Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Phil Barker is professional, was Re: \ Truly 'Open' Competition

Expand Messages
  • the_chink_between
    Hear, hear. ;-)
    Message 1 of 86 , May 31, 2011
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Hear, hear. ;-)

      --- In DBA@yahoogroups.com, Alberto Barsellini <betobarse@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > Lurking mode off:
      >
      > First off please forgive any errors in my english. My mother tonge is
      > spanish & learn english later.
      >
      > I beg to differ on this opinion. You have only to play agains an
      > opponent willing to use the geometric tricks that the DBA game
      > allows to remember that this is a game. Truly, it's based on history,
      > and many of the posts in this list have a high level of history
      > knowledge (at least to me as an IT professional) ... i respect a lot
      > of the work made by "the man" and believe that DBA is an excelent
      > wargame based in history. But to forget the kinked lines, the can't
      > shoot 'cos you can't see the entire front, staged stands to avoid
      > contact, BUA rules, yada.. yada... ( ad your one pet peeve here)..
      > is to forget that we are pushing little lead models, and have a ton
      > of fun out of it.
      >
      > My 2 cents on a very good topic
      >
      > Lurking on again
      >
      >
      >
      > On 05/25/2011 11:13 AM, cburr@... wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > I would beg to differ when you qualify DBA as
      > unhistorical. While I agree it is a very high level
      > simulation of command for pre-gunpowder period battles, I
      > think than in many respects it may well give as historical
      > and plausible results as many far more detailed rules when
      > played using armies from the same historical period and
      > preferably historical opponents. Certainly any set of
      > rules that covers over a thousand years of history is
      > unlikely to give "realistic" (whatever that would be)
      > results between opponents separated by time and technology
      > such as Bronze age Egyptians fighting late Medieval fully
      > armored knights.
      >
      >
      >
      > Chris
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • the_chink_between
      Hear, hear. ;-)
      Message 86 of 86 , May 31, 2011
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Hear, hear. ;-)

        --- In DBA@yahoogroups.com, Alberto Barsellini <betobarse@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > Lurking mode off:
        >
        > First off please forgive any errors in my english. My mother tonge is
        > spanish & learn english later.
        >
        > I beg to differ on this opinion. You have only to play agains an
        > opponent willing to use the geometric tricks that the DBA game
        > allows to remember that this is a game. Truly, it's based on history,
        > and many of the posts in this list have a high level of history
        > knowledge (at least to me as an IT professional) ... i respect a lot
        > of the work made by "the man" and believe that DBA is an excelent
        > wargame based in history. But to forget the kinked lines, the can't
        > shoot 'cos you can't see the entire front, staged stands to avoid
        > contact, BUA rules, yada.. yada... ( ad your one pet peeve here)..
        > is to forget that we are pushing little lead models, and have a ton
        > of fun out of it.
        >
        > My 2 cents on a very good topic
        >
        > Lurking on again
        >
        >
        >
        > On 05/25/2011 11:13 AM, cburr@... wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > I would beg to differ when you qualify DBA as
        > unhistorical. While I agree it is a very high level
        > simulation of command for pre-gunpowder period battles, I
        > think than in many respects it may well give as historical
        > and plausible results as many far more detailed rules when
        > played using armies from the same historical period and
        > preferably historical opponents. Certainly any set of
        > rules that covers over a thousand years of history is
        > unlikely to give "realistic" (whatever that would be)
        > results between opponents separated by time and technology
        > such as Bronze age Egyptians fighting late Medieval fully
        > armored knights.
        >
        >
        >
        > Chris
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.