I have to say at the outset that although I play to win on the table top I am a strong advocate for anti-competitive and anti-competition styles of gaming (see the other blogs). So it was with somewhat jaundiced eyes that I played my first game of ADLG last night and it bought back all of the good and bad memories of the DBX sets of rules.
The recently produced English version (2015?) is actually version three of the rules and has most of the bugs ironed out. We found the rules are very tightly written and with the reasonable index we were able to answer most rules queries reasonably quickly.
They are a set of rules that are ideal for competitions and the more competitive style of gamer as evidenced by the “explosion” of national and international rankings and competitions in only a few short years. It is also interesting to note that the good players from DBM days are at the top of the rankings again, which says more about the style of game than the players.
Despite this the gaming groups I have attended over the years have all played DBX for years in a non-competitive and friendly manner and were able to divorce this normal style of play and put on our “competition face” when in that environment. If you can say using Eskimos as a Forest Indian army competitive!!!
The pre-game set up is very similar to DBM, and is open to all of the vagaries of that system. My bias is that I prefer pre-set realistic tables rather than a random generated, player tweeked, competition style set-up process. So there – I said it!!
Map drawing is again introduced which seems irrelevant seeing that you are required to have at least one command in each sector and very little advantage can be gained because of this. Deployment in depth has to be done within a command and not by having a reserve command behind another. The result is that a number of legitimate tactics like fighting on a narrower front to utilise interior lines and hit a hinge point are denied.
The Game itself:
With years of DBM experience I was able to pick up most of the concepts very quickly.
Some observations:
- The game is an element based system with an element equaling a unit;
- The game relies on both armies having the same base widths;
- Movement mechanics are similar to DBM;
- the familiar PIP system exists in a modified form;
- Units are single DBX sized bases of Cavalry or Light Infantry with other Foot being in 2 or 3 ranks;
- Moves are in UD (unit distance) which equates to Base Width like DBMM;
- Shooting is more effective because of the additional ranges;
- There is no difference between regular and irregular units;
- You must have three generals.
- The rules handle mixed units better than most other systems I have used.
I had a thorough look at the army lists for those armies that I use all the time and also those that I have a strong historical knowledge of.
Most were handled well but there is still the perpetuation of the LMI myth.
I found the limits on some troop types restrictive but workable, especially seeing you are trying to represent an army with 20 to 30 elements.
The Peltast style units seems to be done well treating them as javelin men or light infantry javelin men.
Things I don’t like:
It is still a game of millimetres and while the ability to “slide” overcomes many DBX issues lining up for combat is still an issue. I have to say the Dan Mersey systems handle this in a far superior manner.
The pre-game set-up is arbitrary, open to competition rorting and a waste of time – almost a game within a game.
I still had the capacity to “react” to enemy plans too easily and the dreaded 6 – 1 dice roll is still there.
For a more comprehensive review see:
http://www.madaxeman.com/L_Art_de_la_Guerre_page.ph
Andrew and David S played the game with a Ghaznavid and Early Archaemenid Persian army respectively. The Persian wings consisted of Persian cavalry and Skythian light cavalry on the right, Iranian infantry and Immortals in the centre, and a Greek hoplite ally on the left. The “Ghazis” had a cavalry right, an infantry and elephant centre, and a spear armed infantry left.
The armies were causing gradual attrition on each other until one devastating turn in which the Persians destroyed a number of units. The end game had that particular DBX feel where you were trying to pick off vulnerable elements to achieve victory.
Will I use them again, probably as other group members like them and it will give me a chance to dust off armies I haven’t used for a while. Will they become my major rule set for ancient war gaming? Definitely not.