Well, I guess it belongs here. I earned myself a new trick for balance seeking. I ought to share.
1 - Super fast playtests
I did a number of "playtests" running in the millions now. comparing 3 different dice rolls each time.
And the results can bother me a lot.
I am not talking about different units battling each other. But instead, the same unit battling itself.
While the die with 0 hits in them creates better balance, it also takes longer to calculate. This is a good thing.
I already knew that having a difference of 1, means a lot in the long run. But now having random rolls and watching what the end results might be. I expected a bit more balance by this randomness. After all, the first shot matters.
It turns out that with an equal amount of units. The win/loss is 1:1
With having 1 more unit, this changes into 2:1 (an acceptable risk)
With having 2 more units, this changes into 4:1 (a high risk)
And with having 3 or ore units, this exceeds 8:1 to
infinite:1 at about a difference of 6 units.
The only positive side is that the victor has their health reduced to a lower amount by a notable factor. Since an average is tracked for each unit. I could compile after matches. These can be used to balance the total game. After all, I have a win percentage. And multiplying this with the next win percentage should end up at 50%.
With this method, I can create "perfectly" balanced missions. However, I should consider the tricks a player can pull in the game. And put this winning percentage at 75% tops (3:1) Thus a skilled player in tactics will have a chance to win AND loose.
Should this 3:1 be higher?
Personal note: I need to specialise the simulator to more different units + starting health conditions
***
There are more tricks to create more balance in wargames. But I am not sure if people here are interested in them. Ask if you are :)
Some are well known for being used.
The 3 on 1 was more of an winning rate against less skilled players. With equal skill, the chance will be 1 on 1.
Now, for this 1 on 1, other balancing tricks are needed. The 3 on 1 however is better for 1 player against an AI. These games can't make use of the other tricks. You would only have troops and some terrain influence in these 1 player missions.
There for, this simulator will be of great use to me.
***
Having players a force of 3 times bigger than an opponent will occur. Buy not in single player missions.
This 3 to 1 has normally a 99 to 1 win ratio. If not 100%. Although about 25 percent or less would die.
It suprized me that you said 3 times bigger. But I think you are right. After all, the first initial force looks overwhelming. But is often not worthwhile.
There are some tricks countering this that work great together:
- (re)building troops.
- The right choice in RPS as reaction. Target specific weapons with best choice of armor. Or just an unit with one specific annoying job: hhhhHHiT and RUN!
- Making defences a major part of the game, in other words, promoting camping. These also promote gaining time for the defending player. Resulting in a bigger and better (re)build.
These tricks have their best effect when the attacker has to cross more distance for the right reïnforcements.