What are "Factions"??? Are they UNITS per Faction or something else???

35 replies [Last post]

Fri, 09/20/2024 - 16:38

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

X3M wrote:

Lists some Tiers with "Possible factions"...

I don't know what "Possible factions" are?!?! Are they supposed to be UNITS per Faction??? Or something else???

IF they are UNITS per Faction ... Are they for a TableTop Game or a Video Game?

(Another) IF they are for a Video Game the values may be a bit HIGH. IF they are for a TableTop Game the values are WAY TOO HIGH.

See in a video game takes care of handling the units on SCREEN. But in a TableTop Game, you either need cards with miniatures or standies, etc. In this case I would instead suggest maybe Squad-sized armies (which is 7 to 14 units).

But this could be limited to Armed Forces (soldiers) and then you can have support vehicles like 3 Tanks, 2 Jeeps and 1 Hummer making your Squad-sized army about 20 units FOR THE GAME. Not for a Tier...

SO 20 units for a TableTop Game. MAX!

IF you are talking about a Video Game ... You could have Tiers but not really in a TableTop Game. Furthermore, I said for a Video Game the tiers are still a bit HIGH. A Squad-sized amount of Soldiers is 7 to 14. That works. But you could have more Tanks and Jeeps and Hummers since you can GROUP into separate armies (using Ctrl-1 to 5) and that allows you to control sub-factions of units. Still values above maybe 50 units is too HIGH. In a Video Game I would recommend a cap on units to 50 given a cap on soldiers is 14... That means 36 mechanized units which can be Tanks, Jeeps, Hummers, Apaches, Jet Planes, Bombers, etc. Starcraft 1 = has a cap of 60 units. So 50 is not too bad. And if each group can control 14 units... That means 70 units AT MAX!

Given this analysis, I would say a Video Game caps off at 70 units with 14 Soldiers at maximum (1-Squad) combined with mechanized units which are 4x 14 = 56 units remain to be built.

In a TableTop game ... I would limit this to 14 Soldiers (1-Squad) and 6 support units. In general, LESS is better than more in TableTop Gaming...

I didn't want to write all this in a Private Message... So I posted a NEW Topic for us to discuss... I have not disclosed your Tiers and their values, I have kept that information SECRET. But know that what you propose TO ME, is MUCH, MUCH too MUCH!

I have explained how I see it. And what other comparable games have done. For both TableTop AND Video Games.

Feel free to reply to this topic without YOUR details, we can keep them SAFE and confidential but know that IMHO they are TOO MUCH.

Sincerely.

Fri, 09/20/2024 - 16:51

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

To condense a bit...

14 Soldiers (Riflemen, Grenadiers, Missile Soldiers, etc.) + 3 types of support units with a CAP of 6 mechanized support units. For a TOTAL of 20 units.

That is for the TableTop Game IMHO.

14 Soldiers + a CAP of 56 mechanized support units. For a TOTAL of 70 units.

That is for the Video Game IMHO.

More is too difficult to track and keeping things SIMPLE is easier for the players to comprehend the PHYSICAL limits (or caps) that are pre-determined for each of the types of game (TableTop and Video).

Cheers @Ramon.

Fri, 09/20/2024 - 17:12

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

You can never-the-less have TIERS for both...

Something like this could work.

Soldiers = 1 to 14 MAX. So any combination of soldiers but capped at 14.

Tier	Description	Min.	Max.
#1	Rifleman	1	14
#2	Grenadier	1	14
#3	Rocket Soldier	1	14
#4	Machine Gunner	1	14
#5	Assault Rifleman	1	14
#6	Sniper	1	14
#7	etc., etc.	1	14

Next you could have Tiers for Armored Vehicles (Land-based) and the Air Forces for support (Air-based), etc.

And you can have tiers for DIFFERENT types of Tanks, Vehicles, etc.

Something like that makes sense to me...

Note: I think you can have different Tiers for the TableTop game but I would like LIMIT them to SIX (6) Tiers per game... What do I mean?

I mean that in total with all UNITS COMBINED you have SIX (6) DIFFERENT CARDS in FRONT of you (which make-up you army).

That sounds logical to me... And six (6) cards is just enough for a PLAY MAT or something similar.

You could further divide that into Front-Line and Support and make maybe TEN (10) DIFFERENT Tiers for EACH... 5 and 5... MAX (You could have less)...

If you divide (Front & Support) I would say ten (10) cards (Tiers) is enough.

IF you DON'T divide (online one-line) I would say six (6) cards is enough...

Something like that.

Fri, 09/20/2024 - 17:44

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

So if you have Font & Support... For the TableTop Version

You can have "Riflemen" (#1) and Grenadiers (#2) in the Front.

"Machine Gunners" (#4) and "Snipers" (#6) in Support.

And then some Vehicles like "Tanks" (#8) in Front and in Support.

So you could do something like this:

#2 (1), #1 (4), #8 (1), #1 (4), #2 (1) <= Front line

#4 (1), #8 (1), #6 (2), #8 (1), #4 (1) <= Support line

That's 17 units and comprised of FIVE (5) Tiers.

For a TableTop game... This to ME, makes sense. And you have ONE (1) Token in play which REPRESENTS the Army (that you can move around) without any worry of mixing things up. You have you Playmat and you DEFINE your ARMY. And then you have the AREA of PLAY where you MOVE that ARMY.

Something like that...

Fri, 09/20/2024 - 20:01

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

And I'm pretty sure you CAN use CRT tables too!

So you can have a nice image plus a bunch of stats on ONE (1) SIDE (Face) and on the BACKSIDE (Back), you can have each unit's Tier CRT Table for hitting the unit...

Since you need the extra space, using the BEST and FULLEST amount of space for BOTH Stats and CRT ... You could use BOTH sides of the card.

Plus one side can have a "picture"/artwork of the unit and that goes without saying that your game could be SIMPLE "looking" but much more complex with the CRTs and the various STATS/Abilities each Tier (or UNIT Type) is capable of having and using.

I know this probably sounds too SIMPLE... But some of the BEST game are the ones that are SIMPLE yet FUN to play. Simplicity doesn't mean that the design was very intricate and well thought up... It just means that in the end... The method of play is streamlined into something more "straight-forward" and very intuitive too.

Again something like that...

Fri, 09/20/2024 - 20:50

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Some more information about THIS CRT table

So the Rows is a standard 2D6 roll and the Columns indicate the Attribute Level.

The Attributes themselves come from the LHS of the character sheet which are the 5 STATS given the five (5) colors. In this case 6, 5, 4, 4, and 9.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND the "Green vs. Orange" in the CRT table.

Maybe @X3M can explain this.

The second table is DAMAGE and it's 0 to 9 (Columns) which is determined by the CRT table (I believe). The "WDI" stands for the Weapon Type or Type of Attack. Lower values are stronger than Higher Values

The TOP table is types of attacks in comparison with the enemy. So because this unit only has Melee and Magic Attacks then "Ranged" Row is BLACK. And further analysis shows that Melee vs. Melee = No bonus/penalty same goes for Magic vs. Magic.

This is a very CLEVER implementation of a CRT table and it assumes that the player can wield other weapons (the "WDI" value). We now have a better idea of how that all works.

questccg wrote:

But @X3M that second table can be an ACCURACY table INSTEAD! Hehehe... WOW... Smart minds think alike!

So the Accuracy of the UNIT could be a value between 1 and 5. I would probably INVERT the table and make Accuracy "1" be the weakest and Accuracy "5" to be the strongest and then based on the CRT value ... You determine the DAMAGE which actually gets DEALT.

It's a bit convoluted (3 tables) ... But I'm pretty sure it WORKS and you can definitely TWEAK this for your own NEEDS. The TOP Table could be "Soldiers, Land and Air" UNITS and the STATs could be varied according to different TYPES of ATTACKS (not 100% sure...) You can share your opinion on that @X3M!

Anyways I would look at different CRT Tables. This is only ONE (1) implementation... I wish I could find the Game that uses this... But alas I searched and could find nothing! :-(

In any event it's a worthwhile topic to DISCUSS further...

Cheers all!

Fri, 09/20/2024 - 22:05

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Apparently this Character is from Dungeon Quest... But

I looked at those Hero cards DON'T HAVE the CRT and TABLES. And they only have 4 Attributes versus this version with 5. This character seems also connected to Rune Wars too... (Heard of but never seen or played)

So I searched up & down on TGC to find something there ... Maybe this is an ADAPTATION of DQ?! IDK.

Anyhow in my previous comment, I dissected the entire CRT table and what everything means and how the TABLES are used for this "game" (whatever it is... I could NOT find anything about it...)

It's still very cool as an ODDITY and something Wargamer-ish into something that is RPG-ish instead.

But I'd have my OWN Adaptation for a Wargame instead (as I explained in the previous thread).

Cheers.

Sat, 09/21/2024 - 09:27

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

I had it explained in Discord in a pm

Either way, in a game with the possible damages ranging from 1 to X (10).
The tiers are the "health" tiers that a faction has.

If there are 3 tiers possible. In order for that faction to be able to battle any other faction. You need to design 30 different units for that faction.
And the possible factions number would be, that with 3 tiers. There are 120 factions possible with any given configuration of 3 numbers.

This means that a total of 30*120 of units need to be designed. (And perhaps another 30*120 for defences) Not excluding doubles.

The buildup that I had in mind was the simplicity that I sended in discord. I didn't make a topic about it. Because it would be blablabla. Then I thought, perhaps just posting the list. But there are no people on this forum that are interested.

***

3600 different designs sounds like a finishing touch to a collection in terms of statistic cards. Not sure how many different MtG cards there are.

Google wrote:

The total number of MTG cards depends on what Magic: The Gathering card count you want to use – there are around 27,000 unique cards, but many more if you start to include reprints, variants, and 'out of game' cards like art cards and tokens.
16 feb 2024

Ah, a road cut out for me.

The first factions would start out smaller and anti each other.

1,2,4,8 are the numbers for the first 4 factions. And they would have 12 designs each.
3 tiers * 4 factions * 4 damage = 48 in total.

1,3,9 would be the 5th faction. And the other factions get each 6 more designs.
3 tiers * 5 factions * 6 damages = 90 in total.

1,5,X would be the 6th faction. And the other factions get each 2 more designs.
3 tiers * 6 factions * 8 damages = 144 in total.

Then my idea was to have 2 subfactions. Since the 6 and 7 don't really fit in anywhere. However, looking at the list of possible factions. I could pick one that has one or both tiers of 6 and 7. And the other tiers are previously used.

We get to either 1 or 2 new factions this way.
3 tiers * 7 factions * 10 damage = 210 designs.
or
3 tiers * 8 factions * 10 damage = 240 designs.

***

A faction could have a main colour, secondairy colour and tertiairy colour in order to be identified. And thus the designs for the statistic cards could be in the same style.

The question in the PM about the different number of possible factions. Is depending on the amount of tiers.

The number of different designs will always be:
X tiers * max factions * 10 damage.
X tiers and max factions are linked together.

3 tiers gives 120 max factions. And 120 different factions already sounds like a lot.

With 3 colour codes. We can have at least:
Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Purple, Brown, White, Black, Grey.
Which is 10. And thus 10^3=1000 different colour combinations? Well, we don't want to have confusion. So, I still need to figure things out here. But the 1000 will surely be less.
Also, colourblindness isn't included here. Unfortunately, the statistic cards with the colour codes would have these in the picture as well. And the uniqueness of the picture would be enough to identify. As also the name of the same picture.

Either way.
3 * 120 * 10 = 3600
4 * 210 * 10 = 8400
5 * 252 * 10 = 12600
6 * 210 * 10 = 12600
7 * 120 * 10 = 8400

12600 seems to be the maximum number of designs for units for any number of tiers used.
Perhaps I go for 4 or 5 tiers per faction. But I don't know yet.

Everything is still open for decision making.

PS.
Units roll (trice?) for a hit. Then deal # damage if they hit. This is tracked on the target if the damage is less.

Riflemen will probably be worth 2 points. And thus 6 of them is their maximum on the board.
Since 12 will be the maximum awarded points to any region.

Tanks with tier 9 health and damage are roughly worth 6 points. No worries, it is balanced.
There will be 2 of them.

Average, 4 units per design on the board.
If each faction has 3 tiers, their opponent has 3 tiers. You need only 3*3 different designs in order to fight them. Thus 36 pieces in total as a maximum per player on the board.

72 at least for a 1 on 1 match.
And there is where my thinking process paused due to RL matters.

Sat, 09/21/2024 - 13:01

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

What could be COOL (maybe)!

Is if you defeat the opponent's SOLDIERS and LOOT DROP happens which could be in the form of a "Rocket Launcher, Machine Gun or Assault Rifle" and the troops that are lonely "Riflemen" can get UPGRADED for FREE!

That could be an interesting way to UPGRADE UNITS one-time only.

I can picture this in a Video Game (Not TableTop)...

Anyhow I don't know if you read anything that I wrote... Because I asked you a question and you did not respond. Which leads me to believe that you completely ignored the earlier comments concerning CRTs and Accuracy.

I still have NO CLUE WHY(?) the CRT Table is Half GREEN and Half Orange?!?!

Can you explain this @X3M???

Sat, 09/21/2024 - 21:37

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

No looting anymore

We discarded this at a certain point. Since it acts the same as XP gathering. It would be double in a sense. And letting the player make a choice would be the same. Resources or XP or change of weaponry.

The second and third option is imbalanced with the current goal in mind.

Resources is simply a snowball. I rather not have this either. Or a test should show it wouldn't influence the game too much.

It is all extra handling.

***

The green and orange are "wins" and "losses" i guess. Idk, didn't really look at that CRT. Kinda given up on those for the time being. Since 1 die per piece is enough atm. So, 6 dice at most. And if there are more dice needed. Some are simply added together. Probably from the same unit.

The fact that we have an accuracy roll now instead of a damage roll. Means there are more rolls needed. But these rolls are less complicated.

Sat, 09/21/2024 - 21:50

#10

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I have found other tables for CRT...

Here is one on Wikipedia:

This one claims to use RATIOS of forces:

For a roll less than 1, 1:3 Ratio = All Attacking forces exterminated.

This is another VERSION of the CRT and is interesting in that if provides resulting ratios in terms of Attackers/Defenders and then Losses for BOTH Sides (obviously depending on the dice rolls and ratios).

It is interesting to see this kind of VARIATION and I have seen the "ratios" in other CRT samples as well. I didn't intend to make this a CRT Thread... But CLEARLY the way you handle the CRT affect HOW(?) you handle the number of forces in play. These Ratios show how QUANTITY of forces matches the results in the TABLE.

Again this is a bit "hard to digest" ... It's at the core an examples of how to handle VERSUS combat and can vary per TYPE of unit (Maybe).

I'm still not sure... I am working on understanding the CRT Tables a bit better before suggesting that IF you work in RATIOS ... It really doesn't matter if you have the following scenarios (because they are all identical):

1> 1 Rifleman vs. 3 Riflemen

2> 100 Riflemen vs. 300 Riflemen

3> 25 Riflemen vs. 75 Riflemen

But this all works when dealing with the SAME types of TROOPS... Nothing in this 2nd CRT Table has a way of EXPLAINING multiple "tiers" and different types of units versus one another.

So you see that I am still on-topic when bringing up this 2nd CRT Table ... And perhaps you see the value of this discussion.

I THINK that somewhere in between BOTH will exemplify a modern take on the CRT Table in general (Haha ... Pun intended)

TBD...

Sat, 09/21/2024 - 22:21

#11

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Not an accuracy roll but instead an accuracy FACTOR

X3M wrote:

...The fact that we have an accuracy roll now instead of a damage roll. Means there are more rolls needed. But these rolls are less complicated.

I was not suggesting an ACCURACY ROLL but instead an ACCURACY FACTOR. If you look at CRT Table #1 (Dungeon Quest), they use 5 CLASSES of WEAPONRY. So in this first Table, the present the 2nd results which compare Dice Rolling (2d6) with an Attribute. The RESULT is then compares in the 3rd table which simulates various forms or CLASSES of "weaponry".

So WDI = 1 is the MOST POWERFUL Weapon, while WDI = 5 is the LEAST POWERFUL weapon.

Why is this important??? The CRT Table #2 (Wiki) only deals with RATIOS and does not take into account VARYING "Tiers" of armed forces.

My thoughts are that POTENTIAL DAMAGE is determined FIRST and THEN actual DAMAGE is verified against a VALUE of the "Class of weaponry".

Why does any of this matter???

Because I think you can SQUEAK out a better CRT for the TableTop Version. What do I mean by BETTER? Well something that differentiates armed forces from one set of restrictions (think Soldiers) to another (think light vehicles, heavy vehicles) and of course not forgetting air strikes (think bombers which work on a turn basis) and air support (Jet Planes to thwart air strikes).

The air strikes could be like an AIR RAID warning...

So that gives me "5 Tiers". And would require FIVE (5) ATTRIBUTES. So that's like 75% done ... All that remains is the "WDI" or CLASSES for each attack... And that can be derived from the "5 Tiers".

But I'm STUCK! That 2nd CRT Table (Wiki) goes with RATIOS. And I can't help but wonder or think that the ratios perform BETTER when it comes to ARMIES.

So I don't know what to do to make it work.

And recognize that I am doing it for you (@X3M) for your TableTop Version. I think it could be of real value ... Since the CRT tables are cool and all... I would like to see how the TWO (2) CRTs can be merged into one...

Anyhow... I'll think some more about it. But I'm guessing you gave up on the CRT table concept since you no longer seem to be interested in it. Yet I think it would make a wonderful TableTop Game... I've seen others do it (as per the examples), so I'm guessing it is possible.

I need to ponder it more (To determined if we can FUSE these two CRT Tables together ... somehow...)?!

Cheers.

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 00:18

#12

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Here's my 2nd attempt at the CRT Tables

Here's what I made tonight:

Please tell me if this makes ANY sense to you! I'm not sure if I made the tables correctly or not. I got a bit miffed and had to re-design the LHS Table (on the Left) because it made no sense (to me at least).

Like if you roll an 18 (9 + 9) and have a STAT of "1" you should have a POWERFUL attack even if your STAT is poor. So the table is INVERTED as compared to the CRT Table #1 (Dungeon Quest)...

And then there was Table #2 with the RATIOS that I wanted. I'm not sure... I will wait until someone comments. Did I understand RIGHT or WRONG!? I THINK I did it correctly ... But I'm not 100% certain.

Anyhow let me know if any of this works and makes sense.

Cheers all!

Note #1: The ROLL required is 2DD6 (Dual Dice) and here is the AnyDice Link/URL:

output 2d{0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 9}

Have a look and let me know if this is making sense or did I go wrong somewhere???

Note #2: I know I am onto something... But I feel like there is something wrong with the 2 tables ATM. I'm not sure where my understanding went WRONG... I think Table #2 is INCORRECT. I will re-work it tomorrow...

If anyone would care to share their opinion, please feel free to comment, leave feedback or ask any questions relevant to the CRT Table.

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 08:20

#13

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

That CRT

Is it meant for your game?
If so, can you explain a step by step, on how to use it?

***

As for my game.
I figured that if I use the 10 thematic colours.
We got 10 pure ones.
10*9=90 double coloured ones.
10*9*8=720 tripple coloured ones.

A total of 820. So, I got plenty of room for factions.

Would be neat if I manage to get the factions to develop from 3 to 5 tiers over the years. While maintaining the faction colours.

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 09:08

#14

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

More colours? Searching for a good way to sort my designs

I think I completely miscalculated that in the previous post. It is waaay less.

I found this:
https://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations-calcu...

Order is not needed.
Repetition is not possible either.
You see, I don't want to bother with a primairy and secondair colour at all.

9 Colours:
9 single.
36 double.
84 triple.
129 total.
120 without singles. (This might go well)

10 Colours:
10 single.
45 double.
120 triple. (This might go well)
175 total.

16 Colours:
16 single.
120 double. (This might go well)
560 triple.
696 total.

As you can see, I have some testing to do. What do I feel comfortable with?
8 colours is too little.
9 colours can have 120 combinations without the single colours.
10 colours can have 120 combinations with only the triple combinations.
16 colours can have 120 combinations with only the double combinations.

***

If I allow order, it goes differently.
I would be having a primairy colour, then a secondairy one. And finally a tertiairy one. In the art, the ammount of fields filled would certainly go down quickly, or else the players can't tell.

6 Colours:
6 single.
30 double.
120 triple. (This might go well)
156 total.

Unfortunately, there is only 1 set that allows for 120 options. And it has to be triple. Always...

I don't have to bother with repetition AND order. Since that would not result in any option with 120.

***

So, my options are limited. Thankfully.
I need either 6, 9, 10 or 16 different colours.

Getting to 16 different colours was rather easy.
Or...I shouldn't even bother sorting these out.

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 17:44

#15

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

In general

X3M wrote:

Is it meant for your game? If so, can you explain a step by step, on how to use it?

I'm still working on it. I realized that the two (2) tables I presented don't WORK like I would like them to work. I am currently looking into the matter to see how to improve them.

It's not per se MY game... But it's more or less how I would design a game such as this. It still needs some revision. When I get to the correct version, I will let you know.

But in either case, a CRT that works would be of value TBH.

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 18:09

#16

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Got to it tonight ... Took a while

Okay I finally had some time to THINK about the CRT Table and here is the result:

Those are the TWO (2) Tables that could be used to resolve COMBAT in a "Tier-ed" fashion with RATIOs of forces being included.

In my next comment I will explain the general purpose of the two (2) Tables and how they work with each other. I had the idea about how to FIX the tables last night (around 1:00 AM) but I decided that I would sleep and fix it today.

And voila, they are fixed and I believe NOW MAKE SENSE!

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 18:18

#17

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

An explanation of the table (Now that they are fixed...)

So first thing you do is:

1> Roll 2D6s: roll two standard D6s.

2> Roll 2DD6s: roll two Dual Dice.

Next you compare your ROLL with the value on the Left-Hand-Side (LHS) and find the valid row.

The COLUMN is the VALUE of the "Attribute" or STAT.

Example: Say we roll a "6" and our STAT is a "4" = "6" as a POWER value.

This means that "6" is how POWERFUL the attack will be in the DAMAGE TABLE (2nd).

Next we look at the POWER Value in Table #2 (a "6") to determine the COLUMN and then figure out the approximate RATIO of the units on the LHS of table #2.

Example: Let's say it was 2 UNITS vs. 2 UNITS a RATIO of "1:1".

This means that the result would be "0/1". The ATTACKER would suffer "0" LOSSES and the DEFENDER would suffer "1" LOSS.

This means that in the end it would be 2 UNITS vs. 1 UNIT (because "1" had just been killed this round).

AE = Attacker Eliminated
DE = Defender Eliminated

The rest is self-explanatory from the example above.

Let me know if you have any questions or need more explanations.

Cheers!

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 19:21

#18

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Furthermore...

If you are asking yourself: "How does this work with 'Tiers'???" Well my answer to this is that it DOES by using the STATS.

Each unit has FIVE (5) STATS:

Soldiers
Lite Vehicles
Heavy Vehicles
Air Defense
Bombers

This is the relationship between THIS UNIT and how it performs with the OTHER "Tiers" of combat.

For example: a "Rifleman" the lonely soldier could have the following STATS:

7 Soldiers
4 Lite Vehicles
2 Heavy Vehicles
1 Air Support
0 Bombers

This means he performs well against other Soldiers, can do moderate damage vs. Lite Vehicles like Jeeps, Hummers and other support ground forces, is poor vs. Heavy Vehicles like Tanks and has hardly any Air Power what-so-ever.

When facing off against an opponent, you must figure out which STAT to use based on the enemy forces. This factored in with your Dice Roll determines the TOTAL POWER your "Riflemen" will have against his opponent.

So there are tiers but only five (5) of them based on STATs in how effective they are versus their opposition.

Thinking like this makes the CRT Tables work and determines the losses of units when combating each other.

Makes sense???

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 19:48

#19

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Let's try another example for the FUN of it ...

Now that I've explained the STATs and how the CRT Tables work. There is still one piece of information missing and that how the STATs are derived from each unit.

Example: 5 Riflemen against 2 Tanks. Riflemen are attacking the Tanks.

STAT for Heavy Vehicles = "2" (for the Riflemen).

The Riflemen roll the dice and get a "7". Lookup in the CRT = "5" POWER.

In the 2nd Table we get a RATIO of appx. "2:1" and the result is "0/1".

This would mean that the FIVE (5) "Riflemen" would defeat ONE (1) Tank and the end result would be "5 Riflemen vs. 1 Tank".

I don't have the CRT Tables for the Tank ... So I cannot explain the counter-attack ... But know that the CRT Table #2 with the ratios needs to be fine-tuned. Even going through an example (With "9" as the POWER), the lonely tank would still lose to the Riflemen given this 2nd Table.

So more tweaking would be required to make a more SOLID DAMAGE Table for Tanks. But never-the-less it is POSSIBLE...

Best.

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 20:59

#20

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Let's try this with another example (but same scenario)

So I went back and tried to perfect the CRT Tables for two (2) UNITS: the Riflemen and Tanks.

Here is the NEW CRT for the "Riflemen":

Here is the NEW CRT for the "Tanks":

Let's see if we can WORKOUT the "5 Riflemen" vs. "2 Tanks"...

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 21:22

#21

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Here comes the example... Tada!

Example: 5 Riflemen against 2 Tanks. Riflemen are attacking the Tanks.

STAT for Heavy Vehicles = "2" (for the Riflemen)

The Riflemen roll the dice and get a "7". Lookup in the CRT = "4" POWER.

In the 2nd Table we get a RATIO of appx "2:1" and the result is "0/1".

This would mean that the FIVE (5) "Riflemen" would defeat ONE (1) Tank.

Now for the COUNTER-ATTACK of the lonely tank:

STAT for Soldiers = "8" (for the Tank)

The Tank rolls the dice and gets a "8". Lookup in the CRT = "9" POWER.

In the 2nd Table we get the RATIO of "1:5" and the result is "0/3".

This would mean that THREE (3) "Riflemen" would be defeated ONE (1) Tank.

Meaning that "2 Riflemen" would survive and the lonely Tank is still alive.

Not too bad... I had to tweak the Tank's DAMAGE table a bit... I imagine the real challenge is repeating the process with a list of diversified UNITS. And then see if the UNITS perform as desired... Is the CRT Table "OK"? Is the DMG Table "OK"? etc, etc.

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 22:38

#22

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Let us continue the battle to see how it would end...

Example: 2 Riflemen against 1 Tank. It's the Riflemen turn to attack the Tank.

STAT for Heavy Vehicles = "2" (for the Riflemen)

The Riflemen roll a "9". Lookup in the CRT = "5" POWER.

In the 2nd Table we get a RATIO of "2:1" and the result is "0/1".

This would mean that the TWO (2) "Riflemen" would defeat the lonely Tank.

Here is my TAKE-AWAY:

I think that the CRT tables in principle are good but they NEED A LOT of work. What I mean is you need to re-work with samples and TWEAK to figure out if the values in BOTH tables make sense. And you need to review whatever it is in terms of is it REALISTIC or not.

Clearly in the example, the 2nd Attack by the "Riflemen" seems a bit ODD that two (2) "Riflemen" given a better than average roll ... Defeat ONE (1) TANK.

REALLY??? Two (2) "Soldiers" defeat a TANK?! Not sure how I feel about this result short of the fact that I am not confident this is a realistic outcome.

So this will close my attempt to work with CRT Tables and leave any and all the readers the chance to give CRT Tables a test and see if they MAY work with your designs.

I for one realize that it will take a LOT of effort to tweak each and every unit separately and in MEANINGFUL ways. But this is only a couple examples, I am positive that someone may find them useful for their designs and could find a practical implementation that works for them.

It was worth a try... Cheers all!

Sun, 09/22/2024 - 22:48

#23

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I'm not closing this "design concept"...

I'm just saying that FOR NOW... That is enough. If anyone has ideas on how to IMPROVE upon these tables, feel free to reply and comment to share some of your ideas as to how to better the implementation of CRTs.

Maybe some suggestions or some other examples could help.

I for one ENJOYED trying to understand the "Dungeon Quest" Character Sheet. It's good for ONE vs. ONE combat where the amount of damage is like 1 or 2 HP per attack. It's not good for combat MANY vs. MANY situations and that's what I was trying to SOLVE.

Perhaps one of the key take-aways that I'm finding is that each UNIT should have a LIMIT to the POWER of an ATTACK. Meaning that the Dice Roll tables should be further tweaked to have lower values or perhaps more REPRESENTATIVE numbers.

That could go a long way in streamlining the CRTs a bit further and making combat more intense and realistic per "Tier" of UNIT.

Again if anyone is interested in discussing further, feel free to comment.

Best.

Tue, 09/24/2024 - 20:27

#24

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

In my game

You know. In my game the damage can be overkill.

First you roll to see if you hit.
Then, if you hit, you simply deal damage.

I removed the damage roll. Thus it is only one type of roll.
Rolling and removing dice that miss.

If an unit has a machine gun of 3 dice that each deal 1 damage or 1 cannon that deals 9 damage.
Then the machine gun can kill up to 3 infantry. But the cannon can never kill more than 1 infantry.

Vice versa, the machine gun can never deal more than 3 damage. While the cannon, if it hits, deals up to 9 damage.

I cannot put this all in a CRT. Because a more powerfull weapon isn't nessesarily more powerfull in the game.

To get an idea of how equal weapons could look like....roughly....
If they are worth all the same.
You roll the dice, and if they roll the target number or less, they are still a potential hit. So, 2/5/6 is rolling once. If it is 2 or less, roll it a second time, if it is 5 or less now, it hits.

Damage per hit*Number of dice : Roll 1/Roll 2/Roll 3
1*3 : 2/5/6
2*2 : 4/4/4
3*1 : 3/6/6
4*2 : 3/3/5
5*3 : 3/3/3
6*1 : 3/4/6
7*3 : 2/3/4
8*1 : 4/4/4
9*1 : 2/5/6
X*1 : 3/4/5

Now, it might look a bit weak. But that is because if 6 riflemen are fighting, you can roll 6 dice. And they so happen to have 1*1 : 2/5/6 each.
Meaning that 6 dice are rolled. 2 might survive. So only 2 damage roughly for that turn.
They can do 3 attacks in 1 round. Thus roughly 5 damage on average per round.

5 damage can;
kill 5 infantry (1 hp),
kill 2 troopers (2 hp) plus a third one being injured,
kill 1 light vehicle (3 to 4 hp) plus damaging a second vehicle,
kill 1 heavy vehicle (5 hp),
damaging any heavy vehicle of 6 health or above.
X needs 2 rounds on average to be destroyed by 6 riflemen.

If we want to destroy an unit with X (10) health.
The best option would be the X*1 in that table.
Because it would have 62% chance per round.

Here is a table of the chances to kill 1 Super-Tank of X (10) health, WITHIN 1 round, for these weapons:
1*3 : _0%
2*2 : _1%
3*1 : _0% (3 times 3 damage is only 9)
4*2 : 11%
5*3 : 31%
6*1 : 26%
7*3 : 26%
8*1 : 21%
9*1 : 19%
X*1 : 62%

Here is a table of the chances to kill 3 infantry units, WITHIN 1 round, for these weapons:

1*3 : 48%
2*2 : 25%
3*1 : 13%
4*2 : 11%
5*3 : _9%
6*1 : _2% (Somehow, this one is performing very bad here)
7*3 : _7%
8*1 : _3%
9*1 : _2%
X*1 : _2%

What if we use an unit that has 6 health? Would the 6*1 be the best?
1*3 : _2%
2*2 : 25%
3*1 : 50%
4*2 : 37%
5*3 : 31%
6*1 : 70%
7*3 : 65%
8*1 : 65%
9*1 : 62%
X*1 : 62%

Special case, 2 units of 6 health. Which weapons manage it in 1 round?
1*3 : _0%
2*2 : _0.07% (There is actually a chance)
3*1 : _0%
4*2 : _2%
5*3 : _2%
6*1 : 26%
7*3 : 26%
8*1 : 21%
9*1 : 19%
X*1 : 19%

The fact that
6*1 : 3/4/6 and
7*3 : 2/3/4
are so close together with their effect is simply based on their value.
sqrt(6)*1*3*4*6=sqrt(6)*72
sqrt(7)*3*2*3*4=sqrt(7)*72
A weapon of 7 is 8% more powerfull than the weapon of 6.
Whilest I designed these weapons to have an average score of 180. The weapon 6 here has only 176 and the weapon 7 has an 190.

Imbalance is easily created. One of the reasons why the hobby variant has huge differences in the damage types.

Thu, 04/17/2025 - 14:46

#25

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

7 months later

Not sure what started this topic. But I was looking back for topics regarding faction balances.

This topic too:
https://www.bgdf.com/forum/game-creation/design-theory/rps-between-3-fac...

Aaand, I combine it with this topic:
https://www.bgdf.com/node/24365

So, the 3 topics here have something in common.

Topic 1
This one, is regarding having different kinds of factions. Yet, it seems that each faction will have a limit on body types. Yet they use all weapon types. This won't do, unless you got like a huge fantasy. Aaand, you need to set up a plan for designing for expansions for your game. As designer, you limit yourself. And to start it of, you make your designs self destructive. Meaning you have a faction designed for removing itself.

Topic 2
Is me yapping at having a limit to your factions. Yet you design in such a way that there is a RPS instead. Which means, a player needs designs from each faction. This in hindsight is rather...silly. Let's call it silly. Which was the conclusion after a test.

Then, what is the best way to have multiple factions? As said before, design a faction to be self destructive. But, you don't want to add more and more designs. Just to cover all weaknesses of an opposing faction. It is an option, no doubt. But you need to plan it.

So, where does the third topic come in?
Topic 3
Here is am yapping about dice rolls. Sounds completely off topic at first. But it got me to thinking on having 2 or more factions. Not changing in their designs. Nor adding more designs. But actually have the units being effective against other factions as well.

So I needed to look at something that all factions have in common.

Tiers
Which slightly resembles your mention of 5 stats.
Lets consider any faction for now.
It is always going to be selfdestructive.

We design 5 tiers for each faction:
Tier 1: Infantry Class
Tier 2: Light Class
Tier 3: Medium Class
Tier 4: Heavy Class
Tier 5: Special Class

Might I add that flying units or sea units are not in the list just yet. We set up a basic system first.

With 5 tiers or classes. We also need 5 weapon classes.
The 5 weapons are meant in terms of damage types.

We get a 5x5 diagram this way.
And we want to have every column and row to have the same ammount of tickboxes.

XOOOO
OXOOO
OOXOO
OOOXO
OOOOX

Is such an example, where each row and column has 1 X. And thus is balanced. In this regard. Each class is good against itself. And we need only 5 designs here.

We can have other designs. Thus creating a RPS within the system.

OXOOO
OOXOO
OOOXO
OOOOX
XOOOO

Is a system where class 1 is good against class 2.
Then... 2 > 3 > 4 > 5 > 1
This requires 5 more designs.

We can combine the 2 RPS into 1. Thus having a total of 10 different units. And the whole faction is balanced on itself. And also being 100% self destructive.

As for other RPS. We can even add something like this:

OOX OO
XOO OO
OXO OO

OOO OX
OOO XO

Which has class 1 to 3 being in a RPS. While class 4 and 5 are each other counters.

This one too, can be added to the main list. Thus we have 15 designs in total.

1=2=3=4=5=
1>2>3>4>5>
1<2<3< = >4><5<

Anyway. Keep adding only 5 units per set.
If you add a set with attributes. Remember that 2 attributes are a 2x2 system. And you need to add 15 units. Each set would be 1 attribute, good against another attribute.

It is of course possible to have "hybrid" units. That can take multiple classes. But this is for when you are comfortable with what you have.

***

Now then. For having 2 different factions with different selfdestructive RPS systems. Being balanced to each other.

Well, in my case, my classes have an armor setting and damage setting.

I can add weight factors in such a way. That a very standard design for a body or weapon. Has the same cost.
And it is in here that we can see the translation to one to another.

Let's consider 2 factions with both having the same self destructive system of only 5 units.

1=2=3=4=5=

As for the tiers, let's consider the 2 colours blue and red.
Each faction has weight factors for each tier.

Blue:
Tier 1: _50; Infantry Class
Tier 2: 150; Light Class
Tier 3: 300; Medium Class
Tier 4: 500;Heavy Class
Tier 5: 750; Special Class

Red:
Tier 1: __50; Infantry Class
Tier 2: _200; Light Class
Tier 3: _450; Medium Class
Tier 4: _800; Heavy Class
Tier 5: 1250; Special Class

Last year I couldn't have these 2 factions face each other. Without making new designs.

If blue wanted to attack a medium class of red, with an infantry. The design would have to be 50+450. Not 50+300.
The math values are 81 for 450 and 36 for 300.
Clearly the effect of 36/81 is not good.
The square root is 6/9. Or 300/450.

So I had an idea. What if the design is originally 50+300.
But only when this blue soldier is facing the medium class of blue itself.

The weight is 300. And for obvious reasons, if we use the red medium class as weapon. That 450 being reduced to a weight of 300 is 2/3rd.
The damage type would still be 81. But the added dice roll would now be 4/6th for a hit. This means that EVERYTHING stays the same for that design. The cost, the armor, the health, the movement speed, the attack range etc. Except for 2 stats.

An extra accuracy roll and the damage type changes.

Now we got a design that has 2 subdesigns for the weapon stats.

6/6 x 36
4/6 x 81

And it weights the same.

Even when the medium tanks of blue and red are working together. The rocket soldier can now be effective against both of them.

150 vs _200 would have 0.750 and 1.333 for the exchange.
300 vs _450 would have 0.667 and 1.500.
500 vs _800 would have 0.625 and 1.600.
750 vs 1250 would have 0.600 and 1.667.

You can see in that other topic what kind of dice rolls are needed.
Obviously, 1.5 for example would be a die roll of 3/6th, then add another die for whatever rolls are needed later on.

No doubt there are many questions. But I leave this here.

Cheers, X3M

Thu, 04/17/2025 - 21:36

#26

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I got through 50% on this latest comment and...

I got the RPS rules about how you expect there to be 5 Factions and that you want one to beat the other. However there is the availability of a MORE COMPLEX RPS rules and it goes something like this with 5 Factions:

Faction 1 beats Faction 2
Faction 1 beats Faction 4
Faction 1 beats Faction 1

Faction 2 beats Faction 3
Faction 2 beats Faction 5
Faction 2 beats Faction 2

Faction 3 beats Faction 4
Faction 3 beats Faction 1
Faction 3 beats Faction 3

Faction 4 beats Faction 5
Faction 4 beats Faction 2
Faction 4 beats Faction 4

Faction 5 beats Faction 1
Faction 5 beats Faction 3
Faction 5 beats Faction 5

This is a TRUE RPS-5 and the relationships between the various FACTIONS. Since there are 5 Factions, each Faction defeats 3 other Factions (including itself) and is beaten by 2 other Factions.

How to comprehend this is to think of FIVE (5) RPS-3s that go around the pentagram of the RPS-5. I can't explain this but it's basically 5x RPS-3s produce these rules.

***

Now this may be MORE of a challenge to BALANCE. The cool think is that it does what an RPS is meant to do is to make SOME Factions stronger versus some others all the while maintaining a balance.

You can RE-THINK this as a Faction is STRONGER than 2 Opposing Factions, is ON-PAR with itself and is WEAKER to 2 Opposing Factions.

This will make for more INTERESTING RPS-5 dynamics if you are planning to work on FIVE (5) Factions in your Board Game (IDK is this for the Board Game or RTS Video Game???) In any case this is much more DEEP in understanding the relationships that are in the game.

***

If you want to make it SUPER challenging in terms of RPS-5 Rules. You can do this by a CASE-BY-CASE method. What I mean is each UNIT you design, you follow the SAME RPS-5 Rules: 2 are stronger, 1 is the same and 2 are weaker.

This means that even if you LOSE a battle, it doesn't mean that you lose the war... It just means that you will need to match the opponent's units with the ones in your arsenal which are STRONGER to compete against.

***

IDK if you understand all of this... But I've worked EXTENSIVELY with RPS-5s and know a LOT about how to BALANCE the RPS-5 rules. How you approach it in YOUR game may be different. That IDK. It is 100% up to you.

I'm just explaining that the RPS-5 Rules allows for more COMPETITIVENESS than what you had presented. I don't think you had made the LINK that RPS-5 allows for MORE RULES and BALANCING than the series that you presented.

***

If you have any additional questions or want more explanation (in case you don't understand my POV and what I've explained), just ask me questions and I will do the best I can to address them such that you understand that YOUR versions of the RPS-5 Factions is VERY LIMITED. I offer you a more RICH version which allows much more COMPATIBILITY and COMBATIVENESS such that the special (2-1-2) rules make for the opportunity to create units for the FIVE (5) Factions more DEEP.

Remember if you do it on a CASE-BY-CASE (Per Unit) that is one approach but it is the MOST complex one. Otherwise you do it Per Faction and although this means that some Factions are stronger versus a Faction, also the opposite is True too...

***

Personally if it was up to ME: I'd do it PER UNIT (Case-by-case). This would make the UNITS much more dynamic and it means that you can BEAT an opposing army just by knowing the MAKE-UP of that specific "army" or "platoon".

***

Let me know IF I have explained the RPS-5 in the correct amount of detail.

Cheers!

Thu, 04/17/2025 - 21:53

#27

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Putting it in a sort of TABLE

T, X, O, X, O
O, T, X, O, X
X, O, T, X, O
O, X, O, T, X
X, O, X, O, T

Where "T" = Ties, "O" = Weaker, "X" = Stronger.

This is the REAL RPS-5 RULES for a proper Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock actual relationships.

YES it is more complicated... But at the SAME time it is 100% accurate.

Best.

Thu, 04/17/2025 - 22:21

#28

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Like I said...

For RPS-5 relationships... I have done a LOT of studying into the RPS-5... I've even worked on RPS-9 relationships with my game "Archon: Circlet of the Heavens" (ARCHON). But that design is virtually DEAD. I'm not working on it any more for various reasons. You TIE three, BEAT three, LOSE three.

And you can make one of the BEAT a "SUPER BEAT" some kind of Mortal Enemy.

You can transform those relationships into a "5 Symbol" component. Super is in the MIDDLE, 2x BEAT on top, 2x TIE on bottom.

This means that FOUR (4) Symbols are omitted and work as follows: one is itself (TIE) so we can ignore that one, three "lose" so those can determine when a UNIT is compromised and defeated. Basically all you need to know is WHEN you BEAT. Otherwise you are beaten.

And this is done using only 5 Symbols.

I tried to look for an example... I have no such images. I will dig for an example ... And see IF I can find one. In any case, what is important to remember is NINE (9) RULES become only FIVE (5) RULES. 4 you BEAT or TIE and the 1 you SUPER BEAT. That's all you need to explain.

The rest is intuitive: if you have a SYMBOL (or Faction #) not in the 5 Symbols... You are BEATEN (UNIT LOSES).

That's how it is all simplified. Very straight-forwards.

Sincerely.

Thu, 04/17/2025 - 23:10

#29

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Here's what I mean

Just a quick example of the RPS-9 I was talking about...

Fri, 04/18/2025 - 01:30

#30

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Hey, what I meant is

Hey, what I meant is that...

The rps-5 is within 1 faction.

In another topic I mentioned that rps between factions is a bad idea. Smart players will not attack their prey at all.

As for rps-5

There are a lot of options.

Rps-1 well, doesn't exist. But this unit is designed to fight itself.

Rps-2 is impossible too.
But now you have 2 units being each other counterpart. If 1 of the 2 can't shoot for some reason. It is GG.

Rps-3
A beats B beats C beats A again.
Of course, this could go counter clockwise.
But if you asign a number to each letter.

You get:
123
132
213
231
312
321

From there you can deduct that only 2 options are true.
123, 231 and 312 are the same.
321, 213 and 132 are also the same.

Rps-4
A beats B beats C beats D beats A again.
Can be done in the same way.
There are 6 ways.

Rps-5
Has 24 ways.

The fun part about setting up a 5x5 system that is balanced. Is that you can have a rps-5. Or have rps-4 with 1. Or have rps-3 with 2. 2 plus 2 plus 1 is also an option. And lets not forget 1+1+1+1+1.

Either way, rps-4 has 6 ways. But there are 5 tiers that can be excluded. After all, we have 5 options for that 1 lonely design that will take out itself.
So, rps4 with 1 has 6x5=30 different systems.

Rps 3 with 2 has 2 ways. But 10 configurations. A total of 20 here.

Rps 3 with 2x1 has again 2 ways. This time, again 10 configurations. The only difference is that the remainder 2 aren't countering each other. But themselves instead.
20 total here.

2 with 2 with 1...
Well, idk how to quickly calculate this one.

2 with 3x1 would have 10 options.

1+1+1+1+1 has only 1 option.

There are more than 75 sets. (To sleepy for that one)
And if you allow for example 3 sets for a faction.
The number of balanced factions is 75^3.

What are "Factions"??? Are they UNITS per Faction or something else???

User login

Navigation

Apr 21 2025

Apr 19 2025

Apr 18 2025

Apr 17 2025

Apr 16 2025

Apr 14 2025

Apr 10 2025

Apr 4 2025

Apr 3 2025

Apr 1 2025

Mar 31 2025

Mar 30 2025

Mar 28 2025

Mar 22 2025

Mar 20 2025

Mar 19 2025

Mar 18 2025

Mar 13 2025

Mar 9 2025

Mar 8 2025

Mar 7 2025

	Trying to Learn to use Vassal (5) by larienna
	Protospiel Kansas City 2025 (0) by The Game Crafter