New weapon properties needed

Yes, it is indeed my intention in making interesting choices of weapons.

Well, of course we don't roll d6 with an accuracy of 6. It was just for comparison.
And there is a second roll that is depending on the number of hits. But shows no difference in influence thus far.

I could call the 4 weapons 1x 6/6, 2x 3/6, 3x 2/6 and 6x 1/6 if that is easier to understand.

I tested in my simulator. And the score of the 1x6/6 against all other weapons are:
111% against 2x 3/6
115% against 3x 2/6
121% against 6x 1/6

That was for a 1 on 1. (I simulated 100,000 times) Obvious the lower accuracy means a better chance in killing. But also in doing overkill. That is why they are actually worse in the long run.
That effect goes away when I have like 30 vs 30 soldiers. Where the end result is only 104% for 1x6/6 versus 6x1/6.

While you need only 3 hits against the weakest soldiers. Having 6 hits is indeed overkill.
It is not really a choice. If you like to go for a long run, you go for the best accuracy.

So my guess is, that I need to have more reasons for players to choose the weapon they like to equip their soldiers with.

Surely,
the way of upgrading a weapon,
or the soldiers that take opportunities,
cannot be the only 2 reasons for this.

And the reply is some sort of TLDR. Although in blocks. I tried to respond to as much as possible as short as possible.

Exactly the problem. While the inaccurate weapons have 2 subtle advantages. Players won't see these.

The percentage of wins goes down. With increasing the number of soldiers. And increasing the health for each soldier. But it never goes exactly 100% or below 100%.

This is already the case. Every projectile will hit something. And it seems to be balanced out by the fact that all 6 can easily miss too. Especially in a long run. Which surprised me.

***

Origin of the less accuracy.

The previous main purpose of less accuracy was: Making the expensive weapons cheaper. It also created more balance to the game. But it only had this purpose when the weapons had different RPS effects. Breaking through armor has its price, but it was ok if it occasionally missed. In the long run, a rocket would win against a tank, but not against a soldier.

***

Well, I named 2 subtle ones. Apparently their effect on the game was less than I imagined. And that is why I am troubled right now with having this "choice".

It had an origin. And that purpose will remain. All I want to tackle now is the "Why even do that on the smallest weapons?" part. Because this question of yours is exactly what we are having right now.

Agreed. Some sort of extra mini RPS could help? But I have no idea where to begin with in this case.

The current situation is:
The 1x6/6 has 100XP for that one bullet.
The 2x3/6 has 50XP for each bullet.

If both gain 150XP, than the second weapon has 1 more upgrade. That is the current advantage for the second weapon.

It is the second weapon that can kill in the first turn. But in the long run it is weaker despite the kills.

Setup; like my artillery, which need 1 turn to deploy. Fast enemies have plenty of time to run.
Cooldown; is something that requires a lot of handling. I already have to trouble them with tracking health and upgrades for the units. Which both are by the given situation. Cooldown is always.

Please explain. I am curious. Because I think it could help me with my current problem.

The game is there. I am trying to cut this current branch that has sprouted. Due to other branches that I helped growing.

***

Lets just say, the game is to big to be described here. (In practise with the board it is still an hour of explanation) Therefore I only described this one part. Sorry for that. But I appreciate that you answer any way. Because blind answers might give the best idea's/solutions!

These secondary effects. I think they have some merit.

And the very next turn, these guns don't fire? I can see this work. It would mean, - 1 bullet. Thus 6x1/6 would become 5x1/6 for 1 turn. While 1x6/6 would become 0x6/6. A; it needs ALOT of tweaking for balance. B; a major part of the problem is still the long run.

I already got this one in the form of upgrades. But the problem remains unchanged with this. Linking it more to the problem might show interesting results. But I have no idea in how to do that.

A fast firing gun would benefit from this. It is some sort of the same as the slagged gun. But I think that if I add shields to certain units. This might actually work. And there is some sort of RPS effect in it. Again, a lot of tweaking, but it makes sense.

I got this one covered. But I find it cool that I am not the only one thinking of this.

A weapon that needs to warm up? That is a cool idea. It would work like having an average of 3. Starts with 2. And at top it would be 4. This is an excellent idea. And works very well with the inaccurate weapons. Actually, it only works with the inaccurate weapons since they have so many bullets to work with.
The simulator that I have cannot work this out. Because this effect is influenced by micro management on the troops. The inaccurate have to move in close to the enemy. Then they need enough time to warm up their weapons before it has a positive effect. This clearly is an additional choice. And worthwhile.

5 hits and he is dead. With numbers working in 30 soldiers. It will not be much of use. Only when you have a 1 on 1 battle. But it is sort of the same as the warming up weapon. How could this one be applied? A temporary upgrade is the only way I see this. Which is a good idea as well, no doubt. But it doesn't help tackling the problem.

I already have this covered. But are you saying that the chance on inaccurate weapons should be even higher?

Well, I did read what you had to say. And making my game faster and faster is a good thing to do. Don't mind me scrapping things. I do overcomplicate things. And this is obviously one of them.

***

Last month, we scrapped individual XP. It is gathered on a big pile now. And players kinda create 3 groups of soldiers. Those without upgrades, and those with the same upgrades on armor, and those with the same upgrades on damage.

***

Now to scrapping dice.

We are dealing with an exceptional exception situation here. That is.
6 dice, a bleeding out amount. Happens 40% of the time.
12 would be with a normal army. Happens 20% of the time.
18 would be more or less at the beginning of a war. 10% of the time.
The infantry and anti infantry groups have 18 to 36, which are exceptions. This is rather large, about 25% of the time. And for these we already have the rule that dice count twice. Our current upper level is 18 dice.

With this exceptional exception situation. We would divide by 12. (36*6/12=18). And use 18 dice.

Is 18 still to much? I'll do a survey amongst my fellow warriors to see what they have to say about it.

Something for you all to know is that each turn, about 1/3th dies. And in one round, 3 of these turns can be played. Each turn is max 5 minutes. And goes down when the number of units goes down.
In case of infantry we have:
36>24>16>10>6>4>2>1>0

This game is a long one if you have multiple armies to play with. And ehm, somehow they like it. But if we can reduce the time of one turn. That would mean a lot.

***

Well, leaving out the dice? That is a rather odd suggestion. But if I where to do so. That would mean simply counting the soldiers and reduce the enemy with them. There would be no randomness.

Having just 1 die roll for adding up. I understand this method. But that would mean that the complete army is depending on one die.
Should terrain influence also be done with this one die?
I could try, but I am not sure how to go with this.

Can you give me an example with an army of lets say 23 soldiers?

***

There is this event card that does exactly as you have described. [Teamwork] makes each group type of die roll depending on just 1 die roll.

***

On a side note. I have noticed how players rather play on the board, where the number of soldiers and tanks is less. In case of infantry, the 18 pops up again. Perhaps I should halve the number of units then?

I will take a look in the books you mentioned.

This too is a valid option to add to the game. But I need to be careful with it. Or else it would imbalance the game greatly.

This rolling at the start of the battle is an idea. But I think there is already plenty of guessing for the players.
Before we start, we have each our own deck of cards. Each card has the information of the unit that we want to use. We select those that we deem worthy for the battle of that day. They added their own fluff and pictures :) Which is actually fun.

***

Dice

I asked 3 players about the number of dice. They think 18 is doable. But it might just be us thinking that. More is too much. But sometimes they feel it is needed to play with 36. This surprised me.

They also said that a group of maximum 18 units to play with is plenty. But they don't mind having a second army standing right beside it.

Thus plenty of dice, but divided amongst the turns.

---

Weapons

I asked them how they feel about the 4 different versions of 1 weapon.
They had yet to notice the difference in the long run (except for the simulator supplier).
It seems my game actually forces players to look only 1 to 3 turns ahead. In that case, 3 of 4 versions are valid for the small arms.

They like 1x6/6 and 3x2/6 a lot.
2x3/6 is also often used.

Somehow they add more and more range to their weapon of choice when the accuracy is less. Perhaps because these weapons are "easier" to upgrade.

But they discard 6x1/6.
[1], it has the biggest chance on overkill when you overpower the enemy. Which is a lost cause and the reason for the 21% inefficiency.
[2], in a one against two fight, this overkill is actually the lowest if it comes to making 2 kills. The chance is there, but now very very low. 1/46656. And for one kill we are talking about 26%. Which is a good chance.
[3], since 18 dice is the maximum. The desired effects of rolling are actually not there. Unless we are talking about the big glass cannons. Which the army only has 3 of. (3x6=18)
Snipers too require 18+ dice for better effects. There are 6 snipers in one army, yet each requires 6 dice.

They too think that I am overcomplicating things. But they suggest to leave it the way it is. And letting the game evolve at our own pace. They said that I should stop being little miss princess perfect. (I am sorry, I laughed at this comment :D )

In short.

1x6/6 yes
2x3/6 sometimes
3x2/6 yes
6x1/6 only for the glass cannons

***

No matter, the suggestions given here are good ones. I simply put them in my box of mayhem. And I will pull idea's from the books that you have mentioned too.

I have a little successful update to this little issue.

Seeing as how one weapon has one high accurate bullet and another has 6 inaccurate bullets.

Several additions described down here in the TLDR post. But also summarized.

The first addition gives more progress to the game. And is problem related.

The second addition is a mirror of the first one. Slows down the game, but is useful for half of the players. And is also problem related.

The third one, is some prototype regarding super weapons. Their design. And the combination of warm up weapons.
Not problem related. But adds flavour to the game for small arms too.
Does not speed up the game if done wrong.

***

Addition 1

There are already Event Cards that add 1 more bullet to the list for 1 round.

Meaning that the accurate weapon doubles, while the inaccurate weapon has a factor of 1,17.

So I thought of simply adding a new Event Card that adds 1 more accuracy to each bullet.

Where 1/6th becomes 2/6th and
6/6th becomes 7/6th (remains 1, but has a new bullet with 1/6th).

Both weapons can now enjoy the same 200% effect from a certain event card.

Of course is a 1x1/6 (special weapon against the highest tiers of armor) enjoying the possibility of 2 different Event Cards. Giving it 400%.

Further notice, since the 6x1/6 has 121% against it. I simply put the new Event Card 6 times in the pile while the other card is 5 times in the pile.

OR

6/6 is the limit, no new bullet with 1/6 for high accuracy weapons. Thus rendering the Event Card useless for the high accuracy weapons. And making it more valid for the other weapons. But I don't like that. A little survey amongst my players will do, I hope.

Now for a good name for this card. (And the other one since they compliment each other)

Tracer/Tracker?

***

Addition 2a and 2b

2 More Even Cards.
This idea sprouted from Soulfinger.

1 Reduces the amount of bullets by 1 for 1 round.

The other one reduces the accuracy by 1 for 1 round. And this one is the mirror of the first addition.

Still be needing a good name for these.

I can't use Lucky and Unlucky since those 2 are already in use.

***

Addition 3

Warm up. Also an idea sprouted by Soulfinger.

A lot of imbalance was lurking around with this one. But with another ingredient (cooldown). I got an excellent idea.

Instead of 2-3-4. I simply had the idea of a weapon that has 2 all the time.
But has 1 extra bullet with cooldown 2. And another extra bullet with cooldown 3.

I also can use this on other weapons like Snipers, where they aim, but not fire immediately. Or super weapons.

((True cooldown is equal to other weapons when it waits until it may fire. False cooldown is what you see in ALL rts games.))

Even though this is an addition. It does not help making 6x1/6 more useful or needed.

And tracking cooldown is something you rather only do with super weapons. But if your small arms are already firing. This is nice to do.

***

Should I, or NOT?
Allow players for an extra upgrade on accuracy through XP?

***

Rogue Trader rulebook
That ehm, is indeed a heavy book. Well, lets get started, shall we?