I recently went to my first "major" con out east at Fall In! in Gettysburg, PA. I have been bitten by the ancients bug for some time now and have wanted to try my hand in a competitive setting, head to head -- mono y mono. I must say, on a brief interlude, the convention setting was second to none. It is held just outside the Gettysburg National Battlefield and offers many interesting attractions for the historian as well as the family. It is a shame that the next couple of Fall In! sites have shifted back to Lancaster due to monetary issues with the hotel and the convention staff (sound familiar?).

For my first foray into the DBM tournament scene, I chose a Western Imperial Roman army, circa 397 A.D. I like the Roman army of this period as it has a good combined arms feel to it and can compete with just about any army (or so I'm told). DBM, like DBA, is a game that one can learn the basic mechanics relatively easily but takes practice to become proficient with. Less cumbersome than the old WRG editions, DBM allows prospective Caesars to place tons of troops on the battlefield. Most tournaments allow players to field one of two lists as long as they are from the same time frame and nationality.

This area -- the ability to compose an effective army -- is a skill that is perhaps the most difficult to master. But it happens to be an area that I enjoy: Pouring over army lists with calculator and eraser in hand becomes a game in itself. There were plenty of nights spent in pursuit of the "perfect" army. Well, based on my tournament results, the word perfect is purely subjective. Like DBA, both players roll off to see who is the attacker and who defends based on the sum of the die and the army's aggression factor. The attacker can place limited terrain if they so desire, but most want to limit terrain to that of a billiards table. The armies de jour are heavy with Knights and Light Horse that want to swoop around your flanks. The rules reward a player for doing just this.

The defender then can choose 2-3 optional terrain features and any compulsory features that he wants to lay on the table. Instead of getting to make their own fortress of solitude, the defender divides the table into 6 equal sectors and labels them 1-6. After nominating a terrain feature he rolls for its location using a d6. A second d6 is then rolled to see the area which the terrain is placed. On a 1-4 it has to touch a table edge or waterway. On a 5-6 it has to be placed in the middle of the sector. Terrain cannot be placed on top of other pieces, except on a very limited basis. Army deployment is done on a map and revealed one command at a time, with the defender being forced to place first. Play begins with the attacker taking the first turn and play then alternates between the two opponents. From this point on movement, shooting, and combat is similar to all DBX games -- but definitely move involved and detailed.

Well, enough of the game mechanics, on to a battle report! My first game was versus Mike, a Seleucid player. I keep a record book of all my battles in order to recap them later for analysis and as a journal. It becomes sort of a mini-history of the General Madcamius (me). Anyways, the Roman army of this period has a very low aggression factor and odds on would be defending the majority of battles. Never bet against the odds I say, as in all my battles I was the defender.

Mike chose to put down a waterway on my left flank. He was able to do so because he brought the required minimum of naval elements. I chose the maximum amount of terrain as I brought a substantial amount of troops that excel in rough and difficult ground. My army is allowed a fair amount of mounted but not nearly enough to fend of the hordes of Knights and Light Horse I was sure to face. The Seleucid's placed their pike butted against the waterway. Next he had his mounted command of Knights and Scythed Chariots between the pikeman and a patch of woods. Mike was a good player and left no openings. At least none this Bunnie (the term for those with limited experience playing in tournaments) could discern. On the opposite side of the woods came his Elephants and foot commands. While only a few elements strong, the Elephants made me pause as luck would have it they were lined up across from the few Knights that I was able to bring. On this flank Mike was able to place his remaining troops -- all bow, on top of a hill.

My deployment was poor at best. Where I wanted to place my blades against his pike, I only had auxilia (a type of light troop). Lined up versus his Scythed Chariots and Knights were my blades. Blades fear both Knights and Scythed Chariots, as they are destroyed if merely outscored. The one positive in my deployment was I was able to get my Warbands opposite his bow. Normally this is a very inviting matchup, but I had a long way to go to reach him. Once I got there I still would have to fight an enemy uphill in rough ground. So much for positives! The lowlight of this battle would have to be when, in a desperate and foolish manner I unwisely tried to redeploy my blades to go opposite his pike. It never could happen as the movement of the blades is a measly 2 inches per pip. They got caught behind another line of blades just as it was hit by Mike's charging Knights. Ouch! Not only did I lose the line of blades (with their psiloi support), because their is a "zone of death" behind the destroyed elements, I lost the blades that I was trying to move to face the pikes.

We played for about two hours and Mike wittled me down very effectively. I was able to get some kills in but never enough to break any of his commands. This is key when playing any of the DBX family of games. One should have a plan in mind at the offset. Concentrate your forces to deliver a decisive blow to a sector by achieving locale superiority of men. I never did this. I lost 1-31 in this game. Oh well, live and learn. It was a fun first tournament game against a good player. I vowed to not make the same mistakes in my next game.