# Too much fidling?

298 replies [Last post]
X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
questccg wrote:Here is an

questccg wrote:
Here is an example of ONE (1) Bomber attacking TWENTY (20) Troops:

Bomber (1) > Class 4/80/8 vs. Troops (20) > Class 1/20/1

Use Dual Dice #1
Roll (Die #1) = +2/+1 [3]

=> 1 x +2/+1 = +2/+1

Results:

1x Bomber (7/8) vs. Troops (18)

***

So what I would want to ADD in terms of extra damage (DMG) is a modifier at the end if this result:

=> 1 x +2/+1 = +2/+1 [+?/+?]

***

1 <= 5 which means two (2) dice should be rolled ("6"s are removed as a failure).

So let's say I roll a "2" and a "5". What happens NEXT???

***

An IDEA: Subtract them and convert to a Dual Dice Value (1 to 6).

5 - 2 = 3 = [+2/+1]

It works because it is ONLY 2 dice being used. With more dice, I'm not sure how to handle them...

Maybe you can help me HERE???

The chance for a hit with "4" is 5/6 x 5/6 x 5/6 x 5/6
You roll once, remove all the 6.
You roll once more, remove all the 6.
You roll once more again, remove all the 6.
You roll finally once more again, remove all the 6.

So... 30 might become
25 might become
19 might become
15 might become
13 might become
10

The average would be 14 to 15.

PS. I don't know what you mean with dual dice??

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
If we can SOMEHOW boil it down to two (2) six-sided dice...

Well then I definitely have a solution...

Die #1 - Die #2 = [0-5] => Corresponding Dual Dice.

That for SURE works. But how do you CONVERT like 3 or 4 and 5 dice into only a product of TWO (2) DICE ONLY... This IDK!

And in this context you don't NEED to remove the "6"s. Only compare dice rolls (Highest Die Roll - Lowest Die Roll.

It's not OVER-STRETCHING ... The values are all in-check. But the real issue is figuring out HOW to get 2d6s from a host of other dice...

(Continued in NEXT comment ... Maybe easier solution!)

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Okay ... give me some time to reflect...

X3M wrote:
I am brain dead at the moment...

Your solution REQUIRES you to roll a "Bucket of dice". Even if they are ONLY standard D6s... Rolling 30+ dice just doesn't work (for me). There are two (2) very distinct reasons:

#1. The cost of adding 30+ or more dice to a game is COST PROHIBITIVE.

#2. A bit in line with #1, the weight of 30+ or more dice will have significant amount of weight so that SHIPPING is COST PROHIBITIVE.

While it's SIMPLE, it's TOO MUCH. So I am trying to understand your LOGIC and see if there is ANOTHER way of doing something SIMILAR (but not exact).

***

This leads me to my idea of boiling down:

[total average damage] = [damage projectile] x [penalty roll chances] x [number of units] x [number of projectiles]

To: [Number of Attacking units] x [Dual Dice] + [Bonus Damage]

You only currently need to roll ONE (1) Dual Dice. The [Bonus Damage] if abstracted to 2D6s (Die #1 - Die #2) means that you use two (2) NORMAL D6s and you subtract the HIGHER Value by the LOWER Value...

Any you get a kind of "approximation"...

It may not be EXACT. But it kinda "works" and only requires 3 DICE!

***

Ideally I'd like for a solution to have AT MOST five (5) NORMAL D6 dice... and add to it three (3) Dual Dice (which are custom).

***

IDK how to do it... But I am going to ponder on it... And see what I can come up with to make it WORK! Please let me know IF you have any additional ideas or thoughts on how to take "up to 5 dice" and make them a "subtraction of 2..."

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011

ADD ALL Dice together and then "MODULO 6"! So if there are five (5) dice, we simply ADD them up.

Example: 5, 4, 4, 2, 1 (Five dice, over 20+ Troops)

Total = 16 MOD 6 = 4 = [+2/+2]

Is this NOT BAD???!!! Could be even SIMPLER than the "subtraction" that I have proposed a bit earlier!

This results in these 6 possible values (for the Dual Dice):

[0] = [+0/+0]
[1] = [+1/+0]
[2] = [+1/+1]
[3] = [+2/+1]
[4] = [+2/+2]
[5] = [+3/+2]

That's your Dual Dice #1 which is less "swingy" (and more regular). I think this could maybe WORK! Again it comes CLOSE to the "subtraction" that I proposed and has the EXACT SAME OUTCOMES (0 to 5)!!!

***

questccg wrote:
Like quantity "<= 5": 2 dice, "<= 10": 3 dice, "<= 20": 4 dice otherwise 5 dice...

Using the ADDITION and MODULO makes for a pretty easy method to introduce like up to 5 standard D6s + "3" Dual Dice Custom dice.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
1 die

All cards being equal or lower than that die roll are allowed to do damage.
Of course it is entirely possible that none of your units hit. Or all of them.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
X3M wrote:All cards being

X3M wrote:
All cards being equal or lower than that die roll are allowed to do damage.
Of course it is entirely possible that none of your units hit. Or all of them.

Maybe multiple rolls can still be used for higher "penalties". But it would start with the lowest rolls this time. And more and more cards are added to the attack.

Starting with the 3/6th if the attack would have succes. Both sides could roll this with their own die colour.
Then adding any roll needed in order to add the cards that are able to hit.

This is however an all or nothing situation if it is really just that first roll.
And the only way to prevent this. Is adding more dice.
If I add more dice, then the hand needs different colours. And the player needs to sort the cards first in different groups, before starting to roll the dice.

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I have three (3) variations of Dual Dice

Each with it's OWN "probabilities" and distributions. While the dice are ALL 100% compatible with your standard/average D6s die, their DUAL nature allows them to be used to SPLIT a value into two distributions. Most of the progressions are predictable (except for one) in that they are TOP vs. BOTTOM in terms of values.

The initial die (that started all this MAGIC):

+1/+0 = 1
+1/+1 = 2
+2/+1 = 3
+2/+2 = 4
+3/+2 = 5
+3/+3 = 6

This original die has no flaws and grows in a predictable manner. It's the original die with all of the Coin-Toss simulation, 1-2-3 Fudge Die and a purpose to evenly break one value into two.

After I realized that one (1) die may not be good enough, I worked and defined a SECOND die which is a bit less predictable. Still it has a stable growth and is also free of flaws:

+1/+0 = 1
+2/+0 = 2
+2/+1 = 3
+3/+1 = 4
+3/+2 = 5
+4/+2 = 6

After this die was designed, I wanted something MORE "swingy", something that could add a lot more variance and have a greater mean. So I came up with this next dice which has one (1) FLAW. See if you can spot it?!

+1/+0 = 1
+1/+1 = 2
+1/+2 = 3
+4/+0 = 4
+4/+1 = 5
+4/+2 = 6

The FLAW is on the value of "3": +1/+2. But more so it loses it's ability to have the FACE A - FACE B = Coin-Toss. Another broken aspect of this die. But in another way, this dice is great because of the larger variance... You can still SIMULATE Coin-Toss with a "1" = Heads and "4" = Tails sort of method... But it is a bit different than "FACE A - FACE B". Something the other two (2) dice conserve as a property.

Those are the THREE (3) "Dual Dice" that I have designed and PLAN to use with the prototype (if I ever get that far...)

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Not sure how your dice work

Not sure how your dice work exactly.
Can you describe a one by one step for an army of 15 soldiers that do 1 damage each and 5 soldiers that do 3 damage each?

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Okay ... I'll give it a TRY

Troops (15) > Class 1/20/1 vs. Troops (5) > Class 1/20/3

Roll (Die #1) = +2/+2 [4]

=> 15x (+2/+2) = +30/+30

Troops (15) suffer 30 DMG and are wiped out vs. Troops (5) suffer 30 DMG and are also wiped out.

***

I believe in your case it would be a different result. Something like:

Troops (15) suffer 5 losses = Troops (10) left over.
Troops (5) suffer 5 losses and are wiped out.

***

I didn't say it is perfect... I'm working on it! < Wink! >

Hmm... It seems to work with LOW unit counts. With higher numbers it doesn't work. Okay... Got to think about it and see what I can come up with. All the small examples that I did like:

-Jeeps (2) vs. Troops (20)
-Bomber (1) vs. Troops (20)
-Jet Fighter (1) vs. Jet Fighter (1)
-Jet Fighters (4) vs. Jet Fighters (6)
-Jet Fighters (6) vs. Jet Fighters (4)
-Jet Fighters (6) vs. Jet Fighters (6)

All seemed to work. Huh!? But you proved that the dice system doesn't work.

***

I am thinking and believe that I have FOUND the source of the problem. But I am having a difficulty expressing the nature of the problem.

I too am "brain dead" now! < LOL! > Funny how it worked on a bunch of cases but not on your example.

I THINK I can use the dice for some +/- bonuses to add a bit of CHANCE to the game. But not like I was hoping to use them (the dice that is).

***

Let me revisit the initial example (as defined by you) and see how the dice can be used to add some VARIANCE not overall definition:

Troops (15) > Class 1/20/1 vs. Troops (5) > Class 1/20/3

Roll (Die #1) = +2/+1 [3]

=> 15x1 = 15, 15 Targets +2 = 17/1 DMG
=> 5 x3 = 15, _5 Targets +1 = _6/3 DMG

Troops (15) suffer 6 losses = 9 Troops left vs. Troops (5) suffer 17 DMG and are wiped out.

***

Not sure what I think about this TBH. It's clunky and complicated and definitely not simple. Let me think about it some more. Cheers!

***

I thought after doing ALL the samples that I did ... I had something that could be very effective as an "approximation". But I see that it MOSTLY only works with lower numbers. Your version is much more realistic and a bit harder to figure out. I thought I could SIMPLIFY the MATH using the Dual Dice. And while it works in a bunch of examples... Clearly it is NOT universal and that is totally unacceptable.

Back to the drawing-board for me.

Note #1: This reminds me of a Drawing program that I worked on in the 80s in MS-DOS BASIC. It was called "ProDraw" or "Professional Drawing-board". Not that this is relevant just made me think of a program that I started to code way back in the early 80s when I was 10 or 12 years of age...

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Just a bit of a FLASH idea...

What if the Dual Dice would simulate the [Number of Projectiles]... Meaning that the overall effectiveness of projectiles is subject to CHANCE (like in real world combat some bullets go astray and miss the mark ... So to speak)!?

So we would have this equation:

[total average damage] = [damage projectile] x [penalty roll chances] x [number of units] x [number of projectiles]

And re-write this a bit like:

[total average damage] = [number of units] x [unit damage] x [Dual Dice]

So given YOUR example & a Dual Dice roll of [4] = +2/+2:

[total average damage #1] = 15 x 1 x +2 = 30 DMG.

[total average damage #2] = 5 x 3 x +2 = 30 DMG.

***

Now what??? I'm not sure how to use the Penalty dice?!?! Let's say 15 vs 5 as before.

15 is 4 dice and 5 is 2 dice and we have:

Player #1 (15) = 4, 3, 2, 2 = 11 MOD 6 = "5"

Player #2 (5) = 6, 2 = 8 MOD 6 = "2"

Subtract |5 - 2| = 3 and therefore "+2/+1" Dual Dice...

***

It doesn't seem to work. Well time for bed (it's 12:00 AM over here!) Let me sleep on it and we can discuss FURTHER your "penalty" dice. But ATM I don't see it working one way or the other.

Cheers @X3M!

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Some early thoughts...

What we need is a CUSTOM D8 to establish the right BALANCE and it looks like this:

1/5 = 20%
1/4 = 25%
2/5 = 40%
1/2 = 50%
3/5 = 60%
3/4 = 75%
4/5 = 80%
1/1 = 100%

This will WORK(!) I'm pretty sure. But it's a CUSTOM D8.

Here is the ANALYSIS with the die:

1. It would use simple MATH and NOT percentages (%).

2. It means that the BEST attack will be 100% (1/1) which is possible but not probable.

3. Nothing over 100% is possible. You can't kill more than 100%. Less YES, more NO!

4. This is one freaken COOL custom die. It does a lot to REPLACE the "Penalty" rolls with something more logical. And yes, this dice is even BETTER than my Dual Dice... But yet it is still CUSTOM.

I THINK this dice will work BETTER than "Dual Dice" because there are no DIVISION BY 0 or MULTIPLICATION BY 0, etc. All that crappy stuff, I needed to get rid of. I'm pretty confident about this die!!!

Let me know what you think of it @X3M!!!

Note #1: It's 2:00 AM EST... Got this bit of an idea while lying in bed and wanted to use the phone ... But the computer is quicker!

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Still not sure how your dice work?

I can see that you have divisions. And thus 1/1 is 100%.
But what do you do with that percentage??

And what does MOD mean?

***

Anyway, it seems that my old mechanics are also still hard to understand. First I will do without the penalty rolls. But then again. A penalty of "4" ( <=5 * <=5 * <=5 * <=5 ) is roughly an equal chance to 1 roll of <=3.

So I will try to explain with the example.

15 units with damage 1 per unit. In the latest balance, they have a BASIC 50% accuracy roll and an accuracy of 50%.
5 units with damage 3 per unit. Same accuracy rolls.

Let's ignore the all or nothing with one die for now.

My original games have a roll per projectile.
This means 15 red dice for the 1 damage.
5 orange dice for the 3 damage.

The basic accuracy roll is always 50%. A die remains a succes if the roll is 3 or less. Thus we need to remove all 4, 5 and 6.

20 dice are rolled.
Red: 11111,1233/\4,55566
orange: 123/\46

9 red dice and 3 orange dice remain in this example.

We now roll for the accuracy of the units themselves.
This happens to be 3 or less for both units:
Red: 12233/\4456
Orange 12/\5

5 red dice remain a hit. Each die is worth 1 damage.
2 orange dice remain a hit. Each die is worth 3 damage.

Now we see what the targets armor was.

1? Infantry:
Then The red and orange dice can be added up. 3 damage is overkill on 1 armor. But it still counts as 1 hit. 7 damage in total, thus 7 kills.
3? Vehicles:
The orange dice are worth 3 damage now.
5 + 3*2 = 11. With 11 damage, we can actually kill 3. The remaining 2 damage is either lost. Or Infantry where hiding behind only 3 vehicles. Then you might be able to kill 2 infantry.
9? Tanks:
For 9 or more armor, the same damage applies. In this case, only 1 kill can be made. If it is only 1 tank, then 2 more infantry can be killed. But only if the tank was protecting them. If it was a vehicle behind the tank. Then this guy would not be killed.

It is entirely possible that a tank is protected by 3 infantry. In that case, 3 damage is used on the infantry. And 8 damage remains. The tank will survive this and see another round in full health.

Basic infantry are worth 2, basic vehicles worth 4 and basic tanks are worth 8.
Then the kill score in terms of credits are 22 on infantry, 12 on vehicles, 8 on tanks.
This was clearly an anti infantry attack.

It can be entirely possible that all 1 damage fail and all 3 damage succeed.
Then we got 5 damage on infantry or 10 in credits.
Then we got 15 damage on vehicles or 5 kills or 20 in credits.
The same 15 damage on tanks, is 1 kills, is still 8 in credits.

The true worth of this roll is 15 of 1 credit each and 5 of 2 credits each.
Anti infantry: 15x1 + 5x1 = 20, 20/1=20
Anti vehicle: 15x1 + 5x2 = 25, 25/2=12.5
Anti tank: 15x1 + 5x2 = 25, 25/4=6.25

Anyway, here is the link to anydice. Where that one particular roll is done:
https://anydice.com/program/27477

Fun fact: The maximum damage is 30. The chance to hit is 25%. Yet the at least damage closest to this 25% is 10, not 7.5. 7.5 is however, still the average damage located at the peak of the curve (which is a 50% mark).

***

My proto type board game worked the same. But then there is health tracking, even on infantry. And the cost=tier, where tier^2=armor
My public version worked the same. But with smaller numbers. Here I got to use the cost=2^(tier-1), where 3^(tier-1)=armor.

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Here's what I mean

X3M wrote:
I can see that you have divisions. And thus 1/1 is 100%.
But what do you do with that percentage??

[total average damage] = [damage projectile] x [penalty roll chances] x [number of units] x [number of projectiles]

My goal was to "simplify" it a bit using ONLY ONE (1) die. So call my custom D8 [accuracy check]. And therefore we have:

[total average damage] = [number of units] x [damage projectile] x [accuracy check]

Number of units = 20 Soldiers
Damage projectile = 1 DMG each
Accuracy check = 25% or 1/4

[total average damage] = 20 x 1 x 1/4 = 5 DMG.

Number of units = 5 Soldiers
Damage projectile = 3 DMG each
Accuracy check = 33% or 1/3

[total average damage] = 5 x 3 x 1/3 = 5 DMG.

Both of my results yield 5 DMG.

The result would be Troops (15) remain vs. Troop (0) remain

X3M wrote:
And what does MOD mean?

Modulo or the remainder of a division when using whole numbers:

10 MOD 6 = 4 or 8 MOD 5 = 3, etc.

***

See I'm not interested in all those "rolls" where you have to do it several times and have to "remove" dice at each step. I'd like to simplify things to being a couple die rolls and that's it. Quicker resolution, simpler to remember how it work and DOESN'T require a bunch of dice to roll. Currently only 1D8 per player involved in the conflict.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I see what you mean now

[total average damage] = [damage projectile] x [penalty roll chances] x [number of units] x [number of projectiles]
Where you convert everything on the right into 1 roll.

The number of units times the number of projectiles, depends on the number of cards and/or chips on those cards multiplied by the factor of projectiles that the same card possesses.
This is always a multiplication that players need to perform indeed. And normally this was the bucket of dice that a player was going to use with the old ways.

The damage projectile is not used correctly I think. I think you still don't understand that part.

The penalty roll chances is the only random factor here.
It could be possible to turn this into a percentage roll indeed. Making the result more linear. A higher risk. But also a calculation...
This is a step harder than the multiplicaton. And having a 100% result should be extremely rare.

How to track the number of hitting projectiles then?
Have the players divide the total number of projectiles by a factor??

2d6 could already have some interesting results.
With the lowest number being divided by the highest:
1/6
2/6, 1/3
3/6, 2/4, 1/2
4/6, 2/3
5/6
6/6, 5/5, 4/4, 3/3, 2/2, 1/1
1/5
2/5
3/5
4/5
1/4
3/4

100% seems to be rolled for 1/6th of the time.
But then there is your d8 suggestion too.

But then, some weapons should be weaker. How to do that? Having the highest number getting a +X factor?
Just experimenting myself here.

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Here are some of my other thoughts on the formula!

X3M wrote:
[total average damage] = [damage projectile] x [penalty roll chances] x [number of units] x [number of projectiles]...

...The damage projectile is not used correctly I think. I think you still don't understand that part.

Well I see from your message you understood and proposed using 2D6s. The only thing why I PREFER the Custom D8 ... Is because Division by 6 can be a bit tricky (if you know what I mean). With the D8, it's 1, 2, 4 and 5. No 3 or 6.

But I can appreciate how you broke it down into one roll of two (2) dice.

The part about the [damage projectile] this I understood as the Weapon/Armor value of the unit. And by using a [accuracy check] you don't necessarily NEED the [penalty roll]. Both are trying to do something similar which is make the attack LESS "effective".

X3M wrote:
And having a 100% result should be extremely rare.

With my Custom D8, the odds are 1 in 8 or 12.5% (under 15%)

X3M wrote:
How to track the number of hitting projectiles then?
Have the players divide the total number of projectiles by a factor??

I'm still out on the [number of projectiles] (in the equation). Let's say that a Soldier with 1/20/1 DMG/Armor deals "1" DMG. Where as a Bomber with 4/80/8 drops 1 bomb with a DMG of "8".

I'm not 100% sure. Why? Because let's say that "1" DMG is ALREADY a combination of multiple projectiles. You see the value as "1" ... But I could see it like 10x 0.1 = 1 DMG. So it may ALREADY be FACTORED into the equation without REQUIRING a "Factor". Same like the Bomber "8" could be 2x 4 = 8 DMG.

4 vs. 0.1 is a realistic DIFFERENCE and could mean that it is ALREADY "separated" but we took the details of this to HIDE it from the player.

Or we could simply write it as 10x 0.1 = 1 DMG and 2x 4 = 8 DMG.

So I think we can SAFELY "REMOVE" the [number of projectiles] from the equation... And just rewrite things a bit differently on the units/cards themselves. (Abstracted away to ensure easier equation and focus on simple math...)

X3M wrote:
2d6 could already have some interesting results.

Yeah I understood your idea. I think I prefer having the Custom D8 ... Just because of doing division by "6" are a bit hard. Same with "3"s...

X3M wrote:
But then, some weapons should be weaker. How to do that? Having the highest number getting a +X factor? Just experimenting myself here.

Yeah no problem... You understood. It's not "perfect" yet... Definitely some tinkering that needs to be done. Of course, we're both bright, I'm sure we'll be able to come up with one or more ideas that could work!

Note #1: BTW here is the SIMPLIFIED equation/formula:

[total average damage] = [number of units] x [damage projectile] x [accuracy check]

The [number of units] is a straight-forward value.
The [damage projectile] is a straight-forward value.
The [accuracy check] is a custom D8 roll (which varies from 20% to 100% effectiveness).

So that's what I meant for SIMPLIFYING the formula just a bit. Like I said, IF a BOMB = 4 DMG and a BULLET = 0.1 DMG ... To me this all makes sense! Let me know what you think!?

Cheers @X3M...

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013

The flamethrower should be able to do 3x 1 damage. Thus 3 projectiles.
The grenadier should be able to do 1x 3 damage. Thus 1 projectiles.

Both do the same damage on any unit.
However, the flamethrower has 3 projectiles, and thus can kill up to 3 infantry units.

It is also visible in the costs:
1 damage costs 1
3 damage costs 2
3x1 costs 3
1x3 costs 2

The flamethrower is more expensive.

Flame Tank versus Combat Tank.
A combat tank has a cannon of 1x9 damage.
This costs 4.
The flame tank has 4x1 damage.
This too costs 4.

If they want to kill...
Infantry; 1 dies to the combat tank, 4 to the flame tank.
Vehicles; 1 dies to the combat tank, 1 dies to the flame tank.
Tanks; 1 dies to the combat tank, none die to the flame tank.

Damage results combat tank: 1, 2, 4 credits.
Damage results flame tank: 4, 2, 0 credits.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013

What if we have 1 roll of dice for the whole attacking/defending army. But instead of dividing the result. We multiply?

It would be like a damage roll.
A d6 would suffice.
You would always do a minimum of 1x the attack. The average would be 3.5 and the maximum is 6.
With the durability of 2 in mind. The health of each card would be 7 times its armor.

But it is a given that health would be a matter again? Maybe simply say, a card has to be beaten 7 times?

We still can have modifiers on the cards. But the basic version surely could be balanced.

Of course, 1 roll for all cards is simple. But very drastic. So what about having multiple dice? And simply select a number of cards that are allowed to have a better roll. This way, players can allocate a roll.

d6-1 could be the basic now. Where 0 is a possibilitty again. And the so called health would be 5?
It doesn't matter how many cards a player holds.
The best die can be allocated to 1 card/chip.
2nd best to the next 3 cards/chips.
3rd best to the next 6 cards/chips.
Etc.

I don't know how many dice I should do?
Or that I should add some special rules?

I tried to get something done in anydice. In order to see how a sorted list works. And then see if my idea's are right. But it doesn't work for me this time...

Still, I think that if the best roll is kept for the first card. This would result in a poor roll for the entire army. Maybe having the worst die for the whole army. But then having die results add up for the chosen ones. That surely would increase the result of the best cards...

But that too would not yield a desired gameplay if the army becomes too big. So something simpler should be done?
Perhaps have the player make mulitple groups and roll a die for each group anyway??

What do you think?

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Just some things to think about

X3M wrote:
I don't know how many dice I should do? Or that I should add some special rules? ... What do you think?

The thing is with this TYPE of game where you may have 3 to 4 configurations of units ready for battle, that means 3 to 4 die rolls (If there is ONLY 1 die).

That for MOST people is enough. Rolling 3 to 4 dice is enough per turn. Trust me... That's why I said the whole "bucket-of-dice" would never work because people aren't going to play long if they need to roll that EVERY turn or worst multiple times per turn.

I know you and your cousin don't mind playing the "accurate" way with all of the extra computation, dice and rules... But to have something streamlined for the average gamer is "my point". Rolling 3 to 4 dice per turn is enough. So it means one (1) or two (2) Custom D8 to make it a bit more manageable is not the end of the world.

You need to think that 3 to 4 rolls PER TURN is enough dice rolling. More and people are going to want to play Yahtzee... Which is a DICE ROLLING game which features ONLY rolling dice as the primary Game Mechanic.

I think the simplified equation that I offered should suffice. Like I said we can write whatever we LIKE on the units/cards themselves. If one (1) Bullet is "0.1 DMG" and each trigger 10 shots (so that's 1 DMG) it all works IMHO.

The CHIPS are units counts for various Tiers (I to V). So you can have an Assault Rifle Soldier (I) and Rocket Launcher Soldier (IV)... They have to be computed separately and again one (1) D8 x3 Tiers x3 Platoon... Well you get the idea. It could be 10 rolls in all honesty!!!

So don't look for more dice. Just use this equation as the basis for combat:

[total average damage] = [number of units] x [unit damage] x [accuracy check]

It's very LEAN and does most of the Magic you've been describing inherently.

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Maybe you could try ...

X3M wrote:
2D6 could already have some interesting results. With the lowest number being divided by the highest:

1/6
2/6, 1/3
3/6, 2/4, 1/2
4/6, 2/3
5/6
6/6, 5/5, 4/4, 3/3, 2/2, 1/1
1/5
2/5
3/5
4/5
1/4
3/4

100% seems to be rolled for 1/6th of the time.

Maybe try this 2D6s for the [Accuracy Check]. See what the math is like... Is it reasonable? Or is it too complex with the "divide by 3 or 6"... I personally like the Custom D8.

I found a website that does custom polyhedral dice... But they only come in white and are printed on not engraved. But they cost like \$7.75 USD per dice (for 2x ... So over \$15 USD for 2 dice). But at least I can MAKE something and TRY it out. I know \$15 USD is a lot (plus shipping too...)

The bottom line, is maybe you want to explore the 2D6s and I'll try the 1D8 and report back what works for each of us. Remember you have different units you need to roll for and different tiers too!

Cheers @X3M!

Note #1: Probably no surprise but you could use 1D12 polyhedral to replace the 2D6s according to the outcomes you mentioned above. I checked and there are 12 unique values. I was also thinking about a 1D12 ... But I think for my purposes I'll be okay with 1D8.

questccg wrote:
Here are the 12 possible outcomes for a custom 1D12:

1/6
1/5
1/4
1/3
2/5
1/2
3/5
2/3
3/4
5/6
4/5
1/1

See if you want to go with those. They are a bit more complete than my custom 1D8 ... But I find the division by "3" and "6" to be a bit challenging. I know it's the same as "4" and "5"... In any event... I'll think about it too!

Note #2: The OTHER reason I like the 1D8 is that the faces are a bit LARGER which allows you to properly write the ?/? on the faces very easily and understandable to the person rolling the die. 1D12 has a small surface... That's the only limitation I can see ATM!

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
As a follow-up...

I have sent a Support Ticket over to the Custom Dice Company for a Template of the custom D8 faces (with the correct Bleed). I don't know how else to figure out the size of the PNG or JPG (in dimensions) even though I do know that the images need to be 300 DPI.

We'll see how long it takes for them to get back to me. They say 1 to 3 days!

Anyhow, once I get the template, I will begin working on the Custom D8 dice...

I'm also getting a quote for custom dice from Chessex since I can use more than just a White D8 ... I can get any color and white engraving. We'll see how much they quote me (for 4x D8s).

Best!

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
3 frontlines, 3 support lines, 3 groups of structures

I am using the power of 3 again.
I had this idea last night.

The table contains 9 groups of cards.
3 groups of structures.
3 groups of units with weak armor.
3 groups of units that are very durable.
A player may attack any group of the front 3.

Units can go any where at the beginning of their round.
Defences and structures are stuck.

In the attack, a player can use at most 9d-1. 1 die per group.
A defending player has a higher chance on the need for 9 dice.

***

Maybe this can be translated into 3 dice.
3d8, 3d12 or 3d20:

There are 8 possible combinations of a result:
000
001
010
011
100
101
110
111
Having that on 1 die would be possible.

Then again, rolling 3d8 per group might be possible too. The maximum roll would be 3. The average roll for a group would be 1.5

I am going in all kind of directions. But d6 with modifiers has my preverence for now.

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Had to comment since I thought this idea was Brilliant!

X3M wrote:
Maybe this can be translated into 3 dice. 3d8, 3d12 or 3d20:

There are 8 possible combinations of a result:

000
001
010
011
100
101
110
111

Having that on 1 die would be possible.

Then again, rolling 3d8 per group might be possible too. The maximum roll would be 3. The average roll for a group would be 1.5

I really think you are onto something with these 3Ds! Instead of using Fractions and multiply, you could use these Custom D8s. I think I understood correctly that the IDEA is if you ROLL a: "000" means all your attacks fail and miss. But "111" means that all your attacks succeed and you do MORE DAMAGE! Like you said the average is 1.5 and many of the rolls are "1x" ("001", "010", "100") or "2x" ("011", "101", "110") which is also COOL!

I think this idea has a lot of merit and I favor it to my previous Custom D8.

This is a simple way of simulating 3x D2s ("0" or "1"): successes or failures.

Am I understanding correctly??? 1D8 to represent three (3) binary rolls which can result in a simulation of three (3) possible outcomes...

Please let me know if I understood correctly. Cheers!

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
1d8, 3d8

Would indeed result in 3 binairy rolls. Of 3 groups being able to deal damage.

Lets say a player has 3 columns of cards. Each column is divided into 3 rows, in other words, 3 groups.

The die is rolled to see if a group in that column would be able to deal damage.

000 and none will do damage
001 the last group will do damage
010 the middle group will do damage
011 the last and middle group will do damage
100 the front group will do damage
101 the front and last group will do damage
110 the front and middle group will do damage
111 all groups will do damage

Although, I kinda find it weird to have a group being in combat, yet not doing damage at all.
What if a 0 is rolled, and they remain unexhausted?

Maybe the roll should be one to see if a group is able to attack/defend at all?
Let's say, a player wants to attack.
Rolls the 3d8.
010
101
110 are rolled
Now to let the player decide with these rolls which groups can attack.
There are 2 frontline groups, but depending on the selection, the last or middle group are part of it.
This would lead to interesting choices.
However, I also would find it interesting if it is simply allowing the player to select 2 front line groups, 2 middle line groups and...that's it. The last line can't attack unless there are units there.

Another thought occured to me, what if the same group is allowed to attack multiple times if the die roll was good?
1 group attacking 3 times. After all, the defender can defend with the correct group.

It is still all complicated to decide on what is best.

***

The only thing that worries me, is that it would be all or nothing. Even if lineair. Would it not be better to simply have a factor? And then simply remove cards with the rolled thresholds?

What if the 15 riflemen and 5 grenadiers. Roll 1 die. Then the outcome would be very much a gamble.
A custom made die would offer a solution here.

2,3,4,5,7,9 has an average of 5.
If you need 10 folds in order to defeat a card. The roll can be 2 times or even 9 times that of the cards damage.
The result would simply be shifting the decimal sign by 1 place.

15 riflemen and 5 grenadiers and the 6 possible outcomes:
30x1+10x3; kills 4 infantry or 2 vehicles
45x1+15x3; kills 6 infantry or 3 vehicles or 1 tank
60x1+20x3; kills 8 infantry or 4 vehicles or 1 tank
75x1+25x3; kills 10 infantry or 5 vehicles or 1 tank
105x1+35x3; kills 14 infantry or 7 vehicles or 2 tanks
135x1+45x3; kills 18 infantry or 9 vehicles or 3 tanks

The highest roll could be able to kill this group. But that is only because the group has grenadiers. The factor 9 leaves room for 1/10th of survivors in an equal fight.

It looks easy though, but there are factors. It could be possible that 13 cards have to be rolled for, and the roll is 7. Now 13x7 is hard to calculate for 99% of the people. So, I can't do that.

Maybe if I have the factors be in synergy with the armor value's?
3, 6 and 9 fall in this category. 1 as well. So, there is room for 2 more figures with the sum of 11...
Yeah... idk....

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Just some things to think about

X3M wrote:
Would indeed result in 3 binary rolls. Of 3 groups being able to deal damage.

Lets say a player has 3 columns of cards. Each column is divided into 3 rows, in other words, 3 groups.

The die is rolled to see if a group in that column would be able to deal damage.

000 and none will do damage
001 the last group will do damage
010 the middle group will do damage
011 the last and middle group will do damage
100 the front group will do damage
101 the front and last group will do damage
110 the front and middle group will do damage
111 all groups will do damage

Although, I kinda find it weird to have a group being in combat, yet not doing damage at all.
What if a 0 is rolled, and they remain unexhausted?...

I wanted to comment on some of your earlier thoughts and see what is different. Basically, I would use only 1x D8 ... To get "3" Values: x, y, z which are all binary. Furthermore, I would like the player decide which grouping would get to go (Attack).

So if I roll a "101". In your solution it means Front & Back will attack. In my solution it means two (2) Tiers of the PLAYER'S CHOICE will attack. I'm not going to have a front, middle and back line. Just six (6) spots on the game mat for the player to place his troops.

This is different because it doesn't pre-suppose that the order is DEFINED. Instead it means that two (2) Tiers will attack and the player gets to choose which of his 3 Tiers will conduct an attack.

I think this "looser" interpretation might be more "flexible" and allow the player the better option on his die roll. It's sort of a Probability thing:

1. Whenever you get a "1" means that one of your armies can attack.

2. Whenever you get two (2) "1"s that means that two armies can attack.

And so forth.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
No binary?

In that case, the sides would be:
0,1,1,1,2,2,2,3

Which would be ok.
But then I still want a variable strength to the armies of some sort.

And a die with the sides:
1,1,2,2,3,3
Is also an option for how strong it can be.
Given, that a card needs to be hit 4 times here.
1,1,1,2,2,2? And a card needs to be hit only 3 times. Which suits the power of 3.

Still, with this said. I can't change the value's of the cards in any other way. So I can't design a game at all this way.

Or the costs of an unit card would be much higher.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Something different from the same idea's

Still pondering about the dice. I feel I am heading in the right direction.
Somehow I want the cards to be able to deal damage. But some should do more... As if they do full damage.
So, I suddenly had an idea in regards to the dice we are discussing here.

What if the damage dealt is simply dealt?
Each card needs to be hit "twice" in order to be defeated. This means 1 damage needs to be dealt twice in order to defeat a 1 armor card.
However, this does mean that certain cards will increase in price.

The same can be said about having trice...

Now, as for the dice. A roll would mean that this value is added to the corresponding line or group.
However, in order to maintain balance. A negative value is needed.

But the idea is, that IF, one group deals more damage. Only in that moment, chances are that another group is weaker or deals no damage.
It may not be possible for all 3 groups in a line (000) to deal no damage.
So, a rule should be, that the roll demands sacrifice as well.

The options I have now are:
111; all groups deal normal damage.
012; a frontline deals no damage, but a last line does twice.
021; just fill in the rest. :)
120
210
201
102
003
030
300

These are 10 options. So a d10 could be needed.
But it leaves the players to make certain...decisions in army compositions.

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I still think I prefer the 000 and 111 given the odds

X3M wrote:
Still pondering about the dice. I feel I am heading in the right direction. Somehow I want the cards to be able to deal damage. But some should do more... As if they do full damage...

I understood your new IDEA for the die. But I don't want more than 100% in terms of the attack accuracy. Why? Because I think it is just REAL. I mean if I shot a gun 10 times (like an assault rifle) the odds are that MAYBE I might hit a target with 5 or 6 shots. The BEST could be all 10! So going OVER that amount seems excessive and not well thought up.

The binary values are just EASIER to work with: 0 or 1. 000 is 12.5% in terms of probabilities ... So for the most part you will get 1 or 2 as the outcomes that are accurate.

The other thing that I was thinking is a bit of REVERSE decision making. What I mean by this is FIRST you ROLL the 1D8 and see what you get (000 to 111). The reason being is that you have CHIPS with units on cards deployed and you would want to MAXIMIZE the BEST use of those chips and cards. So the die roll would occur BEFORE you choose which army to attack with.

I know this is a bit "clunky" and counter-intuitive... But to be honest it seems to me to be more FAIR: first you roll and then make a smarter decision.

It feels more "strategic" this way. And since ALL my unit cards have THREE (3) TIERS, the 3 values (000 to 111) work GREAT!

For example:

-A Regular Troop 1/20/1 Tier I = Assault Rifle Soldier
-A Regular Troop 1/25/1 Tier II = Grenadier
-A Regular Troop 1/30/2 Tier III = Machine Gunner

With one card you can have multiples of these Troops. That's only ONE (1) kind of troop (Regular which is the basic unit). With 3 STACKS (of chips) you can have recruited multiples of these troops. And again the values (000 to 111) is what comes into play with these units.

I don't WANT something OVER 100% unless it's some kind of "Tech-Bonus" or something relatively inexpensive. Not a 2x or 3x or more... But like a +1 or +2 Troops killed in the mix of 10+ Troops...

Do you see my logic and what I am aiming for??? So this also makes for important army decision making ... Just a different kind: Do I use Platoon #1 or Platoon #2???

***

So IF I roll a "101" ... It means Tier I and Tier III can attack. I'm like you on the fence about how to handle all the attack values and such... Like if "4" is a missile or "16" is a Tank shell ... Well then a Grenade might do "+2 DMG" when it is used and a Machine Gun might do a "2 DMG" once it is charged after 30 seconds (real-time event/aspect/trigger).

See that's how I am planning to use "Sand Timers" to initiate events at the END of a Player's Turn... But they don't resolve until that Player's NEXT Turn or interrupt an opponent's time when the time runs out.

***

I also am unsure about the "costs"... I'm not doing any heavy calculations in terms of the "efficiency" like you do. I'm just trying to work out from a GAME perspective whatever works for the GAME... Not ratios or probabilities, etc. I know your way is more scientific, but I sometimes get lost in all that MATH and to me a "+5 Credits" per Soldier seems like a reasonable increase in cost if it is to do a "+2 DMG".

Obviously this means little to you. Since you like to have the MATH work for you FIRST. I on the other hand don't necessarily comprehend all of that... I just try to work out a more "expensive" cost for a Grenadier vs. an Assault Rifle Soldier.

***

Vehicles will probably cost more... And I don't know what that MATH will look like either. I'll submit to you my ideas and you can tell me what you think. This is once I figure most of them out.

To RECAP this is my present thinking:

-A Regular Troop 1/20/1 Tier I = Assault Rifle Soldier
-A Regular Troop 1/25/1 Tier II = Grenadier
-A Regular Troop 1/30/2 Tier III = Machine Gunner

"1x" Troop Count / 20 Credits / 10x 0.1 DMG (= Tier I)
"1x" Troop Count / 25 Credits / _5x 0.2 DMG (= Tier II)
"1x" Troop Count / 30 Credits / 20x 0.1 DMG (= Tier III)

Where Tier I and Tier III are ineffective against Vehicles (any). Tier II Grenadiers are effective against Vehicles... And this is only for "Regular" Troops... There are still Veteran and Elite Troops (with different Tiers too...)

Also the "Machine Gunner" does 2x DMG after charging for 30 seconds. This means that 5x Units x 2 DMG = up-to 10 Troops can be killed due to the SPREAD NATURE of a Machine Gun. So it's not "5" like the Assault Rifle Soldiers... But "2x".

***

Not sure what you would THINK about the MATH for these three troop units. Does it make sense, IDK! To me it all seems logical. But maybe some of the MATH is a bit "broken"?!?! Again IDK. You'd have to tell me.

Sincerely @X3M.

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I know this is different from you...

You explicitly said that you wanted no part to do with "Sand Timers". And that's okay... But I wanted a Real-Time component to the version that I am working on.

See that's the thing:

A> When you recruit a troop, you flip the 60 second timer

B> This gives the opponent under 60 seconds to do whatever it is he/she has to do

C> And then if 60 times-out, the other player regains control to recruit ANOTHER troop of his/her desire.

Look at it this way: When Player #2 starts his turn, he has 60 seconds before his/her opponent will become STRONGER (with the addition of +1 CHIP and another Troop). If it takes 2 minutes, that means the opponent gets +2 CHIPS and therefore +2 Troops...

This is like a Real-Time build up as a player plays HIS/HER turn. So you don't want to take forever because your opponent is getting stronger while you are busy with your own plans.

***

Another Real-Time aspect is the Machine Gunners, they start to charge their attack and have a lead time of 30 seconds. That may seem like not a lot... But it means that they need to WAIT a bit before going on the offensive. Sometimes this CHARGING can lead to poor attacks. Granted 30 seconds is not the end of the world, it is relatively FAST as compare to the Troop Time-out of 60 seconds.

There are two (2) more timers: 90 second and 120 seconds. The 90 second timer is used for Vehicles and their deployment. It takes 30 seconds longer to deploy a Jeep, Hummer or Tank than say any Troop/Soldier. The last timer is the 120 second timer and it is used to deploy air-support. So Apache Helicopters, Jet Fighters, and Bombers all take 120 seconds (2 minutes) to deploy.

That covers my Real-Time aspect in the version that I am trying to make a prototype with... I know you said that you were not interested in Sand Timers, to me (and I've seen poor designs of Real-Time elements in Board Games) it just allows me to create "nice" TRIGGERS. When this timer times-out ... Event "X" happens, etc.

And the triggers last for short period of time (maybe 10 to 30 seconds only). Meaning you need to think FAST what you are going to do: will you DEPLOY ANOTHER SAME unit or not. That's the thing... You are either allowed to GROW your army by another SAME unit or end deployment and wait until YOUR next turn to alter your plans.

***

If any of this sounds ridiculous... It probably is. I'm just seeing what may come of this concept. Like I said, I may not even get a working prototype. But that's part of the FUN too. You like the MATH and probabilities, I like the "weaving" of mechanics and game elements (like timers, different troops, Deck-Building, etc.) That's why I enjoy designing... Because cool things can come from simple ideas too!

Cheers.

questccg
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I'm still not decided what I want with the Machine Gunner...!?

While I KNOW a 30 Second Delay to TRIGGER an attack by this units sound plausible there is still nothing that the opponent can really do within 30 seconds unless there is so WAY to "retreat" certain troops.

Without such a CAPABILITY, means that the 30 Seconds is USELESS.

At first I was thinking that I only need one LINE of troop to Attack AND Defend. But now I am realizing that Maybe "5" offensive troops and "3" defensive troops might be more appropriate...

And that could trigger the event of the Machine Gunner to force an opponent to shift his troops back to their defensive position. IDK... I'm still thinking about it. Nothing is set in stone, these are just some ideas that I have going on in my mind... And how to best handle combat.

If you have any words of wisdom, feel free to share!

Note #1: This kinda reminds me of Super Soldiers from something like Resident Evil, where they alter genetics to produce a beefed-up version of a soldier who is tasked with defeating the enhanced super-woman that is fast, nimble and very strong but still looks like a leaner figured woman.

And that was in Resident Evil 3: Nemesis.

Note #2: I guess the real point is this: IF you need to "retreat" and this is possible, it just DELAYS the eventual arrival of forces at your base. So it's like they SURVIVED ANOTHER turn ... but I still see the eventual capitulation as the opponent's army drives forwards into enemy territory...

And so I'm not 100% sure what this is really doing!? Is it delaying the inevitable that will occur one or maybe two turns later...? Or am I missing something in terms of what can be strategically done to retreat, reassemble and advance at a later time... IDK. I can't figure this out. It seems like a real conundrum to me.

X3M
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Regarding math and design

I kinda steered away from percentages of effectiveness a long time ago.
Sure I could have something along the lines of 100%-50%-25% or 50%-75%-100%. But then we are using a RPS that is created. I want a natural RPS. And if something is less effective, I always used a lower accuracy. Even when used in combination with attributes.

You are right about that doing twice the damage doesn't make sense.
In my prototype game, 4x and 5x where used a lot (actually, 4 was 100% and 5 was a +1 on that same damage). However, it would still be a portion of the health tracking. And a lesser roll would simply mean less than 100%. There was no "more than" 100% in that game either.

So, if it is in terms of accuracy. And thus, 1 unit cannot kill more than 1 unit. Then we need to rethink the dice again.

My goal is still, having cards and the numbers for RPS to work.

Back to the drawing board.