Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Age of Myths, Gods and Empires => Topic started by: anton ryzbak on July 17, 2022, 09:27:12 PM
-
My group is still waiting for a good replacement for 6th Ed. WRG. We are still actively playing it, it's great to get a ton of minis out and see a table full of them slugging it out. Recently my Nikephorian Byazantines ran into a bunch of Chinese; needless to say it didn't go very well for my tiny elite cavalry force against his teeming masses of crossbow-armed foot.
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4M6NXM0FSBC7nN3tuvloz_MrtiWZBWAu-s0d8b-bi78thpW5A4M9wjHLauJIFySrhQ0EOvz7fHbDXNfFaojEDaQZjrXbil9ucIuQaJso17CXZUWu6a9IAbU0fUyrgtSj259Pu0ABEM9A-IGseBmWir72rezGxWQgl5ga5z-LoHP-THcv6KxVdmgm7Eg/s4032/20220716_201631.jpg)
Next time I get to know in advance which army my buddy gets to use! https://antonswargame.blogspot.com/2022/07/a-surprise-for-anton.html (https://antonswargame.blogspot.com/2022/07/a-surprise-for-anton.html)
-
Great to see 6th back on the table. It was the first set I played not sure I ever mastered than but they gave some unpredictable games. My Early Imperial romans had several loses to a Sarmatian horde. Reluctantly agreed to another game when one Sarmatian cavalry unit failed a morale test and somehow caused 3 units to rout off the table. Nice revenge for the Romans!
-
I played from 4th Edition but the 6-man Legionary Reg B HI HTW/JLS wedges in 6th took a bit of swallowing...
-
Blimey that takes me back. Played tons of 6th when I first started 'proper' gaming. My main two armies were Carthaginian (that was a challenge) and a Han Chinese using the very same Hinchliffe figures that you are using.
-
Really enjoy 6th WRG, still the definitive rule set for me.
Wish I was able to play more often.
Great to see that others feel the same as I do.
-
Blimey this must go back a few years. Wasn't DBA developed as a simple set because of the complexity and problems with WRG rules? You obviously stuck with them.
-
The problem with 6th and earlier editions is that they are basically big skirmish sets. Look at the huge missile ranges. 7th was an attempt to do a big battle set but it was very complex and geared to 15mm figures. DBA and DBM and DBMM are big battle sets, and get good results with much less complexity
-
I vaguely remember reading old articles in the SOA slingshot magazine, and I think Phil just experimented with new concepts and came up with the element ideal beloved by the DBx series. I don't think that 6th edition was complicated especially when compared to 7th. 6th was mainly popular with the 28mm crowd who generally liked 10/12 units representing an army, I can't ever remember seeing DBM played with anything but 15mm and then just the tournament crowd, vaguely remembering the numerous arguments I never had the impression that DBM was better written than 6th, just had a different set of exploits to be abused by the rules lawyers.
-
I vaguely remember reading old articles in the SOA slingshot magazine, and I think Phil just experimented with new concepts and came up with the element ideal beloved by the DBx series. I don't think that 6th edition was complicated especially when compared to 7th. 6th was mainly popular with the 28mm crowd who generally liked 10/12 units representing an army, I can't ever remember seeing DBM played with anything but 15mm and then just the tournament crowd, vaguely remembering the numerous arguments I never had the impression that DBM was better written than 6th, just had a different set of exploits to be abused by the rules lawyers.
I played from WRG rules from 5th Edition and the intricacies put me off competition play until DBM came along and I played competitively (although not particularly successfully) until DBMM came along when I bailed. Never had much of an issue with other players interpretations of the rules in all that time. Play ADLG now which is great for getting toys on the table. My attitude has always been "socialising first" so I may have missed some of the rules-lawyer attitudes
Played Phil in the first iteration of DBM at the SoA Conference before release and everyone seemed quite happy with his ideas. DBA was the revolutionary set IMHO
-
I vaguely remember reading old articles in the SOA slingshot magazine, and I think Phil just experimented with new concepts and came up with the element ideal beloved by the DBx series. I don't think that 6th edition was complicated especially when compared to 7th. 6th was mainly popular with the 28mm crowd who generally liked 10/12 units representing an army, I can't ever remember seeing DBM played with anything but 15mm and then just the tournament crowd, vaguely remembering the numerous arguments I never had the impression that DBM was better written than 6th, just had a different set of exploits to be abused by the rules lawyers.
Since my ancients stuff is all 28mm, that’s what I used for DBM, and I only ever did historical refights and scenarios, for which DBM is very good. I did play in one tournament, but found the whole thing a bit dull, and some of the geometrical tricks used were just annoying. DBMM is better, but it is a complex set of rules; not something you can pick up again quickly if you only play it once or twice a year
-
Steve,
I remember someone at Warfare DBM competition, several years ago telling the bystanders to keep quiet while he was playing his game! No one was sure whether he was joking which of course increased the background noise. But viewing was like so dull, as most of the players were so serious especially as there was a popular sitting in the corner tactic( Castling) to force a draw .This was mid 1990's and I remember there was still a regular 6th edition competition being run , does anyone know if that comp still runs?
-
My Early Imperial romans had several loses to a Sarmatian horde.
Now there's an army that one doesn't see in many rulesets nowadays; a "pure" Sarmatian list. I think Hail Caesar have one? (I can't really comment on LDLG and MeG)
-
a lot of the issues with 6th can be eradicated by the use of grids
great set and yes it had its issues but the rules are quite simple in reality its just they were written in Barkerese!
Am still playing it and although ruleset design has come on since then including reduction of overlylong factor lists, some of the mechanisms are very clever and well thought out. Whoever came up with the idea of opposing dice rolls for combat and shooting as well as the averaging dice concept for regulars was genius...
-
not tried 6th at all, I still have 4th
-
I must admit I didnt try 4th. I was introduced to 6th in the early 80s and then went back to 5th later but not 4th!
-
I must admit I didnt try 4th. I was introduced to 6th in the early 80s and then went back to 5th later but not 4th!
I started on 3rd and went on to 4th
-
I missed this thread originally. I love 6th and still have it, but I have no one to play it with me.
-
Its a lonely furrow and I only play solo these days
-
Wasn't bought and re-packaged as "Warrior"?
-
Wasn't bought and re-packaged as "Warrior"?
That was WRG 7
-
which had some interesting mechanisms in it
-
Well, we are in North Metro Detroit, if anybody is interested in playing and lives nearby I'm sure we could work something out.
I started with 4th but keeping up with the times was important back then so followed the crowd to 5th then 6th. 7th was a "bridge too far" so it was back to 6th. Then in the 80/90s we tried every new set that came out but nothing stuck (aside from DBA which is an interesting game but a different animal altogether), most were unsatisfying. Hail Caesar had a bit of a run but interest in Ancients waned and we played a host of other rules and periods. It is only recently that my friend and I have begun playing 6th again. I almost enjoy building armies almost as much as the playing. I know full well that this is really just a fancy version of chess (imagine if you would Hannibal calling up Rome and saying "Hey, I have 1500 points worth of troops, would you lie me to drop by, Thursday maybe, around noon?) but it IS fun.
-
Nice. I'm a little far but this is very tempting. I don't suppose you guys ever come to the Chicago area gaming cons?
-
Why do I find myself fiddling around with army lists????
-
Because that was half the fun of 6th!!!!
-
I haven't been to a Chicago area con in ages, now that I am retired that might be a possibility
-
Are your armies based correctly for 6th? I have a lot of ancients armies with 60mm frontage bases but don't have the single figures. And things like SHC are not fitting the scheme. One is tempted to do an army correctly based for 6th....
-
the issue with basing for WRG6th is that it is a little 'cramped' compared to later sets ie the DBx series
-
aphillathehun, My armies were built ages ago at the end of 5th early 6th and follow the old basing criteria. SHC are impossible to base that tightly (even when using "true" 25mm like Hinchliffe or Minifigs). We went with a three figure base with the missing model being the first casualty. Modern "28mm" (it kills me how the metric system is abused in wargaming....for Heavens Sake! pick a SCALE please!) pose significant problems basing close-order infantry. I suppose that is one of the penalties for insisting on playing a game system that is many decades old.
-
Indeed. SHC is actually the thing I had in mind. I have three armies that have them and they are 3 on a 60mm frontage which I guess would correspond to 4 SHC figs in 6th scale IIRC.
But I have a few other things. Thinking about this still.
-
SHC and SHI were always the real issue in 6th