sarmatian horse archers are in combat with the Roman Auxiliaries. In the Roman turn, the auxiliaries are on factor 2 + 6 on the dice making 8 total. The Sarmatians are 3 + 2 on the dice making 5. If they were classed as fast, they'd go down to 4 and thus be doubled and spent. Changing their grade to ordinary keeps them in the fight a bit longer.
Psiloi Overlapping and Flanking
The Sarmatian knights have blown through the legion. The Roman general makes a desperate counter attack, but the only troops he has to help him are a couple of psiloi. Under the normal rules of course, the psiloi would be as effective as supports as legionaries or KnS. However, in the amended rules their effectiveness is more as you'd expect for some light armed skirmishers in a heavy cavalry fight. The psiloi in overlap towards the top of the picture don't affect the combat at all, while the ones that have moved into a flanking position on the other flank give the Sarmatian knight a -1 tactical factor, but will not cause it to be destroyed if it loses. The knight is still at factor 2F vs 4, hardly a good position, but dices well in enough to survive and recoil as shown in the bottom picture .The flanking psiloi slides along to maintain contact when the general follows up.
More Examples from Game 2
The Romans got ridden down pretty quickly in the first game, so we swapped armies and played another. Here are some more examples from the early part of that game.
In the second picture the Romans are able to quickly approach the pip starved Sarmatians without fear of being hard flanked.
Attacking a Column
This amended rule is a little complicated, so there are few pictures to explain it. Initially a two deep column of Sarmatian knights has charged into some Roman legionaries next to the green die, but lost the combat and is forced to recoil. It is now the Roman turn, and they already have an element in position to contact the columns flank.
What happens next depends on the order that the Roman player moves his elements. If he moves the flanking element into contact first, then it conforms to the front element's corner, then the elements in front move into contact, everything stays the same as the current rules, and the leading knight is hard flanked.
If however, the legions in front move into contact, then the new rule allowing columns to defend their flank comes into effect. When the legion moves into flank contact, it contacts both Sarmatian elements, but since the first one is now in combat, the legion must slide down to contact the second one which turns to face it. The first element is still somewhat inconvenienced from a having no recoil.
Overlapping Psiloi
Here the two legions advance against a line of four psiloi. They are able to do so without fear of being flanked next turn. Normally of course under the amended rules overlapping psiloi wouldn't count in the combat, but since the legions are also fighting skirmishers to their front, the overlaps do count. The rationale being that if two heavy forces are clashing, then there is little opportunity for the psiloi to affect things (unless they can right round the flank and start chucking things into the enemy rear ranks), but if the combat is already a ranged skirmish, they can effectively contribute.
Aligning with a Flank
Here the column of Sarmatian knights in the center of the picture has again bounced off the legion. The Romans want to counter attack and use their legionary element to the right of the Sarmatians to charge into their flank. However, another Sarmatian element has arrived on the other side of the column facing it. Under the current rules, the flanking Roman would need to align with its TZ and be unable to legally contact either of the two intervening Sarmatian elements. The amended rule removes this anomaly by allowing the Roman to slide to conform while in the TZ, since the element exerting the TZ won't be behind their flank.
Closing Thoughts
Overall the changes worked pretty well we thought. The game played quickly, less time was spent worrying about flanks, and I don't think a single one element flank guard was used by either of us. The Sarmatians benefited most, feeling powerful surging forwards, and not having to worry about their flanks getting mugged before even getting into contact. However, there were several instances where the Romans were able to advance more directly.
So the Sarmatians rode over the Romans in both games. Did it make them too good ?. Maybe, but too early to say. We didn't use the proper terrain system, and the Romans played in a pretty gung-ho style. In a more competitive game they'd like have been more defensive and used the terrain better. Also 240 AP with three generals is a pretty sweet spot for the Sarmatians command wise. At 400 AP they'll have far more troops to command with the same number of PIPs.
It was the first time testing the Command Focus system. We only used it three times over the two games (seems we rolled far less ones than statistically expected), and only once did it make a significant difference. Needs further testing, but does add an extra interesting decision point.
