Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread

 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 5:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 26824
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
ForgottenLore wrote:
Why is it that every time I leave home to visit my mom for a few days (where I don't have time or convenient access to a full computer) someone posts a thread on one of the forums I read with a topic that I want to write a dissertation about? Every single time it seems....

Anyway, I'm going to do my best to put my thoughts down on a variety of things here.


First, polyversal. For those who aren't familiar with the system, and don't want to watch the video linked above, a quick summary. PVs dice system is an evolution of the combat system from the Silent Death starfighter game. Each attack consists of 3 dice of various types. One die is determined by the targeting systems of the attacker, one by the overall quality of the attacking unit (modified by how shaken and stressed it currently is), and one based on the weapon being used and the type of target (infantry or armor) being attacked. for each attack the 3 dice are gathered and rolled together. The total of the 3 dice is compared to the defense/evasion stat of the target to determine if the attack hits. Each weapon has a damage code, (low, medium, high being the common ones) and the value on the corresponding single die out of the three that were rolled determines the damage the attack causes. Depending on the target, that amount of damage might do various things from reducing the targets quality, degrading its capability to outright destroying it if damage was high enough.

Pro - any given attack can be completely resolved with a single roll of dice. With the combination of the 3 factors that determine which die types to use and the targets defense stat and its susceptibility to damage, the system packs a surprising amount of design space into a single die roll.

Con - Each individual weapon attack must be rolled individually. If you have a squadron of 3 tanks, each with 3 weapons that can shoot, you have to make 9 separate rolls of 3 dice each to resolve that squad's attacks. So while individual attacks may be faster, the overall pace of the game may actually be slower. There is also a minor corner case of a difficult to hit target (whether because of range, size, or speed), while it may not be hit very often, when it IS hit it will always suffer a lot of damage because combining the 2-hit and damage rolls into one like that means that in order to hit such a target all the dice need to have rolled high, so even if the weapon does "low" damage (ie, damage is the value on the lowest of the dice), since all the dice had to roll high numbers, the damage will always be a high number. You can't tag such a target with minor damage. I don't know how significant that con is, but it is there.


Hi!

I love how this system includes the units quality and effectiveness in the die roll. It makes for a well layered mechanic that includes things often ignored in most games.

You cover the "con" pretty well, my main concern being can truly large games with hundreds of models can be done without undue time spent rolling per weapon.

Mind you from my perspective, its not really a con. But I view games in the context of my personal enjoyment not its utility for tournament style pick up games.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 5:47 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 26824
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

ForgottenLore wrote:
Dice Mechanics

I think primarch and I think fairly similarly about dice mechanics in games, here are some thoughts I had on various ways of using dice and I will add some comments about what he said afterward

There are a few basic ways that games generally handle dice tests,

The GW method (also 1st ed D&D) - cross reference on a table. Take the Strength of the weapon and cross reference with the Toughness of the target to get the # you need to roll.
Advantages: The table doesn't have to follow a strict linear progression, we can skew the numbers at the extremes to make a pseudo bell curve of results, making extremes not as potentially breakable
Disadvantages: Tables tend to be complex and hard to memorize unless they do follow a set pattern, but if they are then why use a full table?

The AT-43 Method (also 2nd ed D&D) - Take the Attacker's stat, subtract the Defender's stat and reference a very simple table to get the target number.
Advantages: Very simple for players to memorize, stats are symmetrical (a 4 Strength is about equal to a 4 toughness)
Disadvantages: No room for skewing the results at the extremes. subtraction can be a little distracting and slow a game down slightly.

Warmahordes method (also 3rd ed D&D) - Instead of subtracting the defender's stat, simply use it as a target number for the attack roll. Attacker's stat +die roll needs to equal or beat the defender's stat
Advantages: Very very simple, requires no memorization or calculations on the part of the players just comparisons
Disadvantages: Stats are not symmetrical, a Strength of 5 is way better than a Toughness of 5, making it difficult to compare units at a glance. Odds are a fixed, linear progression, no room for us to tweak the probabilities

Defense roll method - In addition to the attackers rolling dice and adding their stat, the target unit rolls a die and adds their defense stat, whoever scores highest wins
Advantages: preserves the symmetry between stats while retaining the ease of use
Disadvantages: adds extra dice rolls, slowing the game down, creates weird circumstances like rolling a die to see how well your tank's armor absorbs damage this turn

Fantasy Flight method - use custom dice with unique symbol sets
Advantages - odds can be tailored to the designers wishes, opens a lot of design space. FFG claims they have market research that customers vastly prefer the custom dice. Multiple axis of variability can be included on each die, making it possibly to determine more than one thing with a single roll.
Disadvantages - need to have custom dice manufactured. Players need to purchase specialty dice and may suffer if they loose some. the completely wide open nature of such an option makes designing the system much harder because there can be so many more variables to account for.


Wonderful summary!

Indeed I went with the defense roll method, mainly because I wanted a system free of modifiers and looking up things.

Interestingly it did not occur to me that indeed certain die rolls does make certain concepts variable per turn (like armor absorption). I don't necessarily find it a sticking point since I like to add as much "unknown" to an equation to increase game tension, but I can definitely see how it can be view as an oddity.

Ironically the one I like the most, is the last one you mentioned. The Fantasy Flight Model. I love their games. I thought their WFRP 3rd edition had the best die mechanics for an RPG I had seen in a long time. Although it seems to have offended the sensibilities of traditional RPG'ers I thought that a roll that "told a story" was brilliant mechanics for that type of game.

In more recent times getting custom dice is easier and affordable, but it is still a con.

I would really have the "hots" to design a game with custom dice like that. It makes designing so much easier packing annoying rules into the dice instead of stand alone mechanics.

Quote:
Primarch, obviously, is advocating a defense roll method, where, for any given attack, both players are rolling dice and trying to beat the other. What he is suggesting though isn't really a multi-dice mechanic, it is just 2 single die mechanics being rolled together. not much different from a predator shooting a lascannon and the player rolling both the 2-hit and 2-wound rolls at the same time. As Markonz mentions, that precludes rolling a bunch of attacks simultaneously (ie all 9 attacks from a squadron of 3 tanks, all at once). If I am following Primarch's thoughts properly, his solution to that issue is to combine the overall fire of those 3 tanks into a single roll (correct me if that isn't what your proposing, P). That I don't like. It strikes me as too much abstraction, even for a 6mm scale game. What if those units want to target different targets? you have to recalculate the firepower involved for each attack then, wasting whatever time you save with the dice rolling mechanic. that also reduces the overall spread of your results because each roll has to be able to incorporate not just the variability of a given weapon, but also the variability of the number of weapons being fired (I'm not sure I explained that point adequately. I know what I'm trying to say, but I can't figure out how to say it clearly enough. Hopefully you all are smart enough to decipher it).


I get what your saying. :)

I'm not happy with the type of abstraction either in melding multi-model rolls into one. But the die rolling can get excessive in very large games.

Needless to say my tests leave me with the feeling that while there is a kernel of something good in the mechanic, it just does not have everything I want in it.

I tinkered with the system for a few years now. On and off. Not satisfied overall to sit done and organize it.

After your reminding me about custom die mechanics, I wonder if that is what I am missing and ultimately want.

A fusion between and defense system and custom die system sounds about where I'd like to be, which is similar to that WFRP game I mentioned since it would be basically constructing a die pool depending on the models characteristics and rolling your custom dice versus the defenders pool of custom dice.

Hmmm... with some Polyversal ideas, I am beginning to see the start of such a system. ;)

Quote:
A modification to P's system that avoids that abstraction would be to return to rolling 2-hit and 2-damage separately and have each attack from a given unit (3 tanks, 10 infantry stands, whatever) be rolled against a single defense roll from the defender. So if 10 stands of Orks (for example) shoot at 3 stands of Space Marines, the Orks roll 10 dice to see how accurate their fire is and the SMs roll 1 die to see how hard they are for that unit of orks to hit them. Each of those 10 dice are then compared individually to the SMs 1 die to see if that specific shot hit. All the ones that hit are then rolled vs a single die to see how well protected the SMs are from those orks. I would thank that such a system would preserve P's desire for simple comparison of results without the need for excessive abstraction.

Another comment I wanted to make, however, comes from X-Wing and SW Armada. X-Wing uses a defense roll mechanic, the attacker rolls attack dice and the defender rolls defense dice and the results are compared, just as P suggests. The thing is, a lot (I mean A LOT) of people complain about how swingy that makes X-Wing. You can have a really good attack roll and end up doing nothing because the other guy had an even better defense roll. One of the most common things I read about Armada is how it FFG learned from X-Wing and removed the randomness of a defense roll. Instead, defense in Armada is handled by tokens that can be spent to apply defensive effects to an attack. Each token can be spent and refreshes at the end of the round, or it can be spent a second time during a round and actually discarded, removing it from the game permanently. Such a system not only reduces the randomness of combat some, but adds a set of decisions that need to be made during a part of the game that, in most wargames, is just a dice rolling fest.


I like some "swingyness" in my mechanics, to account for luck. But I agree too much just makes it a "pure luck no skill" game.

If your ever game to design a game let me know. ;D

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 6:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 26824
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

ForgottenLore wrote:
Movement

I have come to realize over the past several years that, for all the attention that the dice mechanics get in wargames, it is actually how games handle movement that determines how they really play. No matter how it's done, combat in wargames almost always just comes down to rolling a series of dice. While a bad dice mechanic can make that decidedly tedious, the best it can get is just a series of instructions on what dice to roll when and what results are needed on them. With virtually all wargames it is the movement of your units that requires player skill and strategy and that is generally the part of a game that engages players and makes a game fun. To that end I have been giving a lot of thought recently to how to make the movement of your units important and relevant in a game.


This is indeed an important thing to consider. I have found that the better combination are movements of "median range" (where it would take elements 3-4 turns to cross the game table) with ranges in the "shorter tier". Mainly because this discourages "turtling" and encourages maneuver.

If movement is too fast, its too easy to redoly and cover mistakes and it also basically reduces the value of weapon range, while ranges that are too long means little to no movement.

Quote:
Firing arcs - many games centered around vehicles (X-Wing, Firestorm Armada, wings of glory) as well as some infantry based games (Warmahordes, Infinity) make use of firing arcs. Units can only make attacks in specific directions and so how the unit is placed becomes impoortant. Even if the firing arc is a simply (and large) as 180*, the placement of your figures becomes more important to think about than if units can fire a full 360* without worry.


Generally I like weapon arcs, but within reasson. I usually limited then to turreted (360 arc), half traverse (180 arc) and limited arc (90 degrees in one direction). As long as I don't have to pull out a degree measuring device I'm good.

Quote:
Range - in a lot of games, range is a simple binary condition, either a target is in range of a given weapon, or it isn't. If a game uses more detailed range effects however, then getting your units in the optimal range while denying that to your opponent becomes more important (I'm thinking especially of Star Fleet Battles here, a game where controlling range is very important)


I mainly divide them in short and long with long having an accuracy penalty. haven't found much use in more detailed ones since they often get forgotten in the heat of play.

Quote:
Cover - A game system with a robust cover mechanic (infinity) can make the positioning of your units vitally important. whether or not your units are in cover, and whether or not you can position your units to have cover themselves, while denying cover to the enemy can have a huge impact on effectiveness.


I mainly use three levels of cover: soft, hard and fortified. Where the bonus or penalty is placed (more armor, less accuracy) really doesn't matter much, although from a "psychological" view bonuses are more "fun" than penalties.

Quote:
Warmahordes chess king mechanic - In Warmachine you loose if your Warcaster is killed. I know a lot of people (including myself) who dislike that feature of the game. I realized recently, however, that it is a big factor in making movement and positioning in that game important. It is critical in Warmahordes to position your units so that easy avenues to your 'caster are blocked. A great deal of the skill of experienced players is doing that effectively.


Agreed. I dislike this type of mechanic because the game becomes about finding that right rules loophole to take out the "king" and win outright. The army surrounding it, much like pawns in chess are expendable.

This doesn't mean there can be high priority targets that if eliminated makes life difficult for the player, but you should lose the game outright.

Quote:
If anybody has any other ways that movement can be made more important in a wargame, I would love to hear them.


The only system where I could make this happen is the custom die system. All other systems I have not been able to come up with one that doesn't either come out too good or useless.

Quote:
A concluding thought on this subject. 40K just came out with a new edition and it is getting a lot of early praise from people after they read the new rules and play a couple games, but as I thought about it more I have come to the conclusion that the new edition doesn't really fix any of the root problems that GW games have had. In fact, they seem to go out of their way to make movement mostly irrelevant. All models now have 360* firing arcs, except for a single class of weapon you are either in range or not, cover is almost an after thought. there is essentially nothing to the game except moving into range and then rolling dice until one side is gone. For all the good changes GW made in the new editon (and there were several) I suspect they game will continue to be little more than a dice fest that is decided during list building, and I think this facet of game design is why.


Agreed. I consider GW, at best a mediocre rules company. Then again, they've said as much since they are a "miniatures company". Their insistence on d6 mechanics and "IGOUGO" mechanics are old, stale and don't really solve any of the issues I have with that game.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2017 1:35 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:34 pm
Posts: 576
This discussion is great. I'm also looking for that ideal 6mm sci-fi ruleset. I want a great game, although I'll take a game people will play with me since that tends to be the choice.

I quite like the degrading effectiveness system in polyversal, and a few other things discussed here.
In fact, unless you use custom dice, it seems that the polyversal system is the best one for this kind of game. It's just a shame that it really restricts you to certain sized games. Perhaps allowing players to add 1 level to the effectiveness dice for each additional shot of that type in the group(up to the max allowed). That way, you can focus fire, but the pay off is only useful against more powerful enemies, where you don't want to fire 10 shots that will do little to no damage.

You would still be left rolling a lot of dice in large infantry battles, but it would become much easier to play if larger units are involved. Plus, imagine the weight of fire of a horde of Orks managing to overcome an Titan's shields through sheer weight of numbers.
If this dosn't work, I'm sure there are other ways of reducing the down time caused by this system.



As to custom dice. I think this could work well, but it would really have to be a very good system to work. In addition the solutions I can think of would require large numbers of custom dice, which is not good.

_________________
Check out my youtube channel for Tutorials, Battle reports and other stuff in both 6mm and 28mm

www.youtube.com/user/ManticMoments


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2017 4:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 26824
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
bertnernie wrote:
This discussion is great. I'm also looking for that ideal 6mm sci-fi ruleset. I want a great game, although I'll take a game people will play with me since that tends to be the choice.

I quite like the degrading effectiveness system in polyversal, and a few other things discussed here.
In fact, unless you use custom dice, it seems that the polyversal system is the best one for this kind of game. It's just a shame that it really restricts you to certain sized games. Perhaps allowing players to add 1 level to the effectiveness dice for each additional shot of that type in the group(up to the max allowed). That way, you can focus fire, but the pay off is only useful against more powerful enemies, where you don't want to fire 10 shots that will do little to no damage.

You would still be left rolling a lot of dice in large infantry battles, but it would become much easier to play if larger units are involved. Plus, imagine the weight of fire of a horde of Orks managing to overcome an Titan's shields through sheer weight of numbers.
If this dosn't work, I'm sure there are other ways of reducing the down time caused by this system.



As to custom dice. I think this could work well, but it would really have to be a very good system to work. In addition the solutions I can think of would require large numbers of custom dice, which is not good.


Hi!

That's the tricky part to figure out.

While it is relatively simple to figure out a base mechanic that covers a lot of detail, it inevitable makes this sort of game feasible with less miniatures. While games that handle more of them inevitably make a lot of abstractions (many of which I dislike).

Figuring out to get the cool mechanics of a game like polyversal (or DS2 and others) and adapt them to large games is much more difficult.

I am convinced however that it may only be achievable through custom dice (more probable) or an ingenious use of multiple polyhedral dice (more difficult).

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2017 9:42 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7833
Location: New Zealand
I agree, great discussion!

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 8:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:17 am
Posts: 1627
I have a fix for the custom dice problem, but I have a question first. What is a good percentage to hit for a standard model. Non elite, non conscript. Basically you have a standard infantry platoon of 8 stands what's the percentage you think they'd hit when shooting or melee.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:14 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:34 pm
Posts: 576
Personally somewhere between a third and half the time. My reasoning being that standard infantry are often doing suppressing fire, but at the same time you don't want a game where standard units may as well be carrying around a gun that just shoots 'suppression' everywhere.

_________________
Check out my youtube channel for Tutorials, Battle reports and other stuff in both 6mm and 28mm

www.youtube.com/user/ManticMoments


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:35 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:17 am
Posts: 1627
So for some time i have been working on my own games, and game ideas. Wartorn was a work in progress that is now hosted incomplete but playable on the microworld games website. I like what i did their but i knew what i had wouldnt transfer over very well to a scifi game. So i've been wracking my brain on how i can get a dice mechanic that dont have custom dice yet be very simple to see when rolled.

The dice are basically a percentage to hit. I felt that around 30-40% would be a good standard infantry to hit stat. So i original wanted to go the custom dice route but thats out of my expenses so i scratched that. Then i decided to use polyhedral dice. So my idea is to use the full set or some of the set to designate skill level.

So basically the name of the game is 1,2,3. You roll a dice and if you get 1,2 or 3 you hit.

D4 - 75%
D6 - 50%
D8 - 37.5%
D10 - 30%
D12 - 25%
D20 - 15%

The percents are chance to hit based of rolling 1,2,3, on any of these dice. Not all dices sizes need to used, but a good standard trained infantry could be a D8 to hit, or D10. Elites can be D6 or D8.

I was also thinking of a rule using weight of fire. Lets say the different weapons use armor pentration, and anti infantry. If you have a bunch of infantry stands that don't shoot armor penetration they can still do damage by rolling as many 1's as they can for every 2 or 3 they can penetrate. For instance an 8 stand infantry squad cant damage a tank platoon but they lay everything they have into them with their small arms their weight of fire is 2. So they can now roll 8 d8, they get 3 1's during their roll. So they score 1 damaging hit, the extra 1 is lost since they need 2 1's for each damaging hit. roll damage as normal.

This idea is the main mechanic i was working on for a game engine that encompass all types of game, ground mass combat, skirmish, space combat.

Can also do 1,2,3,4, to hit as well increasing the hit chance.

Any thoughts?
Blind-


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 2:40 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:44 pm
Posts: 301
Sounds like Force-on-Force. It uses a dice shifting mechanic for Troop Quality, but all rolls of 4+ are a success.

Lately, I have been going the opposite direction of these discussions and moving towards less crunch and more abstraction in my game rules. My preferred mechanics right now are dice pools looking for successes in an opposed roll (ala a Shadowrun system). That way you can still toss plenty of dice, but the law of averages make calculations of success relatively easy.

For example: A unit may have 4 dice pool on the attack, and 3 to defend. Firing it can roll up to 4 dice and defending it can roll up to 3. A dice is a success if you roll a 4+. Everytime an attack beats the defend it is a potential hit.

This way, the defender always gets to participate in the action, since no one wants to sit there and just remove models.

_________________
Do you like Free Wargames?
http://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2017 12:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:34 pm
Posts: 576
I actually disagree with the notion that opposed rolls add any real long term enjoyment to a game. It can often just make things take longer to work out, you have to have the board space to roll dice separately, and it can cause annoying outliers in results.
When learning a game, the notion of rolling a dice to defend is a great way to make someone feel involved. However I personally feel that that should not inform your design choices.

On the other hand, I do feel that there is a balance where giving other players an opportunity to react, or to use a special ability to enhance defense at critical moments( or whatever) is good. Opposed dice rolls gives the defending player zero choice, but means they must always participate in a set manner. The latter version gives the defending player agency, even if they only make the choice to act 2 or 3 times in an entire game. I feel that the latter option makes a player far more engaged in a game in the long term, and more likely to play again after their 5th time playing.

Separate point:
I've always liked the idea of 50% chance on each die, and the incrementation coming from the number of dice you are allowed to roll, based on your unit, weapon etc. While this simplifies the 'sorting dice' process, I don't know how it could be done well, without potentially buckets of dice for any sizeable unit. This mechanic is used, somewhat, in Kings of War, and makes the game easy to learn. However I don't know if it would transfer to sci-fi weapons, or to the 6mm scale(even though Mantic are apparently using a similar system for warpath).

_________________
Check out my youtube channel for Tutorials, Battle reports and other stuff in both 6mm and 28mm

www.youtube.com/user/ManticMoments


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:42 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5335
Location: London, UK
Great discussion.

Here are a couple of other approaches

===========

I helped a friend write "King of the Battlefield", rules for Seven Years War historical battles. Having been through many sets that used multiple die rolls to determine fire effectiveness, defensive armour and then morale impact, we ended up using a single combined roll to cover the lot, greatly speeding up combat.

When a formation shoots at a target, the defender throws a white D8 (positive) and red D6 (negative) together, adding factors for cover, range etc. If the result is >= "0" the formation is undamaged, if negative the formation is damaged / reduced effectiveness. Depending on the quality of the formation after one, two or three such losses, the formation is destroyed.

This works really well at the strategic level represented by the rules and reduces dice throwing to a minimum, and could be adapted elsewhere. In KotB players must act more like commanders, moving their troops to achieve desired concentrations, while the relative strengths of formations are less visible, being 'viable' right up to the point where they break leaving holes that must be plugged by reserves.

===========

Another approach that I came across which seemed sensible was to use dice to add a small variation to anticipated results (Warhammer ancients?). Here the player counts up the number of units firing/ fighting giving a base number, and then uses dice to add a variable number to the base giving the total impact.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2017 7:18 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 8:54 pm
Posts: 2194
Location: Cornwall
3rd ed did the one roll method, and though it took time to get used to having no "saving throw" it was much quicker. The problem was sticking to D6, which gave little room for mods, hence the look up table. If using a D10/12/20 system combining mods into one roll would be easy, and much quicker than either.

Eg.

Target value on dice = (Armour - AT/AP Penetration value)+Range modifier+Cover modifier

Dice pools split down into AT and AP.


Sent using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:44 pm
Posts: 301
bertnernie wrote:
I actually disagree with the notion that opposed rolls add any real long term enjoyment to a game. It can often just make things take longer to work out, you have to have the board space to roll dice separately, and it can cause annoying outliers in results.
When learning a game, the notion of rolling a dice to defend is a great way to make someone feel involved. However I personally feel that that should not inform your design choices.

On the other hand, I do feel that there is a balance where giving other players an opportunity to react, or to use a special ability to enhance defense at critical moments( or whatever) is good. Opposed dice rolls gives the defending player zero choice, but means they must always participate in a set manner. The latter version gives the defending player agency, even if they only make the choice to act 2 or 3 times in an entire game. I feel that the latter option makes a player far more engaged in a game in the long term, and more likely to play again after their 5th time playing.


Yes adding choice is usually good. That's why non-replenishable dice pools are better, but then the tracking becomes burdensome. As designers, you always need to thread the balance to chieve what you want and mimic what you think matters.

I have seen to many games try for the "One roll to rule them all" method, and get just as bogged down in creating the Target Number instead of getting on with it and rolling some dice. :D

_________________
Do you like Free Wargames?
http://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Interesting Rules Ideas Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:17 am
Posts: 1627
In all honesty for my i prefer to have a handful of dice and see the numbers rain down. So this is how i would utilize the idea i have put forth.

WoA = weight of arms: weight of arms indicates how many 1's it takes for a unit to land a hit on something that it can normally not target, or count for extra wounds through crits. For instance if a ork unit was shooting/or meleeing a superheavy tank that can only be harmed by an anti armor weapon. This allows even a lowly soldier to have a chance at victory! Picture tom hanks in saving private ryan firing his .45 pistol at the german tiger tank closing in on him! BOOMMMM!!!!

Ork: Orks are ferocious in hand to hand combat but lack the fine motor skills to be great marksman
Shooting| D12| WoA 3
Melee | D8 | WoA 1

Space Marine: Space marines are super soldiers genetically engineered to be superior to any enemy they may come across.
Shooting| D8| WoA 2
Melee | D10| WoA 2

Next thing i would do is define a wound system. I believe giving a set standard for wounds such as orks have low armor but high toughness value would give them a 3 armor value. Space marines are tough with good armor giving them a 4 in armor value. These are off the top of my head numbers and not set in stone.

For instance a unit of ork boyz are shooting at a space marine formation out in the open. 10 ork boy stands shooting at 6 space marine stands. They roll 10 D12, and get 1,1,1,2,5,7,8,9,12,12 As you can see they got 4 hits, and 1 weight of arms crit. So they land 5 wounds. their damage is D6 for shooting lets say. they roll 5 d6 and get 3,3,4,5,5. so the orks have caused 3 fatalities. This doesnt take into account having extra armor for being in cover, wooded area, digging in.. etc. which can add extra armor value and cause infantry to be quiet the pain in the ass to dislodge from a fortified area. Very similar to how infantry are real world.

Anyway, still working on ideas.
So thoughts are welcome.
Blind-


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net