Skip to Content
 

Wargame points formula. Determining weights.

16 replies [Last post]
mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012

Balancing a multi army miniatures wargame is an absolute chore. Determining if one stat cost more than another (defense cost more than initiative) to upgrade or how much a ability on a weapon cost compared to a different ability (burst fire vs armor piercing).

I am trying to give a point value to each thing in the game but finding that balance has a lot of back and forth.

Also determing the number is another thing to worry about. Like do I want it to be low point totals (warmachine) or larger numbers (40k).

I am really having a great time racking my brain. There is more to balance in a wargame than anything else I have ever delt with.

I am working on setting up a spreadsheet to contain it all and make it easier to just change things when I change my mind.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
How about you post every stat

How about you post every stat that an unit can have.
And how they are related to other stats, mechanically speaking.

I might be able to give some pointers. But there are many ways to keep track of your intented balance.

There are also questions like:
Do you have a mechanical RPS, or are you aiming for a natural one? Or both?
Or
Is there a noticable difference between meat, normal and support units? And how can they work together?

***

For my own game, I keep track with an excel sheet for calculating costs and XP spending for units as well. But before I got to that sheet, I had to analyse every, little, thing about my game.
I also have an information page on these calculations that I am expanding slowly for new design options. Because, well, you might forget things later on if your game finally gets the intended expansions ;)

Last but not least. Don't make things overcomplicated. You need to analyse for your own game, how everything is related. Than base a part of the formula on that part. In other words, don't try to compile a pile of lego blocks into a lego house. You start with the foundation first. And it turns out to be very simple if done correct.

Don't simply asume how the formula is done. Make sure you truly analyse each factor, while changing only one other factor. Is it multiplied or added? Maybe a division or substraction? Perhaps you have exponential effects.
Maybe, just maybe, you have some of your stats. Depending on other stats. For a weird example: I have the health of my units depending on their armor. Simper said, armor is chosen, health is then a given.

Good Luck!

mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
Yeah, the analyzing is really

Yeah, the analyzing is really taxing, but has to be done.

Here is a list of the main character stats:

HP-Number of wounds a model can take before being removed

•Range (RS)- This number is rolled against a weapons accuracy rating. Each success under the goal causes a loss of 1 die during damage step.

•CQ- This number is rolled against an opponent models CQ and is added to a weapon profile to determine number of attack dice.

•Defense (D)-This number is added to a Armor profile to determine number of defense dice during CQ

•Initiative (I)-determines movement and attack order

Then of course there is the weapon profiles and special abilities. But That is easy if I can get in the right scale.

Also a Very basic character starts with a 1 in each category except HP. A basic dude is 3.

adversitygames
adversitygames's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
I'd suggest get playtesting

I'd suggest get playtesting soon and expect all your points values to be wrong.

If it's as complex as you seem to be saying, there *will* be horrendous game-breaking exploits. If you can get the system in front of some skilled gamers, they'll expose them for you. It's hard to see these things from the inside.

ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
One of the things I was

One of the things I was considering for the point-based wargame was buying commanders with retinues, instead of individual models. Army would then consist of a number of retinues.

Balancing a set of units with another set of units is easier, and you have no problem with "never used units" and "always used units".

This would be more fitting for a medieval/fantasy setting but could work with modern as well I guess.

mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
Already playtest the main

Already playtest the main mechanics. That worked great with matching armies. Now with different squads and different weapons it all goes to hell. Once I can figure out model cost based on a base plus exact numbers for each none basic number or effect, I am good. :P

ruy343
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2013
A thought:

It is not my intent to be insulting with this post.

However, seeing as you're kind of new to game design, I highly recommend that you start with a smaller project. I'm serious. Often, new designers bite off more than they can chew with their "dream game", and they never get time to prototype or playtest it because it's just too big, has too many pieces, and takes too long to play.

Start smaller. Try to make games with few game pieces first, and learn how to balance the options that you present. Try to refine your designs so that it takes only an hour or four hours to prototype - something you could feasibly get done on a weekend. Don't try to make it pretty at first - if necessary just make the cards in excel.

That being said, if you want to make a wargame with lots of player options and tactical movement, how about you make it smaller at first, just to see whether the mechanics you've implemented will work the way you intend? Once you get a handful of failed prototypes under your belt of smaller-scale games, then you can step up and try something bigger. Just be careful not to burn yourself out!

mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
I could see that functioning.

I could see that functioning. Only issue for me is my game is based on squads that can have people break away as needed and work individually. They are purchased as squads but the size can vary. And each model can customize to and extent.

mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
Not new at all. I have at

No insult taken.

I am not new at all. I have at least 10 completedish games and 5 very done ones. I have been designing a wide variety of games for the last 8ish years. I just don't publish them. Some of them are actually quite good and get requested at the local gaming place. Some not so much. I have also played a large amount of wargames because I hate having free time.

I have designed everything from super abstract (newest one) all the way to a full RPG system and big box games. Also have a few card games that are not terrible.

I knew what I wanted in a game and the basics are already in playtesting phase. The issue is balancing everything. I know it will take a lot of trial and error, but I am ok with that.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Are you new to designing a

Are you new to designing a wargame perhaps?
Or are you advancing on this as we speak?

Because my first wargame 15 years ago was a hell for me as well. And I really started to learn when doing it step by step.

Adding 1 variable at a time.

mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
X3M wrote:Are you new to

X3M wrote:
Are you new to designing a wargame perhaps?
Or are you advancing on this as we speak?

Because my first wargame 15 years ago was a hell for me as well. And I really started to learn when doing it step by step.

Adding 1 variable at a time.

I would like to publically thank you for that massive detailed response that was in my inbox.

adversitygames
adversitygames's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
mongoosedog wrote:Already

mongoosedog wrote:
Already playtest the main mechanics. That worked great with matching armies. Now with different squads and different weapons it all goes to hell. Once I can figure out model cost based on a base plus exact numbers for each none basic number or effect, I am good. :P

I think your premise (that there is one exact number) is going to cause you to fail.

Traits and effects will have synergistic effects. They will become more powerful than their points represent when combined correctly. This is what I meant by finding exploits, you focused on the "playtest" thing and missed the point of my post.

For a straightforward example, look at 40k.
Regular troops and hero units often have access to the same power-up, but have to pay different amounts for it, because of the synergy of that power-up in combination with the rest of the traits of the unit.

mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
iamseph wrote:mongoosedog

iamseph wrote:
mongoosedog wrote:
Already playtest the main mechanics. That worked great with matching armies. Now with different squads and different weapons it all goes to hell. Once I can figure out model cost based on a base plus exact numbers for each none basic number or effect, I am good. :P

I think your premise (that there is one exact number) is going to cause you to fail.

Traits and effects will have synergistic effects. They will become more powerful than their points represent when combined correctly. This is what I meant by finding exploits, you focused on the "playtest" thing and missed the point of my post.

For a straightforward example, look at 40k.
Regular troops and hero units often have access to the same power-up, but have to pay different amounts for it, because of the synergy of that power-up in combination with the rest of the traits of the unit.

Units are limited in the gear they can use. I understand that certain combos may develop and that should be avoided. Mostly I am trying to find a base that I can wiggle from as mmore amd more testing happens.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Constantly think from a new players point of view.

I have read your document (1 time).

CQ stands for Close Quarters. There is a bit more logic now, to it all. But just a little bit. Care to explain, before you use the abbreviation.

Maybe you ought to put the link here to the document. Then others can take a look at it as well. Even if it is unfinished yet.

Maybe a picture of what the players are playing on. Or at least describe it before hand. And with what the players are playing. To make things visual. They can have a better understanding too when you explain the rest.

"Rules are like game laws. But to what world do they belong too?"

New players can't know this yet. Unless you tell them. And the order is important. Let's say, they need to read ABC to understand A comes before B comes before C.
If your document is like CBA, they have to read it at least 3 times. Err, something along those lines.

mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
I didn't even realize i only

I didn't even realize i only posted the acronym.

I agree that the rules need some formatting, rearanging, editing, etc. I am not good at rulebooks.

The weird part is the guy the game is for wants a lovecraftian themed armies. That is completely normal except the means will be at least 40% water. The back of each card has updated stats for when they are in water.

This is the original model mod he made a long time ago. That the new models will be themed around.

http://www.thedarkcity.net/t6667-mariners-blight-a-maritime-inspired-lov...

Here is the link to the basic rulebook

https://docs.google.com/document/d/18QysHsx-LqaRuXtPbLUAXHT3jwbp7ZQn7p14...

The funny thing is that my original post didnt have an actual question. Just a statement about how difficult I was finding a starting point for balancing.

I am glad it took off with advise and critique.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Is it ok to send you a TLDR

Is it ok to send you a TLDR post again in your PM? Where I point to the various parts in your "manual"?

Balancing comes after understanding the game.

mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
X3M wrote:Is it ok to send

X3M wrote:
Is it ok to send you a TLDR post again in your PM? Where I point to the various parts in your "manual"?

Balancing comes after understanding the game.

of course. I look forward to it. I updated some last night. Not much though.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut