Please do more rules comparisons like this for other period. This was a very enjoyable, entertaining, and truly informative video. One I think I will refer to over and over again. Yeah, can the music. I want to hear the words. It doesn’t add much atmosphere.
You got it! We are planning on a Napoleonics Rules Round Up! I think I can cut back on the music a little and only use it on the bridges between the on camera moments. Cheers!
Agreed, though this video wasn't too bad. For us older folks, and no doubt some younger gamers who have actually served at the tip of the spear, hearing loss is a thing.
Great overview! If you are going to parse through the Barkerese of DBA, I must recommend the orphan child of the DBx family - DBMM. Think of it as Advanced DBA - very much the same rules with more flavour/chrome. The key point for me is that when it is played at the 100 point level, you'll get roughly the same unit count as DBA - 12 bases, but with a better representation on the table of an actual ancients battle - Going from memory 9 Roman Legionary bases will face off against 15-20ish hairy barbarian bases making flank protection much more important and prototypical than DBA. Definitely going to check out Age of Hannibal though.
DBA- my first wargaming love. :) A very elegant system, and in my opinion gives a good feel with very few rules. A great entry point for all ancient games, as a ton of them use the basing convention started by DBA. So if somebody would be interested in ancient wargaming- I would say start with DBA have a feel for it, and if you don't feel this ruleset is for you you when looking for other sets like Impetus you already have a good chunk of your army ready.
@@samb2052 i think the set is good for scenarios / pre set battles . I have played about 10 points based battles and it didn't work as well as the preset battles .
Not to be that guy, but point #1 is really up in the air. Recent scholarship points to the idea that Ancient warfare is not as linear as Carl seems to prefer. Instead, there is a lot of debate about nodes rather than battle lines, and the battles were more mobile than previously thought. The truth is, we really don't know as the ancients seemed to take it for granted. At the end of day, no one really knows exactly how ancient battles played out. However, Battle Line games do have a strong Point-of-View of how ancient battles worked. That is the most important thing for a wargame to have in my book. The designer needs to have a Point-of-view on how Ancient battle worked, and then back it up with the game mechanics.
Totally understandable. I'm up on a lot of the suggestions being made, esp about roman warfare and "impulse" based fighting and the new ideas about extended missile exchanges. I suppose my understanding of how a game should operate is very much based on Thucydides' and Polybius' descriptions.
There is always something new to learn, which is why ancient history and archaeology are so fascinating. BTW, did you hear they found an ancient Sumerian tablet about a thousand years older than Pythagoras that appears to be explaining Pythagorean geometry? (But, I digress...) To your point about the linearity of ancient battles: they may not have been as rigid as we first thought. But, let's acknowledge how ahistorical the early miniature rules were. All different kinds of troops all mixed together all the way across the battlefield; combined arms tactics rivaling the Army's air-land battle doctrine.
I'm surprised Mortem et Glorium wasn't mentioned, after the longest time our gaming group played Warrior but when we found MeG its been an absolute blast, it has a massive number of unique army lists per region and time period, it has its own map generator, army list creator and campaign system. It most definitely supports armies sticking together in linear warfare with bonuses to movement, support in combat and flanking. The generals play a key role by issuing orders to the units via command tokens as well as participating in the combat itself when committed at their risk. The units are all tailor made with a huge list of universal weapons, special rules and formation types that each cost the a points value in the army list creator so it has an internal balance between very different armies and time periods, but the army composition is what make them unique so the actual organization and tactics are encouraged there. I couldn't recommend it enough because its been so fun building all sorts of different and fun armies to play against each other which they make easy by having three different sizes of warfare with their small, medium, and large scale battles that can make it cheap to start playing while being able to grow it into a big army. while we play at 15mm they definitely support 25-8mm or 6mm gaming with it as long as the base widths are the same
I have played most and I feel like most people can get real defensive on wargames ( or what is their wargame) but I can share some thoughts since I have played most of these. I keep coming back to DBA 3 with its simplicity, no need for more than 12 units per side and its overall improvement from DBA 2.2. It is likely one of the easiest on the list to get someone to learn and play rather quickly. From time to time I will play BBDBA 3 if I am looking for a larger more strategic battle that can still be ran quickly. Think DBA 3 but with 3 armies a side instead of 1 in DBA. If you want larger battles, you want to play competitively and have a little background in DBA, then DBMM or Art de la Guerre is really the only choices in this scenario. You can look to Historicon or Britcon as example of the competitive scene. I love the unique gameplay mechanics and strategy in To the Strongest. This might be the one I wish I played more as I have so much fun when I play. To the Strongest might be the only wargame that really brings new and refreshing ways to play. I love the cards mechanic (instead of dice) and the grids, it brings a whole new level of strategic play. I just need to get more people to play it lol! Triumph is just a tweaked version of DBA 2.2 and I don't think really brings enough new to the game to be even in the list. From a historic perspective, you really need more units on the field if you are trying to create scenarios that could replicate specific battles, so BBDBA, DBMM, To the Strongest or Art de la Guerre . You also need to think about what games are out now and supported by the publishers. WAB IMHO does not belong on the list. It bring up Hail Caesar and its expansions into different periods if you want to discuss WAB. Swordpoint is just a streamlined Hail Caesar but nobody seems to play it. I am surprised you do not have SAGA 2 in the list with all of the eras, no needing a lot of figures but I have found it does not replicate historical accuracy for me. Saga games are always fun though. The boards make the armies interesting and different. TooFatLardies is on my list to learn as I have heard goods things about it. If people want to learn wargames but not paint miniatures, I tell people about Commands and Colors (blocks with stickers) that can recreate historical battles well, inexpensive to get into and covers historical, medieval or gun powder eras.
Triumph! is more than just a tweaked DBA, but is a significantly improved version, and for me is an ideal 'go between' between DBA & DBM. All the former DBA players in our club have gone over to it and never looked back.
Give Warmaster Ancients a try - it is a much better game than Warhammer Ancients. WHA is basically a skirmish game while WMA zooms out to the army level. Heroics aren’t very well represented in WMA, but keeping units in line & brigades up is a must. Plus, the different abilities of each unit, as well as the number and type of units available to each army give WMA a lot of flavor.
@@steveholmes11 Morphed like the flu virus 😁😂. Are you sure you’re not thinking of Warhammer Ancients instead of Warmaster Ancients? Both WHA and HC are essentially platoon/company level, while WMA is more army scale.
To the Strongest is Excellent. I started sceptical, end up sold - does everything an ancients game needs to. Yeah for some not getting to throw dice is a loss, but it's actually really fun slapping out the cards one after the other in close combat.
@@robertwalton9053 Yep for sure, we tried both and ended up loving the cards. They just work really well for this particular game. But a D10 is definitely an option.
I’ve played To The Strongest in 6mm and really enjoyed it. At first you are skeptical of the grid, but it works really well and you don’t miss measuring. The 2 army books give you almost any ancient or medieval army you could imagine from Asia Europe and Africa. The card activation is a little awkward on the table and shuffling, I’d like to try chits instead.
Here in York, UK we've been playing TtS for years and 100% chits is the way to go. It's a great system but it's a visual hobby and who wants a game to look like an explosion in Vegas? We used chits right from the off and it makes the game look so much better.
I love the video and I would love to see more rules comparisons to eras. The two guys here were great and loved hearing about what makes a great ruleset from an expert historian. I gotta say though, gotta get rid of the music or add music that is more appropriate.
Now this was unexpected video...but greatly enjoyable one! Love the reviews and the elephant simulations too...nice touch. I've only played three Ancients rule systems, first off was DBA, an excellent introductory to ancient gaming and small figure count. Next was "Might of Arms" from Bob Bryant. I find these to be an excellent set which uses DBA basing. I don't feel it has the Heroic flavor, but well worth a look and game play. I believe you can get them for free now. If interested, I can send you the link. And finally, from Too Fat Lardies, "Infamy, Infamy". These definitely have met all of your criteria and then some. You'll definitely get the feel as a Roman player and the barbarians. It's different systems for each army and works well...a definite look and play. Again, great video. Take care.
I'm not sure what the criteria is for what was chosen here to review? You've got Warhammer Ancients, which, as far as I know, has almost zero support? Obviously, you are going to show what you prefer, I would too. I would suggest your criteria is lacking on some other subjective attributes. Are the rules currently supported and either bought new or available for download? The first criteria should be scope/unit representation. Skirmish, small unit, single or multibasing per unit. Abstraction level, small combat to huge battles. Time to resolution, 1 hour or less, several hours (evening) or full day slog. Play balance. Is it possible to win with an underdog army given the right circumstances or will Macedonians, Romans, Mongols, etc. usually win? Set armies, scenarios, or list building? Player base. Are others playing the rules or are many abandoning? Complexity. Everything from combat resolution, number of troop types, number of reference charts, unit formations or none, etc. Some other rules currently supported but not mentioned (complexity: Low, Medium, High. Scope: Skirmish, Semi Skirmish, Multibase units, Abstract/Single stand/multi figures) Lion Rampant (Low, Semi) Mortem Et Gloriam (High, Multibase) Warmaster Ancients (Medium, Multibase) Clash of Spears (Medium, Semi Skirmish) There are other rules sets that have waned but are still decently supported and available Impetus Might of Arms (free download) DBMM Tactica II Armati II Warrior Rules
The geometry of ancient battlefields is what we see in history books and with wargame rules. In wargames too often we maneuver geometric shapes instead of pieces representing living creatures. It's absolutely absurd! A more realistic game recognizes this organic nature of units, usually through higher level abstraction. The other problem with a focus on rectangles is that players are taken out of the narrative in order to focus on fractions of an inch, degrees of arc, and area templates. That's where games such as To The Strongest using grida really shine. You focus on the action, not high school geometry. 👍 It might sound counter-intuitive at first, but the use of a square grid makes the game MORE organic.
Good Review! I personally prefer Art de la Guerre. The rules seem daunting at first, but after a couple of plays, flow quite smoothly. Also, the army lists are extensive and include many options and allies. I'll give To the Strongest a try though!
I find myself in general agreement with your tastes. I enjoy a fast moving game that doesn't leave me with a headache at the end. That puts me off the "more is better" school or rules.
Our Thursday night group in KC did KADESH a while back using the WARHAMMER Ancient Battles rules - we had lights (archers/slingers), spearmen, Imperial Guard (heavy Infantry), and chariots (heavy horse) and it seemed a fairly easy system then ! Leaders made a difference too both positive in attack/defense and negative when lost (dead) ! :-)
Good post. Rule One is good but Rule Two - Heroics is NOT a criteria for me, I prefer realism. Also, I like games where you give orders and your units may or may not obey them. Because of the inluence of Warhammer most modern wargames are skirmish whereas I like the feel of being a general commanding an army of thousands. You can probably tell that I grew up with Donald Featherstone and Wargames Research Group
Really fun to watch! My club has been playing phyrric and punic wars with hail caesar in 28mm for a couple of years now and it's beginning to feel stale. I'll check out to the strongest, though the grid doesn't really appeal to me yet (but we'll see) ^^
as someone who has only ever played warhammer (whfb) i would have loved a little more explanation about the combat mechanics; like how many rounds of rolls does a combat take (in warhammer that is 3: weapon skill VS weapon skill, Strength VS Toughness, Armour Save), how is 'combat resolution' resolved (number of ranks, number of wounds, outnumbering model count?), what bonuses give flank and rear charges. Just the basics, as i have absolutely no clue, but i assume its different ...
Well done and I think pretty fair review. I play ADLG and have to agree that it’s the game system that draws players to it along with the variety of army list and not the simulation of ancient warfare that others might provide
Guys Nice video. Thanks 🙏 First time I have seen your videos. Can you do a video about some old rule sets such as WRG , Rapax and Chainmail? I have these and would like to see what you think? Btw I base as per DBA 2.2 but use different rules.. All the best from down under. Lewis Sydney Australia 🇦🇺
Always felt to the strongest was underrepresented, at least on youtube, thanks for giving it the spotlight it deserves! Maybe because its card based? I would be lying too if I said I prefered cards over rolling dice for the sear enjoyment factor.
Just what i needed, been looking at rulesets for ancients for quite a while now. But not quite sure what was fitting my needs. Interesting that you used different rules in the latest battle report.
Yeah, and we had some issues with them if you check out our review! In the end they did what was needed, but I’d like to try that battle again with Triumph or AOH
Loved sword point... however in version 1, people found that heavy melee and bow armed troops trumped every other unit. Hopefully number 2 has sorted this. I also really liked Field of Glory 1st edition. Would like to try TTS, sounds great. I also have and have yet to try Mort et Glorium... think it's called that. Great video.
What are your thoughts on Field of Glory Ancients and Medieval? The rule book is currently being given away for free on the official site making it great for budget gamers/early adopters.
Thank you guys! DBA is a classic and still my go-to for ancients. Been wanting to branch out into more contemporary systems lately (sans Warlord Games; great models, terrible rules systems in my experience) so this was nice to see! Armati is another decent system for ancients/medieval to try out. Not sure if it's still in print though. The hidden set-up of armies behind a screen with the big reveal before the game starts is a fun little twist. VERY exacting geometric game though, so while it definitely meets one of your criteria, it can be a real turn off for some people. Thanks again for the great video!
Hi, very infromative review tks. I've try a lot of rules set but for me the main issue was that they don't usually keep me engage while the other one is playing their turn. Until "Clash of Spears" from Fighting Hedgehog is a solid ruleset. And now is our main ruleset. hope you try it out
For historical feel, my favorite Ancients rules are Mortem et Gloriam (MEG), especially in the command and control system. It is not as complicated as the quick reference sheet makes it look. 😀
Ive been playing ancients since early 90s. Just getting back to it. Please review "Mortiem et Gloriam". I have only seen one other review of it. From what was described, i wanted to see more. I agree, kill the music.
Having played most of these rulesets I have found that Mortem et Gloriam is the best set I have played. They give a great feel to the game and it makes the troops feel like they should.
Tactica used to be popular, particularly in the US, and is still around, if not as widely played. There was a 2nd edition a few years ago, followed by a deafening silence. It would be interesting to hear your views on it, as well as the other Ancients game by the author, Arty Conliffe, whose name currently escapes me.
If you can find a copy, try Might of Arms. I think it captures the feel of ancient warfare the best. Cav fights are generally quick, infantry fights have a grind to them. Great rules for doing larger, historical battles. Marker intensive, which can be a turnoff for some people.
I am going to suggest, The Die is Cast, my rules. Sold by Veni Vidi Vici, my shield transfer business. Designed to play historical battles (like all my rules). So tested by straight up combats, then by playing historical battles. Generals have command and combat abilities to inspire troops, with different grades from 0 to 4 in each category. Combat split into 3 different types: infantry, infantry vs cavalry and cavalry. Morale included, so bad troops run away (under stress), good troops don't. Special rules, like Roman line replacement, are in there.
I think you short-changed Triumph! a little. It's a bit more than a DBx offshoot (or DBA translated into English). I also think ALDG is more of an Armati offshoot than DBx. ALDG took a clean set of rules (Armati) and added a great deal of chrome (many like that approach, I don't). Thanks for the reviews. If you revisit the topic, I'd love to hear your thoughts on Lion's Rampant for skirmish-level games.
I don't agree about ADLG, definitely a DBM successor. Armati is multibase units with much less flexibility. Triumph is much better than any DBA version with the exception of 1.3. DBA just got crazy with revisions.
Regarding Warhammer Ancient Battles, you've stated it misses out Roman line relief - it is covered in the Hannibal supplement. Also, many units have special rules throughout the several supplements. It is funny that you state that it doesn't have much flavor, while the previous rules set you mention, DBA, just narrows down to a table with combat factors vs foot and mounted 😆 However, the battle line aspect is indeed lacking in WAB and was the thing that I mostly disliked, together with any lack of command and control limitations
I haven't seen the Hannibal supplement. Good to know. I think it's true that WAB has some rules designed to give flavor, it's just that it's all carryover from WHFB, not actually ancients flavor. Greek hoplites, for instance, can have standard bearers. Because that's a thing in WHFB, not because they ever carried them. I think my bias against WAB might be due to single basing, which is just not ideal for most players.
I'm surprised you didn't go into more detail on Triumph! Did you actually play it before this review? While there is some similarity, overall in relation to DBA it's a significant improvement, is army points based, (more realistic than the artificial DBA 'chesslike' 12 elements per side), has march moves, substantial interpenetration rules, a good variety of troop types, (+600 army lists free for download), a system of 'battlecards' giving certain armies a unique flavor, well written and illustrated, truly "mean what they say" Rules, and excellent Rules Writer/Player feedback. It also has a Fantasy version which seamlessly blends in with the core Ancients rules. All former DBA players in our Club have gone over to this excellent set. (For myself this has been a good 'go between' between, DBA and the more complex DBM/DBMM.) Suggest you play some games using Triumph! and give us a more informed review. (who knows I may even subscribe to your channel;)
Some of us have tried and enjoyed Triumph a lot. I even own the excellent scenario book on it. We just chose to group the "descendants" of DBA into one category.
Like the review but it could have been at least three times as long if all of the other mentioned rules were in there. I play a lot of Commands & Colors:Ancients which is actually a board game but a lot of people scale it up for figures.
when I began Wargaming the only rules for Ancients was WRG6, It as complex and ponderous, as well as a rules lawyer paradice, Ancient wargames were effectively a dead end save for a few die hard enthusiasts. DBA changed all this, but it was very simplistic in the beginning. But it was a tabletop game meant for children, but it has mushroomed into the go to rule set for many wargamers,
I tried To The Strongest. I really liked the activation system, but the combat system felt super grindy and ineffectual, very hard to get anything done and then the opponent just rallien the hit off anyway.
Warhammer Ancient Battles is NOT a GW product! It was published under the Warhammer Historicals banner by Rick Priestley. So was Warmaster Ancients. GW got pissy about it, as they do about EVERYTHING, because they think they own the hobby. I think this led directly to the creation of Warlord Games. Warlord's Hail Caesar has an unmistakable Warmaster vibe to it.
Playing Ancients since 1985, those WRG sets. DBA is still a great game (The DBx family all give a good accurate game). SAGA works as a perfect Skirmish game which allows for that Heroic component, at first troop accuracy looks bad but when the battle board comes into play, national characteristics add the flavour. If ALDG or MeG was around 20 years ago I'd be playing them but my brain hurts after a game and the stamina of the 3 hours of games is gone. 😀 I have also played the Field of Glory series, but there are better rules now. We are spoilt for choices these days.
Really dislike warhammer ancient acrivations too...unfortunately my club is going eavy on warmaster...do you have any suggestion for an alternate fantasy ruleset or adaptation that have better command&control rules?
With Hail Caesar, you criticise the rules for having to test to activate units. I quite like some friction in a game. Yes, it's frustrating if orders are failed, but I think they are trying to represent the fact that some generals were better than others. Some were luckier than others. What always strikes me about wargamers is our ability to not have a consensus about what plays best!
Thoughts on Sword and Spear? Is it a bit dull? Like the pulling of chits to run the activation so it's not all igoygo. The lists are a bit bland but still believable.
Warhammer Ancient Battles and the Hannibal supplement are the only rules I found that portrays the republican Roman triplex acies in any realistic way.
A lot of their sets tend to sit at a skirmish level, a little out of the scope of this, just like Clash of spears or Mortal gods, both fun games. Maybe we'll do a skirmish roundup eventually.
Card driven = NO. DBA, ugh. DBM, mmmm, maybe. 7th Edition WRG, yes! Can't believe you guys didn't include Warrior in this list. Feels like much better simulation than the rules you were covering.
Warmaster is essentially Hail Caesar 0.5, Impetus, fair you got us, we haven't tried it. Strength and Honor I have not played enough games of yet to give a proper opinion. It is maybe a little niche, with its small scale and restricted time period
Please do more rules comparisons like this for other period. This was a very enjoyable, entertaining, and truly informative video. One I think I will refer to over and over again.
Yeah, can the music. I want to hear the words. It doesn’t add much atmosphere.
Agree this style of rule vid is awesome. I liked the music.
You got it! We are planning on a Napoleonics Rules Round Up! I think I can cut back on the music a little and only use it on the bridges between the on camera moments. Cheers!
Agreed, though this video wasn't too bad. For us older folks, and no doubt some younger gamers who have actually served at the tip of the spear, hearing loss is a thing.
@@MarksGameRoom You guys should talk to Tundraworks about their next-gen napoleonic rules system then 😉
Impetus. I think it’s very underrated. Probably not too big on the heroics but that’s not a big deal for me.
Impetus is popular in Australia. Way better than other systems and fast and easy to play. It's only $5 to download the PDF.
I found that Mortem et Gloriam is a nice rule for me.
Great overview!
If you are going to parse through the Barkerese of DBA, I must recommend the orphan child of the DBx family - DBMM. Think of it as Advanced DBA - very much the same rules with more flavour/chrome. The key point for me is that when it is played at the 100 point level, you'll get roughly the same unit count as DBA - 12 bases, but with a better representation on the table of an actual ancients battle - Going from memory 9 Roman Legionary bases will face off against 15-20ish hairy barbarian bases making flank protection much more important and prototypical than DBA.
Definitely going to check out Age of Hannibal though.
DBA- my first wargaming love. :) A very elegant system, and in my opinion gives a good feel with very few rules. A great entry point for all ancient games, as a ton of them use the basing convention started by DBA. So if somebody would be interested in ancient wargaming- I would say start with DBA have a feel for it, and if you don't feel this ruleset is for you you when looking for other sets like Impetus you already have a good chunk of your army ready.
Kill that music, my dudes...!
I was hoping for a Strength and Honour mention. Great video!
We didn’t have time to mention that one; I was pretty lukewarm on it, but I’d like to give it another try.
S & H seems to be pretty popular, definitely worth a couple of minutes discussion.
@@samb2052 i think the set is good for scenarios / pre set battles . I have played about 10 points based battles and it didn't work as well as the preset battles .
@@suzsam17 I get the impression that it’s really intended for scenario based battles rather than points or tournaments.
Definitely my favorite large scale ancients battles rules. It ticks all of the boxes you listed
Not to be that guy, but point #1 is really up in the air. Recent scholarship points to the idea that Ancient warfare is not as linear as Carl seems to prefer. Instead, there is a lot of debate about nodes rather than battle lines, and the battles were more mobile than previously thought. The truth is, we really don't know as the ancients seemed to take it for granted.
At the end of day, no one really knows exactly how ancient battles played out. However, Battle Line games do have a strong Point-of-View of how ancient battles worked. That is the most important thing for a wargame to have in my book. The designer needs to have a Point-of-view on how Ancient battle worked, and then back it up with the game mechanics.
Totally understandable. I'm up on a lot of the suggestions being made, esp about roman warfare and "impulse" based fighting and the new ideas about extended missile exchanges. I suppose my understanding of how a game should operate is very much based on Thucydides' and Polybius' descriptions.
There is always something new to learn, which is why ancient history and archaeology are so fascinating. BTW, did you hear they found an ancient Sumerian tablet about a thousand years older than Pythagoras that appears to be explaining Pythagorean geometry? (But, I digress...)
To your point about the linearity of ancient battles: they may not have been as rigid as we first thought. But, let's acknowledge how ahistorical the early miniature rules were. All different kinds of troops all mixed together all the way across the battlefield; combined arms tactics rivaling the Army's air-land battle doctrine.
I'm surprised Mortem et Glorium wasn't mentioned, after the longest time our gaming group played Warrior but when we found MeG its been an absolute blast, it has a massive number of unique army lists per region and time period, it has its own map generator, army list creator and campaign system. It most definitely supports armies sticking together in linear warfare with bonuses to movement, support in combat and flanking. The generals play a key role by issuing orders to the units via command tokens as well as participating in the combat itself when committed at their risk. The units are all tailor made with a huge list of universal weapons, special rules and formation types that each cost the a points value in the army list creator so it has an internal balance between very different armies and time periods, but the army composition is what make them unique so the actual organization and tactics are encouraged there. I couldn't recommend it enough because its been so fun building all sorts of different and fun armies to play against each other which they make easy by having three different sizes of warfare with their small, medium, and large scale battles that can make it cheap to start playing while being able to grow it into a big army. while we play at 15mm they definitely support 25-8mm or 6mm gaming with it as long as the base widths are the same
I have played most and I feel like most people can get real defensive on wargames ( or what is their wargame) but I can share some thoughts since I have played most of these. I keep coming back to DBA 3 with its simplicity, no need for more than 12 units per side and its overall improvement from DBA 2.2. It is likely one of the easiest on the list to get someone to learn and play rather quickly. From time to time I will play BBDBA 3 if I am looking for a larger more strategic battle that can still be ran quickly. Think DBA 3 but with 3 armies a side instead of 1 in DBA. If you want larger battles, you want to play competitively and have a little background in DBA, then DBMM or Art de la Guerre is really the only choices in this scenario. You can look to Historicon or Britcon as example of the competitive scene. I love the unique gameplay mechanics and strategy in To the Strongest. This might be the one I wish I played more as I have so much fun when I play. To the Strongest might be the only wargame that really brings new and refreshing ways to play. I love the cards mechanic (instead of dice) and the grids, it brings a whole new level of strategic play. I just need to get more people to play it lol! Triumph is just a tweaked version of DBA 2.2 and I don't think really brings enough new to the game to be even in the list. From a historic perspective, you really need more units on the field if you are trying to create scenarios that could replicate specific battles, so BBDBA, DBMM, To the Strongest or Art de la Guerre . You also need to think about what games are out now and supported by the publishers. WAB IMHO does not belong on the list. It bring up Hail Caesar and its expansions into different periods if you want to discuss WAB. Swordpoint is just a streamlined Hail Caesar but nobody seems to play it. I am surprised you do not have SAGA 2 in the list with all of the eras, no needing a lot of figures but I have found it does not replicate historical accuracy for me. Saga games are always fun though. The boards make the armies interesting and different. TooFatLardies is on my list to learn as I have heard goods things about it. If people want to learn wargames but not paint miniatures, I tell people about Commands and Colors (blocks with stickers) that can recreate historical battles well, inexpensive to get into and covers historical, medieval or gun powder eras.
Triumph! is more than just a tweaked DBA, but is a significantly improved version, and for me is an ideal 'go between' between DBA & DBM. All the former DBA players in our club have gone over to it and never looked back.
I’m a triumph! guy myself, but I also enjoy age of Hannibal. I’ve heard good things about Saga for a skirmish level ancients game
Give Warmaster Ancients a try - it is a much better game than Warhammer Ancients. WHA is basically a skirmish game while WMA zooms out to the army level. Heroics aren’t very well represented in WMA, but keeping units in line & brigades up is a must. Plus, the different abilities of each unit, as well as the number and type of units available to each army give WMA a lot of flavor.
Warmaster ancients was he ruleset that morphed into Hail Caesar.
@@steveholmes11 Morphed like the flu virus 😁😂. Are you sure you’re not thinking of Warhammer Ancients instead of Warmaster Ancients? Both WHA and HC are essentially platoon/company level, while WMA is more army scale.
Can we just leave this whole lineage behind please lol.
My thoughts exactly, Warmaster and epic are my favorite GW products
I looked at Warmaster - it's interesting but didn't want to rebase all my cavalry.
To the Strongest is Excellent. I started sceptical, end up sold - does everything an ancients game needs to. Yeah for some not getting to throw dice is a loss, but it's actually really fun slapping out the cards one after the other in close combat.
Or you could use a D10 instead of cards.
@@robertwalton9053 Yep for sure, we tried both and ended up loving the cards. They just work really well for this particular game. But a D10 is definitely an option.
@@greggamingerI think I like cards for activation and dice for everything else. Probably minicards, aesthetically.
I would be interested to hear what your club would think about the ruleset Mortem et Gloriam! Thanks for another great video 👍
Agree - my group play MeG and we generally like them
I’ve played To The Strongest in 6mm and really enjoyed it. At first you are skeptical of the grid, but it works really well and you don’t miss measuring. The 2 army books give you almost any ancient or medieval army you could imagine from Asia Europe and Africa. The card activation is a little awkward on the table and shuffling, I’d like to try chits instead.
Here in York, UK we've been playing TtS for years and 100% chits is the way to go. It's a great system but it's a visual hobby and who wants a game to look like an explosion in Vegas? We used chits right from the off and it makes the game look so much better.
I love the video and I would love to see more rules comparisons to eras. The two guys here were great and loved hearing about what makes a great ruleset from an expert historian. I gotta say though, gotta get rid of the music or add music that is more appropriate.
Sword and Spear are very well worth a look too.
Btw, I appreciate the effort you guys all put into this production. I am trying these out and working through them. Two the strongest is next
Now this was unexpected video...but greatly enjoyable one! Love the reviews and the elephant simulations too...nice touch. I've only played three Ancients rule systems, first off was DBA, an excellent introductory to ancient gaming and small figure count. Next was "Might of Arms" from Bob Bryant. I find these to be an excellent set which uses DBA basing. I don't feel it has the Heroic flavor, but well worth a look and game play. I believe you can get them for free now. If interested, I can send you the link. And finally, from Too Fat Lardies, "Infamy, Infamy". These definitely have met all of your criteria and then some. You'll definitely get the feel as a Roman player and the barbarians. It's different systems for each army and works well...a definite look and play. Again, great video. Take care.
I'm not sure what the criteria is for what was chosen here to review?
You've got Warhammer Ancients, which, as far as I know, has almost zero support?
Obviously, you are going to show what you prefer, I would too.
I would suggest your criteria is lacking on some other subjective attributes.
Are the rules currently supported and either bought new or available for download?
The first criteria should be scope/unit representation. Skirmish, small unit, single or multibasing per unit. Abstraction level, small combat to huge battles.
Time to resolution, 1 hour or less, several hours (evening) or full day slog.
Play balance. Is it possible to win with an underdog army given the right circumstances or will Macedonians, Romans, Mongols, etc. usually win?
Set armies, scenarios, or list building?
Player base. Are others playing the rules or are many abandoning?
Complexity. Everything from combat resolution, number of troop types, number of reference charts, unit formations or none, etc.
Some other rules currently supported but not mentioned (complexity: Low, Medium, High. Scope: Skirmish, Semi Skirmish, Multibase units, Abstract/Single stand/multi figures)
Lion Rampant (Low, Semi)
Mortem Et Gloriam (High, Multibase)
Warmaster Ancients (Medium, Multibase)
Clash of Spears (Medium, Semi Skirmish)
There are other rules sets that have waned but are still decently supported and available
Impetus
Might of Arms (free download)
DBMM
Tactica II
Armati II
Warrior Rules
The geometry of ancient battlefields is what we see in history books and with wargame rules. In wargames too often we maneuver geometric shapes instead of pieces representing living creatures. It's absolutely absurd! A more realistic game recognizes this organic nature of units, usually through higher level abstraction.
The other problem with a focus on rectangles is that players are taken out of the narrative in order to focus on fractions of an inch, degrees of arc, and area templates. That's where games such as To The Strongest using grida really shine. You focus on the action, not high school geometry. 👍 It might sound counter-intuitive at first, but the use of a square grid makes the game MORE organic.
Good Review! I personally prefer Art de la Guerre. The rules seem daunting at first, but after a couple of plays, flow quite smoothly. Also, the army lists are extensive and include many options and allies. I'll give To the Strongest a try though!
Try Mortem et Gloriam
Nice review. Love To the Strongest! Hope to see it at more conventions
Thanks for the reviews.
I find myself in general agreement with your tastes.
I enjoy a fast moving game that doesn't leave me with a headache at the end.
That puts me off the "more is better" school or rules.
I didn’t see you review Fields of Glory. It was the biggest ancient rule set for a while. I liked it better than LAdlG.
I have never tried it, how does it compare to the others?
You missed Impetus 😢😢😢
Love to give it a shot sometime
Our Thursday night group in KC did KADESH a while back using the WARHAMMER Ancient Battles rules - we had lights (archers/slingers), spearmen, Imperial Guard (heavy Infantry), and chariots (heavy horse) and it seemed a fairly easy system then ! Leaders made a difference too both positive in attack/defense and negative when lost (dead) ! :-)
Kansas City? I'm in Lee's Summit. How do I contact you?
Good post. Rule One is good but Rule Two - Heroics is NOT a criteria for me, I prefer realism. Also, I like games where you give orders and your units may or may not obey them. Because of the inluence of Warhammer most modern wargames are skirmish whereas I like the feel of being a general commanding an army of thousands. You can probably tell that I grew up with Donald Featherstone and Wargames Research Group
Really fun to watch! My club has been playing phyrric and punic wars with hail caesar in 28mm for a couple of years now and it's beginning to feel stale. I'll check out to the strongest, though the grid doesn't really appeal to me yet (but we'll see) ^^
as someone who has only ever played warhammer (whfb) i would have loved a little more explanation about the combat mechanics; like how many rounds of rolls does a combat take (in warhammer that is 3: weapon skill VS weapon skill, Strength VS Toughness, Armour Save), how is 'combat resolution' resolved (number of ranks, number of wounds, outnumbering model count?), what bonuses give flank and rear charges. Just the basics, as i have absolutely no clue, but i assume its different ...
Ancient Empire by Greg Pitts has always been my favourite, tried others but always return to them
Love the critical comparisons of different rules, not nearly enough critical analysis is available to hobbyists.
Simple but believable mechanics so you play the game not the rules is one of my first lookfor in a set of historical rules, thanks for your insights.
Great comparison! Did you ever get around to playing Swordpoint? I'd love to hear your comments on that!
Well done and I think pretty fair review. I play ADLG and have to agree that it’s the game system that draws players to it along with the variety of army list and not the simulation of ancient warfare that others might provide
I needed this. Im currently looking at what ancients system, and what napoleonics system to use. This is fantastic! (Is there a napoleonics one?)
We will be releasing a Napoleonics roundup in the coming months
Guys
Nice video. Thanks 🙏
First time I have seen your videos.
Can you do a video about some old rule sets such as WRG , Rapax and Chainmail?
I have these and would like to see what you think?
Btw I base as per DBA 2.2 but use different rules..
All the best from down under.
Lewis
Sydney
Australia 🇦🇺
Always felt to the strongest was underrepresented, at least on youtube, thanks for giving it the spotlight it deserves!
Maybe because its card based? I would be lying too if I said I prefered cards over rolling dice for the sear enjoyment factor.
Looking forward to a review of Sword-point. Check out medieval war-gamer who plays the Hundred Years Wars.
Just what i needed, been looking at rulesets for ancients for quite a while now. But not quite sure what was fitting my needs. Interesting that you used different rules in the latest battle report.
Yeah, and we had some issues with them if you check out our review! In the end they did what was needed, but I’d like to try that battle again with Triumph or AOH
has there been a look at: 1) Clash of Spears 2) Saga 3) Field of Glory?
CoS and SAGA both are skirmish games, definitely another sort of game entirely, but one we’d like to look at.
Loved sword point... however in version 1, people found that heavy melee and bow armed troops trumped every other unit. Hopefully number 2 has sorted this. I also really liked Field of Glory 1st edition. Would like to try TTS, sounds great. I also have and have yet to try Mort et Glorium... think it's called that. Great video.
I have played To the Strongest at conventions and I thought it has a roll to activate system like hail Caesar?
Are you guys going to review Might of Arms or Tactica?
What are your thoughts on Field of Glory Ancients and Medieval?
The rule book is currently being given away for free on the official site making it great for budget gamers/early adopters.
Thank you guys! DBA is a classic and still my go-to for ancients. Been wanting to branch out into more contemporary systems lately (sans Warlord Games; great models, terrible rules systems in my experience) so this was nice to see!
Armati is another decent system for ancients/medieval to try out. Not sure if it's still in print though. The hidden set-up of armies behind a screen with the big reveal before the game starts is a fun little twist. VERY exacting geometric game though, so while it definitely meets one of your criteria, it can be a real turn off for some people.
Thanks again for the great video!
Played Armati for a few years. Was a fun system, though I have grown from the igougo systems, i wanted more.
Hi, very infromative review tks. I've try a lot of rules set but for me the main issue was that they don't usually keep me engage while the other one is playing their turn.
Until "Clash of Spears" from Fighting Hedgehog is a solid ruleset. And now is our main ruleset.
hope you try it out
For historical feel, my favorite Ancients rules are Mortem et Gloriam (MEG), especially in the command and control system. It is not as complicated as the quick reference sheet makes it look. 😀
This is a great resources for new players looking to get started
War and Conquest is the successor of WAB. Deserves a mention too
Ive been playing ancients since early 90s. Just getting back to it. Please review "Mortiem et Gloriam". I have only seen one other review of it. From what was described, i wanted to see more.
I agree, kill the music.
This right here. I loooooove Mortem et Gloriam, but you don't hear much about it.
Mortem et Gloriam is on my shortlist of games to try. Getting ahold of it in the US is tough though - maybe at Fall-in?
@@Carl-MGR they're now available as PDF download or local print on demand so should be really easy to get hold of from anywhere.
Having played most of these rulesets I have found that Mortem et Gloriam is the best set I have played. They give a great feel to the game and it makes the troops feel like they should.
You missed Impetus V. 2! 😊
And give ADLG another's shot! 😉
Good video, in any case! Thanks, guys!! 😊😊
King's of War ancients. Love it... Protect your flanks. Heroic characters, flavourful unit rules.
Conquerors & Kings just did a 2nd edition. Any thoughts?
Tactica used to be popular, particularly in the US, and is still around, if not as widely played. There was a 2nd edition a few years ago, followed by a deafening silence. It would be interesting to hear your views on it, as well as the other Ancients game by the author, Arty Conliffe, whose name currently escapes me.
Armati is the name of the other set. Like Tactica, it was popular once but seems to be largely overlooked these days.
I own Tactica, need to give it a shot one of these days.
I think you mean Armati.
Yes, I did. I remembered it later.
Love Tactica and Armati. BTW, there is a second edition of Tactica out, and it is... disappointing. Too much complexity and not well written.
If you can find a copy, try Might of Arms. I think it captures the feel of ancient warfare the best. Cav fights are generally quick, infantry fights have a grind to them. Great rules for doing larger, historical battles. Marker intensive, which can be a turnoff for some people.
Might of Arms is a favorite of our friends at NOVAG! I was turned off by how complex the rulebook reads
I am going to suggest, The Die is Cast, my rules. Sold by Veni Vidi Vici, my shield transfer business. Designed to play historical battles (like all my rules). So tested by straight up combats, then by playing historical battles. Generals have command and combat abilities to inspire troops, with different grades from 0 to 4 in each category. Combat split into 3 different types: infantry, infantry vs cavalry and cavalry. Morale included, so bad troops run away (under stress), good troops don't. Special rules, like Roman line replacement, are in there.
I think you short-changed Triumph! a little. It's a bit more than a DBx offshoot (or DBA translated into English). I also think ALDG is more of an Armati offshoot than DBx. ALDG took a clean set of rules (Armati) and added a great deal of chrome (many like that approach, I don't). Thanks for the reviews. If you revisit the topic, I'd love to hear your thoughts on Lion's Rampant for skirmish-level games.
I don't agree about ADLG, definitely a DBM successor. Armati is multibase units with much less flexibility.
Triumph is much better than any DBA version with the exception of 1.3. DBA just got crazy with revisions.
I agree on ADLG although it is the rule set I currently play.
Regarding Warhammer Ancient Battles, you've stated it misses out Roman line relief - it is covered in the Hannibal supplement. Also, many units have special rules throughout the several supplements.
It is funny that you state that it doesn't have much flavor, while the previous rules set you mention, DBA, just narrows down to a table with combat factors vs foot and mounted 😆
However, the battle line aspect is indeed lacking in WAB and was the thing that I mostly disliked, together with any lack of command and control limitations
I haven't seen the Hannibal supplement. Good to know. I think it's true that WAB has some rules designed to give flavor, it's just that it's all carryover from WHFB, not actually ancients flavor. Greek hoplites, for instance, can have standard bearers. Because that's a thing in WHFB, not because they ever carried them. I think my bias against WAB might be due to single basing, which is just not ideal for most players.
I believe Might of Arms meets all of your criteria as well. Most accurate army lists of almost any game out there
I'm surprised you didn't go into more detail on Triumph! Did you actually play it before this review? While there is some similarity, overall in relation to DBA it's a significant improvement, is army points based, (more realistic than the artificial DBA 'chesslike' 12 elements per side), has march moves, substantial interpenetration rules, a good variety of troop types, (+600 army lists free for download), a system of 'battlecards' giving certain armies a unique flavor, well written and illustrated, truly "mean what they say" Rules, and excellent Rules Writer/Player feedback. It also has a Fantasy version which seamlessly blends in with the core Ancients rules. All former DBA players in our Club have gone over to this excellent set. (For myself this has been a good 'go between' between, DBA and the more complex DBM/DBMM.) Suggest you play some games using Triumph! and give us a more informed review. (who knows I may even subscribe to your channel;)
Some of us have tried and enjoyed Triumph a lot. I even own the excellent scenario book on it. We just chose to group the "descendants" of DBA into one category.
OK Looking forard to more detail on it. Great set. (& if you go Fantasy too, there's no limit!)@@Carl-MGR
Not an improvement. It's retrograde.
Any thoughts on DBMM and Field of Glory?
I liked FoG but not DBM
if you are looking at 'current' ancients rules - what is warhammer ancient battles doing in here?
What’s the best set for simplicity but still retaining some flavor?
Some of my group doesn’t play much
To the Strongest, perhaps
Like the review but it could have been at least three times as long if all of the other mentioned rules were in there.
I play a lot of Commands & Colors:Ancients which is actually a board game but a lot of people scale it up for figures.
when I began Wargaming the only rules for Ancients was WRG6, It as complex and ponderous, as well as a rules lawyer paradice, Ancient wargames were effectively a dead end save for a few die hard enthusiasts. DBA changed all this, but it was very simplistic in the beginning. But it was a tabletop game meant for children, but it has mushroomed into the go to rule set for many wargamers,
I tried To The Strongest. I really liked the activation system, but the combat system felt super grindy and ineffectual, very hard to get anything done and then the opponent just rallien the hit off anyway.
No IMPETUS? I find the Dadi e Pombo rules generally really good.
You need to do this with Napoleonic rules.
More rankings please
Have you discussed Morten et Gloriam?
Recently bought it - we’ll be playing it soon!
Cards on the table. I reckon the 'best' (for various criteria) ancients 'big battle' ruleset is DBMM. But good grief it is hard to get into..
Warhammer Ancient Battles is NOT a GW product! It was published under the Warhammer Historicals banner by Rick Priestley. So was Warmaster Ancients. GW got pissy about it, as they do about EVERYTHING, because they think they own the hobby. I think this led directly to the creation of Warlord Games. Warlord's Hail Caesar has an unmistakable Warmaster vibe to it.
That's probably why the book says "Published by Games Workshop"
How is it not a GW product if it was produced by their staff and published with their logo, on their dime and sold through their website?
Playing Ancients since 1985, those WRG sets. DBA is still a great game (The DBx family all give a good accurate game). SAGA works as a perfect Skirmish game which allows for that Heroic component, at first troop accuracy looks bad but when the battle board comes into play, national characteristics add the flavour. If ALDG or MeG was around 20 years ago I'd be playing them but my brain hurts after a game and the stamina of the 3 hours of games is gone. 😀 I have also played the Field of Glory series, but there are better rules now. We are spoilt for choices these days.
Soldiers of Rome by Warwick Kinrade?
Did you try Clash of Spears?
We did, and enjoyed it. It's in the "skirmish" genre though, which I wanted to keep seperate.
Have a look at Mortem et Glorium or MeG
No Kings of War historical?
Really dislike warhammer ancient acrivations too...unfortunately my club is going eavy on warmaster...do you have any suggestion for an alternate fantasy ruleset or adaptation that have better command&control rules?
With Hail Caesar, you criticise the rules for having to test to activate units. I quite like some friction in a game. Yes, it's frustrating if orders are failed, but I think they are trying to represent the fact that some generals were better than others. Some were luckier than others. What always strikes me about wargamers is our ability to not have a consensus about what plays best!
WRG 3rd Edition best set I’ve played and you can find it free online.
What is the simplest to learn according to you ?
I think To the Strongest is an exceedingly easy system to get into. Age of Hannibal is also pretty simple.
@@Carl-MGR Thank you!
Thoughts on Sword and Spear? Is it a bit dull? Like the pulling of chits to run the activation so it's not all igoygo. The lists are a bit bland but still believable.
Hmmmm What about Mortem et Gloriam? 😮
We have heard the call and we will answer! Picking up the special cards and dice at Fall-In and giving it a try
Command and Colors Ancients?
you ever looked at Clash of Spears?
Warhammer Ancient Battles and the Hannibal supplement are the only rules I found that portrays the republican Roman triplex acies in any realistic way.
Try Mortem et Glorium (MeG) is overtaking the ancients game world....don't miss out
And this particular french loves you
6th Ed WRG
Lard rule sets?
A lot of their sets tend to sit at a skirmish level, a little out of the scope of this, just like Clash of spears or Mortal gods, both fun games. Maybe we'll do a skirmish roundup eventually.
@@Carl-MGR I suspect he was referring to Strength & Honour, a good game but somewhat unique in scale, though 6mm can be used for it.
6th Ed WRG the gold standard
Card driven = NO. DBA, ugh. DBM, mmmm, maybe. 7th Edition WRG, yes! Can't believe you guys didn't include Warrior in this list. Feels like much better simulation than the rules you were covering.
Great Review glas to see To the Strongest getting praise. The only criticism was the awful and often too-loud background music.
No Basic Impetus, no Ancient Warmaster or Strength and Honour
Warmaster is essentially Hail Caesar 0.5, Impetus, fair you got us, we haven't tried it. Strength and Honor I have not played enough games of yet to give a proper opinion. It is maybe a little niche, with its small scale and restricted time period
what the F does all that load music have to do with miniature gaming