Skip to Content

Changing the "bonus damage rules"

33 replies [Last post]
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013

I re-edited this whole post
The thing is. Weapons with a higher cool down, increase the natural RPS mechanics of my board game(s).

But my bonus damage rule will undo this effect. Especially when the 2 different designs are equal of costs.

My bonus damage is also complicated (although it is reduced to a quarter of its former complexity).
I want to reduce the complexity to something understandable by 10 year old kids.

I want to turn it into a simple compare and adjust mechanic.

The new idea
To keep things simple.
Where bonus damage becomes a natural occurrence. It will be present for both armies, despite of size difference.

I want the total weapon costs of an unit, to be compared to the total body costs of an target.
If the targets body is bigger, a bonus to the damage should occur.

I am not sure yet about the factors here???

The bonus dice are rolled alongside the main dice.
But kept in a different group.
They can only affect the targets that belong in the category.

The first tier of the bonus would be +50%. You roll dice to determine how many bonus dice are rolled.
The second tier is simply doubling the dice; you roll 2 groups.

***

How to explain this in kids language?

What factors should I use? x2 for the first tier, x4 for the second?

Should I use more than 2 tiers? 3x33% or 6x17%?

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Editing the first post

Should bump the topic?

Juzek
Juzek's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/19/2017
Stop rolling so many dice.

I think I am missing a bunch of additional info here.
you are doing a tactical war game with different armies made up of multiple units, and coming up with bonus damage based on the size of your target?

You had me laughing with "You roll dice to determine how many dice are rolled". I don't think you should peruse this regardless of any circumstances.

D&D 5th edition simplified a lot of complexity with their Advantage / Disadvantage system concepts such as flanking, and positioning, and surprising all boiled down to: is the target at an advantage or a disadvantage at the judgement of the Game Master. You simply roll the D20 twice, and take the higher number for Advantage, and the lower number for Disadvantage.

D&D also has some combat differences for size. The larger you were the lower your AC, and thus the easier you are to hit. This was counter balanced by your hit points, which are typically higher the bigger you are. A normal wasp would have a very high AC, and very low hit points.

some other options you have:
Add a bonus dice for each size difference.
allow re-rolling select dice a number of times equal to your bonuses.
Roll, and depending on the roll, roll additional dice for each 6 displayed.
Scale everything back to only use 2 dice normally, and one extra dice for each tier of bonus damage.
Attack the susceptible units twice.

No matter what you chose, please only have dice only determine the amount of damage.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
What about the use of COLORS???

X3M wrote:
Should bump the topic?

I think what you could explore is COLORs for the dice. Like "Black" could be your "core" 2d6s and then use other colors like "Red", "Green", "Blue", "Yellow", "Purple", "Orange", etc. They can be linked to units so a squadron could be combined with two (2) types of units "Fire Brigade" (Red) and "Grenadiers" (Green). Whichever you have the most of, that's the squadron's attack. If there is a tie, the player chooses.

Like a few examples: 3 Fire Brigade and 3 Grenadiers. The player chooses to either roll the "Red" dice or the "Green" dice. When units die from a squadron, let's say you lost 2 Fire Brigade and 1 Grenadier, that would leave you with 1 Fire Brigade and 2 Grenadiers... So future rolls would now be "Green" dice, etc.

I don't think you need A LOT of dice, just various colors to match the classes you are playing your game with!

Cheers!

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
I can make it REALLY simple

The Attacking Player rolls "Black" 2d6s. The Defending Player rolls "White" 2d6s. The player with the highest rolls wins. So if it is the Attacker, he then gets to roll 2d6s (of the correct color) which can be custom dice and effective cause damage to the Defender. If however the Defender wins the initial roll, the Attack stops there...

Can be as simple as that. The colors would be "Custom" d6s and have different numbers that affect the amount of DAMAGE caused by that type of unit...

No need for much more complication TBH...

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Thank you for reading and reacting.

Juzek wrote:
I think I am missing a bunch of additional info here.
Sometimes I get the feeling that I give too much information. And thus people don't read.

Either way, the game rolls with #D6.
Each die represents 1 projectile.
The projectile can either fail.
Or double up.
Once this is determined. The new number of dice are rolled for damage.

Juzek wrote:
you are doing a tactical war game with different armies made up of multiple units, and coming up with bonus damage based on the size of your target?
That is the main idea.
This to create a balance of certain (not all) infantry against tanks.
Smaller targets are often harder to hit.
But this would slow down the game.
I rather do the other way around.

Juzek wrote:
You had me laughing with "You roll dice to determine how many dice are rolled". I don't think you should peruse this regardless of any circumstances.
A die roll has each their own strength.
A +1 on a normal die would be +60%.
A +1 on the weakest die would be +600%.
This is very imbalanced.
After all, the weakest die would also cost only 1/10th that of the normal die.
And thus you would have like 10 of those.
In a way, having +50% for all is only optional by having a die roll for if more dice can be rolled.

But there might be a solution:
Simply counting the amount of weapons of the same type.
And having 1 extra die for every 2 (or 3, or 6) number of dice.
Only the last one is cut in half (or 1/3rd, 2/3rd, 1/6th, 2/6th etc.)

Juzek wrote:
D&D also has some combat differences for ]size. The larger you were the lower your AC, and thus the easier you are to hit. This was counter balanced by your hit points, which are typically higher the bigger you are. A normal wasp would have a very high AC, and very low hit points.
I have the same idea.
But I need it a relative scale.
We have situations like 36x1 versus 6x6 versus 1x36.
Here we want the guys of 1 to get a bonus against the guys of 6 and 36.
But also the guys of 6 to get the exact same bonus against the guy of 36.

Juzek wrote:
No matter what you chose, please only have dice only determine the amount of damage.
Like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKkOVcHmmGA
PS. That is not me. Just another guy who loves Warhammer 40k.

Which brings me to the next option.
What if I save the roll for bonus till last?
What if the 50% roll simply means that the die can be used twice for dealing the damage?

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
questccg wrote:The Attacking

questccg wrote:
The Attacking Player rolls "Black" 2d6s. The Defending Player rolls "White" 2d6s. The player with the highest rolls wins. So if it is the Attacker, he then gets to roll 2d6s (of the correct color) which can be custom dice and effective cause damage to the Defender. If however the Defender wins the initial roll, the Attack stops there...

Can be as simple as that. The colors would be "Custom" d6s and have different numbers that affect the amount of DAMAGE caused by that type of unit...

No need for much more complication TBH...


So far, I am using only 1 die per projectile.
A maximum of 12 to start with.
Roll for a Hit/Miss
Roll for damage

Now, where to put the doubling of a projectile?
Maybe at the start by counting the nominated ones?
Maybe at the end, can still be done by counting the nominated ones?

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
I won't say I "understand" when I think it's too complicated

X3M wrote:
So far, I am using only 1 die per projectile. A maximum of 12 to start with...

That is WAY TOO much. Like I said in my post why not "simplify" it a bit. Say for example you roll 2d6s (Black) and beat the 2d6s (White) ... You can make it SIMPLE: Attackers Total - Defenders Total = # of hits. Next you use the colored dice associated with the CLASS to roll for DAMAGE. If White is HIGHER, the attack stops.

Make the number of UNITS the HP of your squadron. So if you have 2 Fire Brigade... That's like a 2 HP unit. What changes with the units is the class of weapon and the amount of DAMAGE your units inflict...

This is a MAJOR simplification. Just some ideas... I know you have your own direction with your game. So I'm just explaining how you can make it less complicated. Cheers!


Instead of FIXING on Black "2d6s"... Make it equal to the number of units in a squadron. Like say it's 10 units. That's closer to 12, so therefore 2d6s. Make it multiples of D6s. So instead of 12 Projectile dice, it's only 2d6 (up to 12). Then the opponent rolls the SAME amount of dice like the Attacker... Resulting in a FAIR way to DEFEND.

The number of HITS = Total Black D6s - Total White D6s. So 8 - 5 = 3 hits. That's like your THAC0.

Then roll the corresponding DAMAGE die (Let's say it's the Fire Brigade) so RED... You roll the Custom RED 1D6 and get a 3 ... You deal 3 DAMAGE to 3 opposing squadron units ... They LOSE "9 HP".

As I said HP = Total of your UNITS. IF he had 8 Units each having 2 HP, that's 16 HP. He would lose 9 HP and be left with only 2 Units (or 4 HP).


Of course each type of unit can have a VARYING amount of HP. Like a Fire Brigade or Grenadier = 1 HP each. A Jeep could have 2 HP each and a Tank could have 4 HP each... That's where your units come into play and it can be simple tables and a computation that you keep track of...

Again just ideas ... Feel free to ignore them. I don't know all the ramification of your game. I'm just discussing DICE Combat Mechanics...

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
At least you brought up the

At least you brought up the 1, 2 and 4 in healths.

By the way, have you seen the video?

It goes like that, and indeed 1 or 2 dice are needed to make a kill.

By the way, having damage dealt to all units in the same way. That doesn't feel right. We rather remove targets completely. And have only one guy take the last remaining damage.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
I think there are too many dice and no variety in any of them

X3M wrote:
By the way, have you seen the video?...

I watched the video... Are you saying you are using a similar method? To me it requires TOO MANY dice. And I like "colors" and "custom dice" too...

Take for example "Crystal Heroes" (CH). In CH, once you conquer a hero, that hero drops LOOT in the form of "Soul Crystals". To collect these crystals, players roll "White" 2d6s and "Black" 1d6. They are all CUSTOM dice (1 to 5 and a STAR). The players roll dice to try to LAND on locations where there are "Soul Crystals". Each hero has different LOOT drop rules like: Roll a "5" Black or Roll "7+" White (2d6s).

If you roll a STAR, it means that the player CHOOSES the "value" for that die. So if you needed to Roll a "3" Black and got a Black STAR... Your STAR could become that "3" and allow you to collect some loot.

So I'm using a that kind of dice rolling mechanic for CH.

Are you saying that's the mechanic that you WANT (in the video)??? It's simple ... but uses a LOT of dice. And there isn't any variety... IDK. It could work TBH... I'm not sure.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
We already use it for

We already use it for years.
It is very fast.
And has the colours for type purposes.

Forces are often mixed.
And will shoot back.

All I am wondering about now is.
What threshold should I apply to having a die double in effect?

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Possibilities maxed out

Talked a bit with Pepper. He doesn't like this forum. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Either way, he doesn't like the fact that the core mechanic should be removed. Because then the whole game logic is removed. Why change a brilliant thing, only to reduce the "max" dice from 12 to 4? Dice are cheap, period. Having a new pile of tables for consult is a lot of work. And it costs too. Also, having non-linear results in hard to balance.

The rolls are now as following, we have to consider fairness and balance:
-Pick the amount of dice; pick 2 when allowed. The total max will be 12.
-Roll for any accuracy.
-Roll the remaining dice for damage.

***

Now I should focus on the thresholds.
A game allows for 36 points.

If I have the bonus being considered in 2 steps.
Then we can take the root of 36, which is 6.
A bonus die will be added for every 2 projectiles that are equal or less than 1/6th.

If I have the bonus being considered in 3 steps.
I have the choice of 3 or 4 as factor.
A bonus die will be added for every 3 or 4 projectiles that are equal or less than 1/4th(3 projectiles) or 1/3th (4 projectiles).

If I have the bonus being considered in 6 steps.
Then we use the factor 2.
A bonus die will be added for every 6 projectiles that are equal or less than half.

Seeing as how we used to have a rule that 1 projectile could double against even bigger targets. I rather refrain from that now. Thus I will experiment with the factor 6. However, 6 is a strange figure. 5 is easier to work with.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Just some other ideas...

X3M wrote:
Talked a bit with Pepper. He doesn't like this forum. Either way, he doesn't like the fact that the core mechanic should be removed. Because then the whole game logic is removed.

I'm not telling you to change anything. I'm just offering a different perspective. If you are happy with you present dice method. That's perfectly fine too! I'm just trying to see if there could be another method to using the dice. But like you said 12 vs. 4 dice is not too big of a difference... And your whole game is built upon certain assumptions.

Sometimes your topics are VERY "nested" deep into some "core" aspect of your game. It's very difficult to understand what you are "asking". I've got to admit I probably only understand 20% of your posts and I read the full 100% of your threads.

But when I see someone throwing over 30+ dice... I've got to think... There's got to be a better way than that! You may only throw 12 or so... But the guy in the video is throwing way more than that.

And so I try to offer "suggestions" or more things to "consider" and you can see where they lead. If you are happy with an aspect, leave it as it is. I'm not telling you to CHANGE your game. All I'm doing is offering up some suggestions that... maybe you can use for a future game.

That's the thing, you may like the idea ... but not for your present game. Maybe for something else?! I doubt you are going to focus on one (1) game idea for the rest of your life...! So this can maybe give you ideas in another context!

Cheers... and like I always say, you don't have to implement the ideas that I am sharing, I'm just offering another perspective (my own) and how I might tackle the problem.

Cheers!

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Well, the thing is

No one asked about the first post.

I often try to describe the mechanics that matter. That are influenced. But you are right, that isn't enough.
However, the same can be said about a lot of other topics by other posters. Simply pointing that out. Isn't really an argument in my ears.

Because:
Simply ask...?
If things are unclear.

There is another reason why I keep things short lately. People don't read tldr topics. I noticed this a lot. And had more (usable) feedback after keeping them as short as possible.

So, what do you want to know?

- How cool down works?
- What the natural RPS mechanic is in my game?
- How the cool down increases the natural RPS mechanic?
- How the bonus damaged used to work?
- What I mean with compare and adjust?
- What I mean with total weapon and total body costs?
- What I mean with factor?
- What I mean with the target that belong in a certain category?

Anyway. Sure, I can use certain dice mechanics in other games. But lets make sure everyone knows. I work on only one board game now. The rest of my little hobby time goes into Youtube.
Also, I work. Even during these times. I have a job to do. And sometimes I will be absent for a longer amount of times. I will not be playing the board game during those times either. So yeah, I will not make any progress. And once I finally return. I get a remark like that as well (other thread) "Always posting about the same game". I assure you, I am not the only one. But at least, I have good reasons.

Oh, how many times I have thought of just quitting all of this. But the guys keep asking me to play again.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
- How the bonus damaged used to work?

Because this is something related to the dice! And I believe it was a part of the OP ... somewhere under all the rest of the mechanics used to resolve the combat portion of the RPS game.

I realize that you have a YouTube Channel ... And that your focus is on this RTS... And that you only have a limited amount of time... Because of work, your Channel and THIS game (the RTS)... That kind of caps off your time.

Which is fine... The RTS, have you started to pen down a RULEBOOK??? Often people ask us to "read the rules for clarity" or because they need someone to proof it for typos and structure (format), etc.

I keep getting the feeling that this RTS is a game... But that the rules as of yet are "undefined"!? Am I correct??? Meaning might have .TXT with some of the rules but you don't have a PDF or DOC file with ALL THE RULES?!

Because writing rules is "time consuming". And you might prefer simply playtesting with your group... As opposed to making this game of yours available to the rest of the World...!

But then again, that might not be your priority. Usually we as Game Designers WANT for our games to be known and played. But in your particular case, you might be just happy playing the game with your small group of friends.

Anyhow... Why don't you talk about the "Bonus Damage". I got the impression that you SIMPLIFIED it ... But that it's still not as simple as you would like to have it...!

Cheers.

Note #1: And when I think "BONUS" damage, I'm thinking about damage such as a Fire Bonus or Piercing Bonus... which rips through traditional armor defenses. Or Concussion Bonus from a Grenade when it is thrown into a squadron and ... BOOM! It can do EXTRA damage under the right set of circumstances... too.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
A game for kids...

One thing you need to know... As Jason (@Jay103) explained ... MOST kids who collect Pokemon Cards... Don't know HOW TO PLAY! MOST. Pokemon is probably as complicated as Magic: the Gathering.

If you want to design a game for kids, you will need to simplify it greatly.

But do remember that millennials play POKEMON too! Competitively also. So do I think Pokemon was designed for kid gamers??? PROBABLY NOT!

Also you need to remember that while adults have longer "Attention Spans", kids can QUICKLY get bored of a game. So a short 10 to 20 minute game is about as much as kid gamers can keep focus on.

And then there are "turn 0" Victory cards like "Flash" which mean that IF you draw this card at the very beginning of the game you WIN! Which is in my mind a "ridiculous" card... Everyone is going to buy 3 or 4 of these and seed their deck with them to DEFEAT their opponent WITHOUT playing the game...

So where was I going with this??? Oh yeah... Short attention spans. You said it right when nobody wants to read a WALL. Might as well break up your question(s) into separate threads or comments... As for kids, well maybe they might like your game... But wouldn't it require your own set of MINIATURES??? Enough said. To costly for me to think about this any more.

Cheers!

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Rolling the dice is considered to be fun here.

questccg wrote:
Anyhow... Why don't you talk about the "Bonus Damage". I got the impression that you SIMPLIFIED it ... But that it's still not as simple as you would like to have it...!

Note #1: And when I think "BONUS" damage, I'm thinking about damage such as a Fire Bonus or Piercing Bonus... which rips through traditional armor defenses. Or Concussion Bonus from a Grenade when it is thrown into a squadron and ... BOOM! It can do EXTRA damage under the right set of circumstances... too.


The simpler, the better.

Fire bonus, piercing bonus and concussion bonus have their own mechanics in the game.

Fire and piercing belong to the same damage adjustment family. Which is a simple adjustment to the damage dice. This is a simple +1 (+50% or +60%) or -1 (-40%), depending on the target. And has no influence from problems like, what if a next target is to be hit?
A +10 damage on such a die is possible, but less efficient in normal cases. The "roll equals 5 damage" is more common used. I can't stack other effects on these.

The concussion belongs in the explosions family. These dice may be re-rolled if the first roll hits, just like the bonus dice. Just to see how much damage they can do. But their effect is always present.
To keep this logistic, the re-roll dice will be re-rolled once the first set has been concluded. This effect affects multiple targets.
This is a luck based part of the game.
This mechanic can increase the damage adjustment. By simply adding more dice (read more expensive, so less dice to begin with).

The "bonus" dice should be applied when a target has a certain bigger size. Believe me, if I say that this was a very complex mechanic 2 years ago. But now, I want it to be a simpler comparison. A "this is it" mechanic.
The addition of dice would be the same as the explosion types. But only if a certain situation is met.

***

Writing the rules is particular hard for me. Because I am stopped, literally stopped, every 5 minutes. And it is the rules that need some re-reading. To make the rules better. I didn't pick this up any more since a year or so. We do it by memory. But as mentioned before, when finally getting an hour or 2. I spend it on my other hobby.

(Even now as I am writing this. I have been interrupted multiple times. I am at home too!)

***

questccg wrote:
So where was I going with this??? Oh yeah... Short attention spans. You said it right when nobody wants to read a WALL. Might as well break up your question(s) into separate threads or comments... As for kids, well maybe they might like your game... But wouldn't it require your own set of MINIATURES???
Cheers!

Thought I cut it up into a small set already.

Here goes again:
"When is an enemy piece, considered to be large enough, for a weapon to do extra damage?"

While not miniatures. Some players do have their own pieces to play with.
The 3D printer ain't that great though. In fact, it is very bad. We returned to cardboard pieces.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
How the bonus dice used to work?

Ok, here goes.

First of all. It was a time when no other mechanics where added to the game. Except for just rolling for accuracy and damage. The game showed an imbalance and this mechanic was what I came up with.
Second. This mechanic was NEVER used in the super simplified version of the game (the one with 1, 2 and 4 health units with CP max=24) Because the imbalance was produced out of durability issue's.
Third, we didn't always use this mechanic. Although it allowed for some noticeable imbalances.
Fourth....most players were of University levels. So, no problem doing this without calculators.

How it went:

The total army of the attacker was compared to the total army of the defender.
Example: 3600 versus 2160.

The smaller army would have a difference of 1440.
With 1440, bonus could be bought. If for example a certain projectile was worth 60 each. And another projectile 100 each. Yes, projectiles, not weapons. If a weapon had 3 projectiles, the bonus could occur on just 1 or 2 of the 3 projectiles. Nowadays, we have 1 to 3 weapons per unit. The player could decide how to get bonus on these. Also, a maximum of 2 bonus for each projectile was allowed. So there would be no super unit that could get like 24 bonus. The bonus used to be +1 or +2 on the dice. (Read as, remove only the 6, or remove no damage)
This always meant to roll 2 or 3 groups for the same damage type.

Anyway, the possible bonus in this example could be:
24x on 60.
19x on 60 + 3x on 100.
14x on 60 + 6x on 100.
9x on 60 + 9x on 100.
4x on 60 + 12x on 100.
We have some algebra tools to get this list asap. Although the tool only works for 2 projectiles. Not 3 or more.

Players had also the possibility to get this bonus by simply using a smaller army in the attack. An army that had better weapons against certain targets.

For example. An army that was 3600 big, consisting out of 18 rifle men and 9 grenadiers.
The opponent would be having vehicles at a 3600 big army.

The attacker could decide to use only the grenadiers. Thus having an army of 1800 in the attack. With the difference of 1800 and a projectile cost of 150. The grenades would get 12 bonus. The damage used to be 18+9*9=99. But using only the grenadiers, the bonus would be 9*9+9*4.5+3*5.4=137.7
On average of course.

The down side to this would be that the grenadiers could not get cover from the (up to 10) rifle men.

***

Now, my goal is this:
"Is the unit big enough?"
Yes --> You roll a second die.

But on second thought, this might be a bit overpowered as well. Unless I allow it only for the number of units equal to the targets... :)

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

So far, I just knew that no one would response to the "old" way. That it is ridiculous. Hahahaha.
That is why I didn't post it before.

***

Either way.
I ponder if I really should use weapon versus body.
Or that I should compare overall sizes instead.

But if I use an overall size, how would pistols outrank a grenade?

So, I think that going for weapon versus body is the way to go. Units with a massive array of projectiles will not get the bonus at all.

Now then, for the factors.
I am going to roughly apply a square root of 2 addition.

Which means +50% when the target has a body, at least twice that of the weapon.

What I am unsure about is, should I creep upon this mechanic?
If the target body has 4 times the size. 2 weapons get this bonus.
If the target body has 8 times the size. 3 weapons get this bonus.

The more and more I think about it. I am starting to feel that I should not add more dice. But have the initial damage being altered any way.

If I allow only 1 weapon for each target to get the bonus. I could actually allow 1 pistol to get that +600%. Right?
Just asking.

So...

***

Each target can get one bonus damage against it.
If the targets body weight is at least 2 times that of the weapons weight: A +1 modifier is applied despite the damage output of that weapon.
However, there should be damage output.
This is done after the accuracy rolls. So chances of this happening is almost 100% certain.

No difficult check.
No extra rolls.

Logistics for the player?
If there are damages done. The target has often a multiplier of 5 times that of 1 damage.
The damages for normal weapons can be 1, 2, 3 or 4.
If a 4 is rolled, this would simply be a 5. And the target is done for.

If a roll would be like 1, 2, 2. Then the +1 goes to a 2. So that a combination of 5 can be made again. If the player would put it on the 1 instead. There would be 1 overkill, thus a lost damage.

Now, when a die has 1,1,1,1,1,1 as sides (no roll needed) This die weight is only 60%. But will double effectively. A higher chance of being chosen. But then again, in combination with 2 rolls of 2. This die will not be chosen. Perhaps it is only the 60% die that could get the bonus. In other words, lost damage in this example.

The most extreme case would be the 10% weight die.
Having 0,0,0,0,0,1 as output. It really needs to roll that 1. But the chance is 1/6th for that. Thus the bonus of +100% is effectively only +16.7% on average.

I am going to toy around a bit with these super simplified rules. Let me know, what you think.
I am unsure on how to put this in understandable rules for the simpler people :)

Simply consider this:

Rules for bonus damage wrote:

- A target may receive bonus damage, if it is at least 2 times bigger than the used weapon.
- Only one weapon may apply this bonus damage, per valid target.
- Only when damage is being dealt, can receive +1 bonus damage.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
What I'm not sure about is ...

How do you determine which Attacker is attacking which Target? Because Rule #1 says "2x bigger". How do you determine if you have a squadron of various units that unit "Q" is attacking unit "P" where "Q" is a Bazooka Man and "P" is a Tank???

The rest sounds reasonable.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
That, my friend...

That choice is free. As long as they don't take cover behind a front line.

Say, the front line has a rifleman and a tank.
The bazooka attacker will automatically aim for the tank.
The sniper will automatically aim for the rifleman.

The big difference is, when the rifleman hides behind the tank.

***

Now then. There are some situations.
Where a weaker weapon might be better.

We have the following weapons:
Size 4, damage factor 16, 1.5 multiplier
Size 5, damage factor 25, 1.2 multiplier
Size 6, damage factor 36, 1.0 multiplier

Target is not too big (size 6 and 7)?
Size 4, damage factor 40
Size 5, damage factor 50
Size 6, damage factor 60

Tank body size is 8 or 9? Weapons average damage:
Size 4, damage factor 56
Size 5, damage factor 50
Size 6, damage factor 60

Tank body size is 10 or 11? Weapons average damage:
Size 4, damage factor 56
Size 5, damage factor 70
Size 6, damage factor 60

Tank body size is 12 or more? Weapons average damage:
Size 4, damage factor 56
Size 5, damage factor 70
Size 6, damage factor 84

In a sense. Vehicles are of more use again.
Of course, infantry are the best choice against those heavy weapons.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Bah...

Too many imbalances.

I am starting to think. That I should do this at a larger scale for sure.
Also, the +1 damage is way from fair in certain instances. So abusement is imminent.

It needs to change in more or less: The smaller army gets the bonus.

But then again. Maybe it is better to apply penalty to the bigger army instead. Thus making an accuracy roll.
And thus in the style of:

Rules wrote:
-A bigger army will receive a penalty.

A penalty is always 5/6th.
Going to experiment with that one for a while.

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

Applying just 1 penalty to all projectiles of the bigger army works wonders for an all out infantry army versus an all out tank army.

The surviving tanks had like 3% health remaining. And 3 out of 6 tanks perished.

Where a normal one sided fire would take 18 rounds. The better the balance, the more rounds you need.
32 rounds!!!

***

So far, I still need to find ways to abuse this.
So far, it was hard math. Not with a simulator.
Going to ask my cousin for both issue's to resolve :)
If it passes him, it will be good.

Another good thing is. A bazooka guy against a tank. Has not only the emergines of 22% more health. But another extra factor of +20% on top. Thus a total of +46% durability.
this is an awesome ability, no matter how you look at it.
Support units have gotten more durable.

Also, there is no need for a body and weapon to compare. Just the total amount, which is also used for other bonusses like +1 range.

So far, I feel happy.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
No simulator

The simulator would fail. Instead, I am determining a certain situation by hand. It is a lot of work, but Excel helps me here.

I checked for any loophole that players could take. Although, the effects by loopholes are very small, now that durability changes instead of damage.

Attackers are allowed to have a smaller army in the attack. Just like the old rules.
The defender can do the same.

However...
The total region (dimension) counts for the penalty rule.
There is no loophole to abuse any more.
Nor to get the players into a analyses paralysis frenzy.

Now one big question remains.
Should I keep the simple comparison rule? And use just 1 penalty?

Or could I add in, multiple steps?
Like for example.
The bigger army gets a penalty of 1.
If the bigger army is at least twice as big, the penalty is 2.
If the bigger army is at least 5 times as big, the penalty is 3.

Something along those lines? Would kids of 12 year old understand that?

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I included sorting

Now that I included sorting for my damage dice.
I noticed that the durability of infantry are not 4.4 health, but only 3.9 health. The given situation 2 posts prior is different if I recalculate. Worse for the losing side, if you will.

So here is a new question. Should I creep upon this bonus rule now? Or better said, have multiple penalties, as the difference grows bigger?

How to do this?

For now, I have 1 penalty for the bigger army, when 1 army is smaller.

Should I do multiple penalties?
How to do this best?
Having players calculate big/small?
Or an absolute difference, then having every 6 CP a penalty?

Just keep in mind. The penalty means that the losing side actually lives longer.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
No use asking

But here is what we decided on:
The player that is weaker will get 2 benefits for its entire army that fights.

The benefits are based on the level of difference.
Level 1: The bigger player is no more than a factor 2 bigger.
Level 2: The bigger player is no more than a factor 4 bigger.
Level 3: The bigger player is no more than a factor 8 bigger.
Etc. The maximum level so far was 6, but very rare.

Benefit 1: Higher durability
This in the form of penalties.
Each level adds 1 penalty roll of 5/6th.
Multiple penalty rolls can be summarized into 1 roll, so there is no dice feast.
Level 6 can be compared with roughly 300% durability on that 1 soldier.

Benefit 2: Higher damage
This in the form of rolling for multiple dice.
Each level adds 1/6th, this grows linear.
Level 6 can be compared with 200% damage on that 1 soldier.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Undecided till a playtest

I need to make a choice.

Penalty or Boost or Both.

After the choice. The severity of the effect needs to be determined.

Although, determining this prior will speed up testing.

I love gradient progress. But this isn't practical.
Using a doubling for each level sounds the simplest so far. Players can't see of an army is 1/6th of the opponent. But they DO can see if it is between 1/4th and 1/8th.

I already trialled having "Both". Against a super unit. The exponential effect of having 1 level for each doubling is slightly too weak.

So, I think I need to have only the penalty. But have it be 2 penalties each level.
Instead of 6 penalties and 6 boosts, it would be 12 penalties, at the end.
The last unit effectivness, while slower game progress. Would increase from 600% to 890%.
I need to test this.

AdamRobinGames-ARG
Offline
Joined: 02/11/2015
Did not quite read through all of it, but...

What if you have #D6 where there are 1-5 and a symbol. Do the damage of the 1-5. Then Re-roll the ones with the symbol to do 2x 1-5. Re-roll the remaining to get 3x 1-5, and so on till you don't roll any symbols on the remaining dice.

Smaller units could have 1-4 and 2 symbols. Increasing the likelihood of doubling while still being generally weaker. If you want to try the 1-3 and 3 symbols, for the weakest, I haven't actually done the math for when you get diminishing return. It's easy enough to track in that each instance creates a new pile of resolved dice, 1x the first roll of dice you set aside, 2x the second and so on.

Alternatively, on the symbol (on dice with the single symbol), re-roll and do 6 + 1-5 on the second roll, 12 + 1-5 on the 3rd roll and so on. Then for the dice with 2 symbols, 5 + 1-4 on the 2 roll, 10 + 1-4 on the third roll. If you try dice with three symbols, then it'd be 4 + and 5 + and so on.

Thoughts?

AdamRobinGames-ARG
Offline
Joined: 02/11/2015
Reading more...

This sounds math labor intensive for a 10 year old. And you've moved past the step I chimed in on...(so ignore my previous post unless you want to consider it for another game.) From a more casual player perspective, having 3 steps plus to determine damage (including determining rerolls/damage/bonuses/penalties) is going to narrow your audience.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Yeah, just skip the posts

AdamRobinGames-ARG wrote:
This sounds math labor intensive for a 10 year old. And you've moved past the step I chimed in on...(so ignore my previous post unless you want to consider it for another game.) From a more casual player perspective, having 3 steps plus to determine damage (including determining rerolls/damage/bonuses/penalties) is going to narrow your audience.

I am still going back and forth in this one.
Finding a good balance.
I was simply posting where I was right now.

Summary; ultimately i have 2 goals with this mechanic:
- Increase chances of victory for a smaller army. If RPS allows it.
- A draw on paper, should end up close to that draw in the game.

We used to have the boosts.
With a very detailed level system.
The target audience was 25-30 year old university people.
Obviously that shouldn't be the target audience.

Having one type of rolls would be best.
Namely the penalty rolls.
The penalty roll is a very simple concept of 5/6th. And roll multiple times if the penalty is higher.
Several penalty rolls can easily be converted into 1 penalty roll of a more severe weight.
(5/6)^1=5/6
(5/6)^2=4/6
(5/6)^4=3/6
(5/6)^6=2/6
(5/6)^10=1/6
And yes, even that last one is still a worthy roll. :)

Some of my players are missing the boost rolls.
I think, i have to make the penalty rolls more severe in order to have the desired effects.

What I am troubled with is the determining of when a penalty roll may occur. And how big this roll is going to be.
The game will slow down, but this is a good thing.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Only Penalty Rolls...

I did not have much time lately.
But did some thinking about using only penalty rolls.

In a sense. I should try to copy the old bonus rules for a bit. But then in a simple orderly fashion.

The old bonus rules kept the damage as high as possible. As if units weren't missing at all. In a sense, the damage was doubled. And when you divide a squared number by its triangular number. You get close to 2 as well.

The original bonus rule was only 2 steps. Perhaps this is better to keep things simple for the players.

9/6, 16/10, 25/15, 100/55, 10000/5050 etc.

The most important one for the hobby game:
1296/666=1.95
If I where to apply the same to the "public" version:
36/21=1.71

This means that if I keep the current penalty. The weaker force will still loose by a noticeable margin.
If I double the penalty effect. Then the 2 steps would contain 4/6th and 3/6th. Which represents the 150 and 200% of the original bonus damage. But the game is slowed down instead of speeded up.

The public game would have:
6 + 1.5*(5+4+3) + 2*(2+1) = 30 as score.
This is still a short coming.
36/30=1.2 where the goal is 1 or slightly less.

The hobby game would have:
1296/1057.5=1.23
But I have good news for that one.
Infantry have a hidden durability of 3.662/3=1.221
Thus the total factor would now be 1.004
A difference of 0.4% is a huge deal!!!

Now, what should I do for the "public" game?

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut