Skip to Content
 

Too much fidling?

297 replies [Last post]
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
A 1 on 1 overkill situation

Long story short again.

I tested all 3 games for a 1 on 1 situation with 1 rifleman shooting another rifleman.

Conclusion:

Here it was clear that the 3d8 or 4d8 or 5d8 or (whatever)d8. Is the reason that 1 unit can do multiple hits.

The mechanics allows overkill on 1 unit.

My prototype game has even the possiblity to allow 4 damage, while the opponent has 1 health. The remaining 3 damage are lost, simply due to how the mechanics work. And yes, a shotgunner can do 24 damage with a chance of (1/6)^12. Only 5 damage is needed there. And for that the unit has a 9% chance. Killing 2 soldiers with the same shot has a chance of 0.4%

My card game doesn't for overkill on 1 unit. When it comes to the number of hitting projectiles.

1 projectile can become multiple hits.
With the accuracy of 50%. This means it could double.
Due to the durability die, it was made clear that the accuracy roll is the reason there is a <1 H/D ratio chance.

I am starting to think to cut in my game. This time the chips. So that the number of units are reduced greatly.
Followed by having 1 die per projectile.
Then add the chips again, in order to track health.

Sure, the bucket of dice returns, but limited. But instead of having this for hundreds of units. It will be only 1 table.

It will also reduce the weird rules. Like being able to increase the number of units, once a card is on the table.

Another limit would be a limit on the cards on the table. Which would automatically limit the dice. Unless wacky cards are played for fun ;)

This way, formations could be made as well.
There is only one thing that I need to take care of...

Army density.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Army density

In a lot of RTS games, you see that stacked units are much stronger than spread out units. Simply due to the fact that stacked units can fire at the same time.

In Starcraft you see this with air vs ground battle's. Prior to the splash vs air with the Broodwar addon. Air had a big advantage in army density.

The overall effect was that the flying units would be the square root of the size of the ground army...stronger. On average that is.

So, if both sides had 36 units, the ground army would have on average, only 6 shooting at the air units.

***

Long story short again.

I figured out how this balancing of army density works for my board game.
Now I need to figure out how it could work for my card game.
I did something with the armor, damage and a threshold effect.

Something similar should be happening for when placing a card.

I am thinking of having the player get the option to still have chips representing number of cards.
This way, you can get squads per card again.
But each chip that represents an unit, will be having a die for itself. Not sure how to balance yet, but here is my first thought, somewhat copying my board game:

1 unit costs 1 unit.
2 units costs 3 units.
3 units costs 6 units.
4 units costs 10 units.
etc.

The card will represent more units. There will be no restock. So, once the squad is gone, its gone.

Defeated cards go to the graveyard. They are not returned to the deck.

I went for the cumulative costs. Since this costs more than the square root. But also for more options.
The army declines once placed on the board. Thus there is a cumulative effect as well.
There is health tracking, no internal cover system. Thus things go downhill with the least handling.

But my main objective has been reached.
1 rifleman will not exceed 1 kill. Even if more damage is done. Simply due to the fact that 1 projectile can hit only 1 target.

Now for the new combat mechanic...

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Similar to my proto-type game

The table has no more than 12 combat cards (units and defences) and 6 base cards.

Each base card can be protected by 1 support card and 1 frontline card.
The value requirements are still that the card in front needs to be bigger than the card behind it. In order to protect it.
So if a base card is worth 5, the support card needs to be worth 5 or more. And the frontline card needs to be worth 5 or more once again.

At the beginning of a round, the player can re-arange any unit. It is possible that units can be placed behind a base card.
It is also possible that if new base cards are added. They are placed in a column with other base cards. But this will remain fixed for the rest of the game.

A column with only base cards is entirely possible. But they can't defend really.

Each column represents a group that can attack or defend.
If one group is attacked, another group can help defend. But they cannot jump in front any more. (room for new attributes)

***

Each card has 1 or more projectiles.
Each projectile is 1 die to be rolled.
First the die is rolled for accuracy.
If it hits, a roll for damage is performed.

And now... I need to be very careful about this one.
If I allow more damage, while overkill is possible.
It is also possible that the same projectile will do more damage on another RPS tier.

I got 2 options here:
1. The roll for damage is the basic roll where the durability is met. In other words. The damage roll is another hit/miss roll. With the H/D ratio of 2 in mind, the chance is 50%. I got this for the public game (2d version of this card game now :D ) And there the chance is 33%.
2. The threshold is no more used as excuse for some balancing. Instead, I also use the old fashioned tier to the power of 2. And then the overkill will be less apparent.

Thus, each projectile will have at least 1 roll. Accuracy of 100% is not rolled. But still a chance is present that way of it failing.

Not sure if I can keep the d8. My other calculations will show me the way. But first let's consider these new adjustments.

***

Well, I guess the previous post still needs consideration.

I either do health tracking or use the threshold.
I did say, I do health tracking. But then the damage die will not be a hit/miss. But rather an ammount of damage.
If each card has health tracking and the H/D ratio is 2. The damage roll will roll 0, 1 or 2.
001122 would be a nice custom die. And I used this 10 years ago as well. It is simple.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Simple choices

H/D ratio is 2.

Threshold balance yes/no?
Yes: A group of fodder has a better chance in defeating a higher tier card.
No: No choice, but to implement health tracking.

The first choice will use less chips. The second choice will render the next quesiton obsolete.

Health tracking yes/no?
Yes: The damage die will be 001122. Chips are used for health tracking, which is 2 times the armor value.
No: The damage die will be 000111.

Either option:
If more than 100% damage is present, overkill will be in effect.
Basic accuracy is always present.

***

Yes and Yes?
I have no idea what the effect is here. I would love to test this out!

Yes and then No?
Will be the closest to the card game of the majority of this topic.

No and then Yes?
Will be the closest to the public version of my board game.

No and No???
While I said, this is not possible. It actually is. However, the higher tier cards will gain a huge advantage in durability. And the game is unbalanced again. The cumulative costs for multiple units will also not be implemented.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
I can't do that

X3M wrote:
...The card will represent more units. There will be no restock. So, once the squad is gone, its gone.

Defeated cards go to the graveyard. They are not returned to the deck...

Hmm... That's an interesting POV. I don't think I will follow suit with that method of play. Why? Because in my Development Deck of 54 cards there are a limited amount of "Troops", "Buildings", "Vehicles" and "Air Units". They're all mixed together... Where "Buildings" are like one-time builds, "Troops" since there can be some kind of limit like "3 of each" means that you would want MORE of this card ... And that leads me to believe that defeated units will go into a Discard Pile (and not Graveyard or Exile) allowing the card to be re-used when the Development Deck is "exhausted" and requires a re-shuffle.

So there is no "running-out of cards" because the discard will be able to be re-shuffled and cards (typically conquered units and soldiers) will be able to be replayed.

Remember that in my version there is a LUCK-BASED Victory condition. When a Player defeats a Platoon (3 Squadrons), they get to choose from five (5) or less Victory Cards one of which is the "White Flag" which declares this opponent as DEFEATED (surrender). I like this idea a lot and want to preserve it.

Therefore it is not only about COMBAT superiority is more about winning battles and choosing the right Victory Card in order to defeat an opponent.

Sincerely.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Getting back to the CHIPS...

Most Poker Chips come in FIVE (5) colors:

- White (2x = 100 chips)
- Red (1x = 50 chips)
- Green (1x = 50 chips)
- Blue (1x = 50 chips)
- Black (1x = 50 chips)

For a Grand Total of 300 chips. It's $49.99 CAD with the case, 1 Dealer chip and a set of 54 Playing cards.

So this means that the following seems logical:

- White = 20 Units = 100 chips = 2,000 units = 500 per player
- Red = 10 Units = 50 chips = 500 units = 125 per player
- Green = 5 Units = 50 chips = 250 units = 62.5 per player
- Blue = 2 Units = 50 chips = 100 units = 25 per player
- Black = 1 Unit = 50 chips = 50 units = 12.5 per player

This is my first TRY at the Chip Distribution based on what I can BUY local to my area. IDK... What are you thoughts on this???

Have I made some kind of "miscalculation" or forgot something?! Is this the RIGHT way to make the "White" ones (2x) worth the STRONGEST Unit value??

This is still a WIP. I'm not sure if "White" should be the "1s" instead... This is my first attempt and will no doubt require PLAYTESTING to figure out what is better. TBD.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
This is about a RE-WORK with some better counts

For my CUSTOM Poker Chips they again come in FIVE (5) colors:

- White (2x = 100 chips)
- Red (1x = 80 chips)
- Green (1x = 50 chips)
- Blue (1x = 50 chips)
- Black (1x = 40 chips)

For a Grand Total of 320 chips.

The custom distribution that I have is something similar to this:

- White = 10 Units = 100 chips = 1,000 units = 250 per player
- Red = 5 Units = 80 chips = 400 units = 100 per player
- Green = 4 Units = 50 chips = 200 units = 50 per player
- Blue = 2 Units = 50 chips = 100 units = 25 per player
- Black = 1 Unit = 40 chips = 40 units = 10 per player

This means that my HIGHEST unit count (in a group) is 10 Units which corresponds to the size of a Squadron. Logical for sure.

I've got to let the "dust settle" and see if this is actually GOOD or not! Hehehe. One thing for sure the "Toys'R Us" doesn't have this chip count... Look like I'll need to check ALIEXPRESS for a custom product (if possible).

Now for some shopping! (LOL)

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
3rd TRY ... More logical...

For my CUSTOM Poker Chips they again come in FIVE (5) colors:

- White (2x = 100 chips)
- Red (1x = 80 chips)
- Green (1x = 40 chips)
- Blue (1x = 40 chips)
- Black (1x = 40 chips)

For a Grand Total of 300 chips. This is to FIT in standard cases with 300 pcs.

The custom distribution that I have is something similar to this:

- White = 10 Units = 100 chips = 1,000 units = 250 per player
- Red = 5 Units = 80 chips = 400 units = 100 per player
- Green = 4 Units = 40 chips = 160 units = 40 per player
- Blue = 2 Units = 40 chips = 80 units = 20 per player
- Black = 1 Unit = 40 chips = 40 units = 10 per player

The important thing to NOTE is that it is 300 pcs... Since that seems to be the correct COUNT (100/300/500 pcs.) The 100 pcs trays are much too SMALL and the 300 pcs. aluminum case is PERFECT with this distribution.

I still have to see if I can get a custom content for the chips or not. Or maybe get like 50 of EACH and then make the necessary corrections for the game... And then worry about this at a LATER time. This sounds like the better strategy! TBH.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Playtest for chips

I think you should play test for seeing how many chips you need.

I know I used a ridiculous ammount of 36 riflemen.
But I also had a 3 in 1 system with the chips.
Then again, it might be confusing for other people.
36 = 27+9, only 2 chips there.
35 = 27+3+3+1+1, 5 chips here.
26 = 9+9+3+3+1+1, 6 chips here.

I think, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50 etc. is the best way to go. Since the Euro also follows this example.

36 = 20+10+5+1,4 chips there.
35 = 20+10+5, 3 chips here.
26 = 20+5+1, 3 chips here.

But how many do I need?
I have no idea since my game is in shambles again.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Not sure about what I am going to do...

Here is a screenshot for the PRICE of 500 Chips. Granted they do look REAL NICE, and they are customized (for the values on the opposite side) in addition to coming in FIVE (5) real nice colors too:

Even with a 25% discount THIS WEEK ONLY ... It's ALMOST $500 CAD!!! IDK... I've got to think about this some more and am running out of time for the 25% off deal so I'm not sure...!

Anyone have any thoughts as to the validity of this price??? About $0.75 per chip and I chose a 300 pcs. case in this particular order. Again, thoughts???

Note #1: I could also buy a cheap set of chips from "Toys'R Us" for about $55 CAD... They have no values or any fancy logos and such, but they come in FIVE (5) colors: White (2x), Red, Green, Blue and Black.

I think for the PROTOTYPE, I could use that case... Why? Because even IF it would make a REAL COOL prototype (the ~$500 CAD one) ... Is it essential as a "prototype" COMPONENT... Or is it just EXCESS???

I'm thinking EVEN IF I design a cool LOGO which I am working on ATM... The reality is that it's 10x the PRICE! I can't possibly justify this cost. Then you need to think... Even IF the game was MADE, if it costs wholesale HALF the price (or $250 CAD) who in their right mind would buy such a GAME??? It would be like $500 CAD + the game another $75 CAD... Insane. I really need to explore this design decision.

Yeah, poker chips FEEL cool and add an element of "Style" (albeit a Poker-Style) ... But the cost is just TOO HIGH. I need to RE-EXPLORE my alternatives and see what is POSSIBLE. Right now, CHIPS are just seeming like they are TOO PRICEY even for the commercial version.

Anyhow more thinking at this time is REQUIRED! Cheers all.

Stormyknight1976
Offline
Joined: 04/08/2012
How about this idea?

Instead of having 100 chips for each unit, you can still have 1000 units on 1 chip.

So 10 poker chips:

1: 100 soldiers
2: 200 soldiers
3: 300 soldiers
4: 400 soldiers
5: 500 soldiers
6: 600 soldiers
7: 700 soldiers
8: 800 soldiers
9: 900 soldiers
10: 1000 soldiers

10 single poker chips per unit.

Or whatever number you want for each colored poker chip

This way you could still have 300 poker chips from the clay poker chips from any store brand in your local area and call it a day.

This is what I've done for my game Dymino Monsters.

14 different units with only 30 cards each.

The first 10 cards start from 100-1000.
Then from 2000 to 20,000. Then from 30,000-100,000. The last 2 cards of the 30 cards. I just halved the numbers 150,000-200,000.

200,000 soldiers on 1 card. Nothing more than that.

Archers, battle standards (house banner soldiers: technically flag footsman) soldiers, knights, warriors, mounts, guards, catapult creatures, allies of other creatures/Monsters or other factions.

I also these numbers in my game and there not percentages just small modified numbers.

It's based on 2,4,6,8, - 1,3,5,7,9, - 3,6,9,12.

There is adding and subtracting for attack and defense depending on if you are in attack phase or defensive phase.

This why I can have so many cards in my game based on the math. And yes , there are larger numbers for different factions, Monsters/creatures , the Titans etc.

The domino set mechanic, I base the numbers from double six , double nine, double 12 and double 15 plus gut instinct.

Jesse

Stormyknight1976
Offline
Joined: 04/08/2012
Poker chips

White, yellow, red, blue, grey, green, orange, black, pink, purple, maroon, light blue, brown.

13 different colors it varies from location.

But, you can use them as units, spell format, land markers, traps, weapon cache, armor cache, food/rations, etc and divide the chips accordingly to whatever you need them to be.

Jesse

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Great advice... But

Stormyknight1976 wrote:
13 different colors it varies from location.

Hmm... That's a LOT. Originally I was going to go with NINE (9) colors of chips then I realized that the amount was TOO HIGH simply based on chip counts for one of the colors: how many?! 100 each = 900 chips total?!

That was too much. Then when I looked at the PRICE of chips, they were $0.75 each with a "special" promo discount this week... And it just doesn't make any sense what so ever!

Even IF I could make them for $0.25 USD each (IF...) That would mean $75 USD just for the Chips (300 pcs.) That's still much, much too high. I mean if you think about it... It would DOUBLE the price of the game... As I am thinking about a $75 USD price point (that's just an estimate ATM).

But I'm sure you get the point. And yeah I understand using different VALUES and different COUNTS ... But STILL... In the END, it all boils down to 300 Chips... And that is over $75 USD to make if not more expensive EVEN if you make the chips in China.

Okay let's say you SHAVE off another $25 USD ... Making them $50 USD. That still is the price of some games out-there in the market. $125 USD for the game is still INSANE no matter how nice and polished the chips look like. It's just COST PROHBITIVE to making something reasonable in terms of pricing!

Note #1: We went to $0.25 USD per piece x 300 pcs. = $75 USD.

Now I said that price point is TOO HIGH (even at that price), so I said we'd shave off another $25 USD... Which means $0.25 x 2/3 = $0.17 USD EACH chip.

The problem is that NOBODY will sell and make poker chips for $0.17 USD. The Game Crafter and previous experience in the printing world, $0.09 USD per PAPER CARD, so it would be DOUBLE the price but still too LOW (as a cost to make the chips - IMHO).

I'm re-thinking how I want to approach this problem. Because honestly it may be VERY COOL and have a very tactical-feel... But it's way too cost prohibitive TBH.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Ow jeez

And here I am, planning to have no more than 3 different colours.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I still need to make decisions

But explaining it all is a tldr topic...

I still remember that my original combat mechanic was called counter intuitive.

If a tank does 16 damage. And the target has 1 armor.
My game rules say, that the tank damage is reduced to 1 damage.

And only after that, health is being tracked.

Thus an unit with 5 health and armor 1, will take 1 damage.
While an unit with 5 health and 16 armor, will take 16 damage.

This seems to be too much of an issue. I have to remove the H/D ratio from the health. Thus a cannon damage wouldn't matter any more and simply kill the infantry unit if it hits.

The die roll will always be a yes or no roll for each projectile.
I did the same for the "public" version at a certain point.

So, the first decision has been made, the default die is a 000111 die (again).

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Cumulative dice??

I am constantly thinking about the number of dice that are used. 3d8, 4d8 and 5d8 didn't work because the whole default deck would have the same result.

And before I change the rest of the game. Maybe I got another option to consider.

Cumulative dice.

***

While I changed the game to having 6 columns as 6 groups. And each group will fight another group. The roll can be big.

I am not going to roll just 1 die per group.
Nor 1 die per card.
It should be 1 die per projectile.

I always use the magic number, 36 riflemen.
In my proto-type game, we roll 12d6, 3 times.

The hit/miss is for all projectiles. Accuracy is a different matter.
Perhaps I can use a d8 that gives the outcome for 3 projectiles.

The custom d8:
0 1 1 1 2 2 2 3

1 projectile can still use a d6:
0 0 0 1 1 1

If I add more custom dice. How many sides do they need?
2 projectiles, d4
4 projectiles, d16
5 projectiles, d32 well, that is not gona work.
d12 and d20 can't help here.

But still, if a player manages to reach 36 riflemen, 12d8 could be rolled.

***

And now for reducing higher numbers. If more than 3 dice are used. The next die should cover a double ammount of projectiles. Meaning each hit counts as 2 hits. Maybe multiplying by 3 is a better idea though.

Where the first idea was 3d8 or 4d8 or 5d8.
The proto-type game is 3*12d6
The above idea gives 12d'8
And the new idea gives 3d'8 + 3'3d'8

Only 6d'8 with the new idea. What do you think?

The dice are kinda rolled for the chips again.

1, 3, 9, 27 etc.
36 units are represented like how the player wants to.
But it only starts at 27 units and more that the dice will be worth more.
1, d6
3, d'8
9, 3d'8
27, 3'3d'8
8, 2d'8 + 2d6

What do you think?

Stormyknight1976
Offline
Joined: 04/08/2012
Suggestion

How about 3d12's.

That's 36 points, instead of rolling 12 D6 three times. 4 different colors. Yellow, red, black, white.

Different colors for different effects.

That's just 12 dice total per player. That will be cost effective. That's 48 dice total with 4 players. You can still use your percentages per target.

Jesse

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Interesting

Stormyknight1976 wrote:
How about 3d12's.

That's 36 points, instead of rolling 12 D6 three times. 4 different colors. Yellow, red, black, white.

Different colors for different effects.

That's just 12 dice total per player. That will be cost effective. That's 48 dice total with 4 players. You can still use your percentages per target.

Jesse

Are you suggesting adding up the value's that are rolled?
Are the dice custom?
Is 0 possible?
What if the number of soldiers is different?

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Discuss this with Jesse maybe... See what he thinks!

Stormyknight1976 wrote:
How about 3d12's...

The problem I see with D12s is that the faces are pretty small. You couldn't put Fractions (like 1/2 or 3/4, etc.) But I think the goal is to ensure that whatever DIE you use, you figure out the underlying challenge. And I think that in @X3M's case, it's using dice such that they produce more DAMAGE than 100%.

That's what happens when the values of these DICE, no matter what KIND of dice they are, the fundamental thing is somehow the BEST ODDS or ACCURACY should be AT MOST 100%. So even if he uses 3D12s... He will need to find a common divisor and ensure that even with 3D12s, the TOTAL of combining those dice = 100% and not higher...

This IMHO is what makes or breaks @X3M's engine. I could be wrong, but from the analysis that I did... This seems like the legitimate issue.

Also it's NOT one dice per unit either. So there is no need to ROLL a bucket full of dice just because you have 36 riflemen. In my version there is ONLY one (1) Custom D8 rolled... And I don't have any problems.

Again this is an ENGINE issue. I can't fix it. It's up to how @X3M wants his game to WORK: is it 1D8 or 3D6 or 3D8 or 3D12, etc. Can be any of these it's a matter of personal choice TBH.

Cheers.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Bucket of dice in the prototype

Didn't had this problem.
Because the outcome was < health
And damage wasn't shared among multiple units.

It is that last line that is the problem with the 3d8. Because needing 3 hits and rolling these. Multiplied by a lower hits needed for a kill. Is what broke the game.

And the rps was also too soft.

I don't have time now to try to figure it out.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
You know

My public game didn't had this problem.

There the number of units on a region was no more than....6.
The maximum number of projectiles could be 12, depending on the units. But ehm... those where special. And the 6 dice where simply rolled twice :)

It all worked out in that game.

***

The card game has many, many chips... That is my problem.

So, perhaps health tracking should be done. But.... The threshold balance removed.

This means, I am going to make my card game much, much closer to the board games.

Still, the number of dice are a problem. Unless, I start cutting the whole table into parts. Just like the board game.

What do you think?

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Another difference

The board game, only a few troops fight. The rest has to wait a round.

The card game allowes all cards to fight...
Should I see if I can change this as well. as soon as i solve the dice problem?

Or perhaps use it as a fix??

A player can attack with no more than.... 3 different cards?
The defender can defend with no more than.... 3 different cards???

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
But honestly, I think I

But honestly, I think I should give this topic a rest for a week or 2. :)

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Let's do that...

X3M wrote:
But honestly, I think I should give this topic a rest for a week or 2. :)

It will give me more time to ponder the issues at hand, even though in most cases I have work-arounds that seem to be working ATM. You mentioned having three (3) unit formations attacking, I already had this with a custom D8 for the formation dice (000 to 111) which determine which units will go into battle. You also had a multiplier which would go over 100% (2x and up) which cause overkill and that also is not an issue in my design since Accuracy can be AT MOST 100% but is usually lower. At the same time there is no 0% meaning that all your units are effective but the ratio to how high this effectiveness varies. We BOTH have issues with chips and the high-cost of using those and I know I sent you a PM about the possibility of using Dry-Erase Markers/Pens instead of chips. A cheap alternative that could work in all cases.

Anyhow I agree, let's wait a few weeks (like until 13 June or so...) giving you time to relax, reset and re-focus on the various issues. All the while trying NOT to post TL;DR posts and keeping the conversation going without too much technical issues/details.

Cheers @X3M!

Note #1: I have some ideas... But TBH I'm not so sure how effective they are. So I'll continue to ponder on those ideas and see IF I can come up with new ones.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
You're not allowed to comment @X3M!!! Hehehe

Just read some of my preliminary thoughts on what I have as an IDEA. So instead of using "Chips" as currency and saying that "1 Chip" = "1 Unit", I have another idea that I would like to SHARE. But again this is assuming that you leave this thread ALONE for few extra weeks.

So here are my thoughts so far (and they can be discussed further). All I want for now, is for you to THINK about the ideas and WAIT until you've had some time to think about them. Okay so here I go:

questccg wrote:
Instead of having one (1) Rifleman as a Unit/Card, what if we were to bring some additional BALANCING to the Units/Cards. What I mean is sort of like this: Riflemen = 6 units. Each "Chip" is worth 5x Multiplier. Each player has "25 Chips" to build up his army/arsenal for combat.

So your Riflemen = 6 units x 5 Chips = 30 units. Assuming that there are a TOTAL of "5 Stacks", meaning that on average there can be AT MOST "5 Chips" per stack. 5 x 5 = 25 Chips.

Therefore you could have Riflemen = 6 units x 6 Chips = 36 Units. (As per all the samples you've been describing)

Okay let me continue to SHARE some additional thoughts. Here I go:

questccg wrote:
The idea is that we would need to BALANCE the units such that their quantity is BALANCED to the "Riflemen". So "6" Riflemen is balanced with "2" M1 Abrams Tanks. This is just an example... We would need to further BALANCE the units with the number of them being deployed PER CARD.

So this would mean that "5 Chips" on the Tank, gives you 2 units x 5 Chips = 10 Units. (Again I'm not 100% sure this is accurate, we would need to discuss further)

In some ways we would TRY to "Balance" or quasi-balance the units such that it requires LESS "Chips". Chips are very expensive and 25 per player from 2 to 4 players is 50 to 100 "Chips". If we can price chips at $0.35 USD that's $35 USD for the chips. Still pricey ... But more affordable than $100+ USD for variable amounts of chips.

What do you think about this IDEA??? Again wait until you have had some time to THINK about it. Let your mind "reflect" upon the idea and wait until you've had some time to mull it over... In a couple weeks or so. If this REMOTELY interesting, think about it and do some tests... Report back on or around 13 June ... Giving me time to see if this will work or not.

I would expect that attacks come in "waves". So attack for Wave #1 would be only 15 chips (an early strike)... Could be less this is just an attempt to show some kind of way of computing the attack (logically).

I'm not sure how SCORING would work ... Obviously we don't only want ONE (1) WAVE... That would be too boring. And ATM I don't have ideas for SCORING either. Just that we could get away with 100 "Chips" (25 per player and assuming a maximum of 4-Players).

Maybe this type of ORGANIZATION or GROUPING might prove to be MORE VALUABLE and easier to MANAGE and BALANCE with all the units.

What do you think??? Could this WORK?? And do you LIKE the idea?

Cheers @X3M. Again please give the idea some time to ponder upon and see what you can work out in terms of concept.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Again ... I will keep this SHORT and BRIEF

Instead of just having "6 Chips" = 36 Riflemen (6 x 6) ... Players could CHOOSE HOW MANY units (think chips) they want to BATTLE with. So let's say I have like "6 Chips" and I decide to PLAY two (2) of them... for my ATTACK.

The opponent can they decide that he will COUNTER (Up the Ante) my 12 Riflemen four (4) Chips.

Now I can use one of my other allied units (to the LEFT or RIGHT) and CALL (+2 Chips = 4 vs. 4) or again Up the Ante and play +3 Chips).

Next the whole ROLLING for Accuracy occurs and we see how the "chips land" (Pun intended - Hahaha)!!!

That to me SOUNDS very EXCITING! It's kinda like POKER but War-Game-Like! With a BET, RAISE and a CALL (sorta) mechanics. This sounds so EPIC!!!

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Fixed the example a bit

Why? Because 2 Tanks cannot defeat 6 Riflemen. 2 Projectiles can at most kill two (2) Riflemen and since that is NOT in the magnitude of the squadron... That means that the Tanks are "ineffective" versus the Riflemen. But 4x 2 Tanks = 8 projectiles... That can MAYBE defeat the squadron of "6" Riflemen DEPENDING on the Accuracy roll. The opponent RAISES to "4 Chips"...

The opponent has 8 Tanks x ? = 6 Riflemen. ? = 6/8 = 3/4... The opponent would need to roll 75% or higher in terms of Accuracy to kill the Riflemen and then Riflemen cannot defeat the Tank ... Because they would need ANTI-TANK Missiles...

So you could UP-THE-ANTE with 2 "Rocket Soldiers" which make the "Chip Count" even = 4 vs. 4 (You CALL). And now while the opponent's Tanks can kill one (1) squadron of your Riflemen (6 units), your Rocket Soldiers can defeat up to "6" Tanks given the Accuracy roll for those units. So you would need 2 Rocket Soldiers x ? = 2 Tanks or 2/2 (or 100% or higher) to defeat the "2" Tanks in one grouping... But EXPLODING armaments use a special D6 which ranges from 50% HIT to 300% HIT. That means that potentially you can kill 1 Tank (minimum 0.5) or 6 Tanks (maximum = 3.0).

Plus since you CALLED the opponent CANNOT RAISE another time...

It works great with the POKER-Aspect. I'm still not 100% sure how effective it would be in terms of units combating each other.

Hmm... Like I said more THOUGHT. These are embryonic ideas only.

Note #1: This also does NOT ATM include the "Damage" [DMG] of each unit. This could be in essence the # of Projectiles INSTEAD... Like the Riflemen it is "1" where as an Air Bomber it is "4" and EXPLODING too.

This would mean that a Bomber could do ONE (1) Chip and do 1 x 1 x 4 x Accuracy = 4 x Accuracy = 4 x [0.5 to 3.0] which means "2" to "12" units of damage. Which means that a Bomber is HIGHLY EFFECTIVE against "Ground Units" (Both vehicles and troops).

Very NEAT so far... I'm really digging this!

Note #2: If Player #2 wanted to INCREASE his odds of success over the Riflemen (12 = 2x 6 units), instead of only adding "4 Chips", he added "6 chips", we would have 6x 2 units = 12! That would increase the odds of one successful attack 12 x ? = 12 Riflemen (12/12 = 100%) OR (6/12 = 50%) which means that to defeat one squadron of "6 Riflemen", the Accuracy roll needs to be 50% or HIGHER! That would mean the Chip counts = 2 vs. 6, requires +4 to CALL...

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut