Totally visual DBA battle report

[Justin Swanton]

I'm experimenting with different formats for future battle reports for Slingshot. Here is a DBA game played at the Durban club: Marian Roman vs Marian Roman. I've deliberately left out a text commentary to see if the visuals are clear enough (a commentary would of course be included in a Slingshot article). Do you think it needs arrows? Input welcome.

[Patrick Waterson]

It works for me without arrows.

Interesting to see how Blue fatally compromised himself on the very first turn (bound) only to be rescued by his opponent trying to do too many things at once (on bound 3) with too few PIPs.

[Erpingham]

I'm not a current DBA player, but understand the basics, so I'm probably not the target audience.  But I'm not sure who is.  Is it absolute beginners and the commentary will explain why each element moved as it did and what advantage that gave in the rules?  Or will the commentary be full of humour and warmth and will explain to real committed competition players how the players tactics and game craft unfolded?  Other than that, I'm unclear why anyone would need to know the movements of the elements and even the dice scores of the players.  There are also 20 maps there.  Imagine it as a whole piece, with text, perhaps, per bound.  Or per Red/Blue sub-bound.  Will it be cohesive as an article, or too broken up?

[Justin Swanton]

The idea is to give a complete game so the readers can see all the nuances of gameplay and judge for themselves - as Patrick did - where the players went right or wrong. The commentary would be a mix of how the rules work and how the players make the rules work for them (using ZOCs for example), and some fun stuff on the players' plans, hopes and shattered dreams (I was red BTW).

[Erpingham]

I think a lot will depend on the quality of the narrative.  I'm interested to see it as a one-off idea of explaining a rule set in detail, with perhaps other sets, like ADLG, given a similar treatment.  I'm still not sure it works best as a Slingshot piece or a piece on the website, where scrolling through might help the reader.   I don't think it would work as a general format for battle reports though.  Be interested to see others' thoughts.

Incidentally, while I knew enough DBA to understand what was going on in terms of the elements moving and interacting, why elements were flying about was a mystery to me, unlike the DBA playing Patrick who could make sense of it all.  Something to bear in mind for the explanatory narrative, I think.

[RichT]

I don't know if it needs arrows but I'd quite like to see if arrows help make the moves clearer (else I find I have to glance to and fro between images to see what's changed).

My main thought is what a strange game DBA must be. Why is that blue general playing hide and seek behind the hill? Why do the main battle lines just stand and stare at each other? Why does red's battle line stand idly by while its one unit with enough gumption to advance gets sandwiched by two blues? Is this down to (strange?) player choices or poor PIP scores or is this good DBA play or what?

[evilgong]

I could follow it, but I also know the rules well - what I'd also need would be some ZOD markers to tell if the elements had limited move options.

Post more, it was fun to read through.

david b

[Mark G]

Some of the turns seem pretty irrelevant to the outcome.

So the important stuff gets lost while you look for meaning from the pointless turns.

Also, is the narrator a player?  Or an observer?

In line with missing the player interaction, you also miss what each player (or at least yourself playing) was thinking.
Consider the good bits from game of thrones.  When you knew what the plan was, and could see it being played out or thwarted.  Much better than the though absent cgi battles.

So if you can edit it to show key turns, with narrative on what both players were trying to do at that time, I think that is a better story. 

Something is needed to explain what those blue boxes behind the hill were up too all game

[Justin Swanton]

Thanks everyone, I'm picking up some good tips.

So, include arrows and ZOCs. Narrative that gives the players' plans beside explaining rules and gameplay, and highlighting key moments. Anything else?

The blue boxes are camps BTW. They don't do anything but if you destroy the opponent's camp it counts as a victory point. 4 points and you win the game (bases count as 1 point and the general counts as 2).

[Erpingham]

I suspect Mark is refering to the strange blue column that shuttles backwards and forwards behind a hill for no readily apparent reason.  It is presumably a game play choice, rather than terminal indecisiveness.

To pick up on some of Mark's points, it does depend if this is a tutorial, showing and explaining every move, or a battle report.  A battle report would preferably have a lot less maps (as Mark says, most don't reveal anything important and the mechanism ones, showing dice rolled, don't help understand the battle narrative).  It would be interesting to see if the players had plans or whether they just intended to pick off isolated elements if the chance presented itself.  As a battle report, I'd prefer it to focus on what was being attempted with enough rules explanation to clarify some outcomes (for example, as I think Richard said, it isn't obvious why Red's line does nothing unless you realise DBA restricts movement at random).  As I said, I can see the value as a tutorial or an action based review, but I don't think it makes a good format for a battle report.

[dwkay57]

Not playing DBA, I would need a narrative to explain what was happening and would have preferred photos to diagrams.

My preference would be that the narrative tells the story of the battle starting with each sides intentions, without any real reference to the rules and troop categories. That's what I've tried to do with my battle reports, but given their low readership rate that might not be the most popular option amongst the wider membership.

[Mick Hession]

I'm not a fan, I'm afraid. There's nothing intrinsically interesting about a random club game and  a turn by turn account is tedious. I could (kind of) see the value of it for a refight like the Knockdoe one but struggle to see what this one is trying to achieve. Perhaps it would have some value as an introduction to DBA for a novice but I suspect there are few enough of those in the SOA.

Cheers
Mick

[aligern]

I suggest its jey that in DBA you only need to destroy a number iof ebemy units....I think its 4  and thus the idd tactcs are because each general wants to create a situation where tgey can get tgat number without a dangerous  full battle line engagement, Also frontal fights are more dice dependent than slipping a unut if psiloi onto a unit's flank and converting a push back into a kill whereas frobtally you would need to double the score?
Should red have tried a general advance once it started to look sticky? My remembrance of DBM is that once the opponent has a one unit superiority you are in trouble  and  tgen best rely on luck.
Perhaps my comments indicate that explanation really is needed?
It looks like it works for DBA and would work fir Armati, L'Art and imoetus or indeed Saga ir Lion Rampant where you have units that move as blocks.  I am not sure that the minestrone that is DBM takes to the number of unique units you would have,
Roy

[Denis Grey]

I liked it and could follow it reasonably easily, but then I play a lot of DBA.  I think arrows would help, especially with outcome moves (recoils).  And to be really picky, I don't think Blue could manage all those moves in the first bound with only 4 PIPs.

You'd need to think about other rule systems.  To take my other ruleset as an example, how would you show loss of cohesion in L'Art de la Guerre?  (Maybe add dots on top of the unit for each point lost?)

Denis

[Mark G]

Yes, thanks Anthony, that was what I was getting at.

Watching a plan unfold is interesting in itself, especially if it falls apart.
But if the plan is to wait for a lot of high pips, it's not a plan worth following.

So editing is strongly advisable to remove all the "in x rules it helps to do this" stuff which you want in a rules tutorial, but not in a battle report.

You are telling a story, make it a good one and folk will want to read more