Stoogecon was last month, but I haven't found time to post a report until now. I didn't bring my camera this year, so I only have results and no pictures.
The first event was a DBA 2.2 Open tournament, with 8 players. I brought my Italian Condotta, IV/61. I plan to use it at the NICT at Historicon, but I had never used it in straight 2.2, so I thought I'd give it a try. Overall, I really enjoy playing this army a lot more than I think I ought to.
In the first round, I faced Mike Naughton, who fielded the only other Medieval knight army in the tournament: Teutonic Orders (IV/30). I beat him 2G-1.
The second game was a tight contest against Jim Naughton's Middle Imperial Romans (East). I ended up losing 3-4 after we each had several opportunities to break the 3-3 stalemate with a good combat roll. This was the first loss for my previously undefeated Condotta.
In the last round, I faced Rob Torres and his Later Pre-Islamic Arabs. I beat him 4-2.
Jim Naughton won the tournament with no losses.
The second event was Matched Pairs, using the February 14th DBA 2.2+ Beta rules. We hoped to play 4 rounds, but unfortunately some players dropped out to play DBM, so we only ended up with 6 players and 3 rounds.
Just like last year, I brought Later Achaemenid Persians with the Auxilia and Psiloi options, and Early Bedouin. After last year's experience with these armies, I decided the pair wasn't actually very well matched. However, I think DBA 2.2+ has improved the matchup in several ways.
In 2.2, the Bedouin camels suffered against the Persian foot, but was a bit better against its cavalry. Their ability to play in the dunes was minimized by their high aggression, and not very useful because of the camel's deficit against enemy foot.
In 2.2+, Camels are now 3/2 and don't recoil against Cavalry (but quick-flee them). This gives them at least even odds against Persian Auxilia, and works fairly well against enemy Cavalry. Also, the Bedouin's greater number of Psiloi benefit from 2.2+'s Psiloi group move through bad going.
Overall, I expected the matchup to be much closer than it was in 2.2. In practice, I only really played one game with this army, and it didn't provide any corroborating evidence.
In the first round, I faced Mike Naughton again, using a Matched Pair I've seen him play before: Scots Irish versus Picts. I chose the Picts with their new Light Spears, and lost 3-4. Mike went on to win the tournament.
Next, Frank Popecki chose to use my Persians against my Bedouins. He beat me 1G-0 in the first few turns of combat, so we decided to play it out for fun. In the rest of the play through, he beat me 4-1. So, score one more for Persians against my Bedouins. I won't believe the Persians are truly better in this matchup for several more games. With this many low-factor troops, a few winning combats early on can cascade into a quick win.
In the final round, I fought Rob Torres again. I chose his Palmyrians, with lots of Cataphracts, against his Later Pre-Islamic Arabs. I beat him 4-0. I remember really liking the look of the Palmyrians and enjoying playing with Cataphracts. Since I don't have a Cataphract army yet, I may have to look into picking up the figures for these guys.
Over the course of the day I won as many games as I lost, which is pretty good for me across multiple events. More importantly, I enjoyed playing DBA. I still prefer 2.2+ over 2.2, which is good since it's the future.
1 hour ago