Skip to Content

Trying to adapt the W1815 combat system for generic battles

5 replies [Last post]
larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008

Note: For those who does not know what W1815 is, it's a war game without movement, everything is embedded in the combat resolution table. Each turn, players chose 1 unit, roll a die and resolve the CRT.

I would like to use the W1815 system as a close up combat resolution mechanism. Think a bit of it like in "Titan" when instead of opening up a tactical battle field, you have an engagement like in W1815.

Now the problem is that the W1815 is designed by knowing in advance which units are going to be available on each side. But in a game like "Titan", you will not know which unit will be on each side.

I intend to use an hex map as a world map with multiple armies on the board ( 1 army per hex). Each army will be composed of 2-3 units.

There seems to be 4 aspects in the W1815 system to consider:

1- There is different flanks where units are isolated from each other.

For the flanking, that will be easy. Each unit on the "World map" will be a flank and units will be isolated from other flanks. In W1815, each village is a separate flank. The only exception is the unit "Guard" that can target 2 different flanks.

2- Combat results, what are the casualties.

For the combat results, I could have find something where you fusion 2 combat resolution table together in opposite direction. For example, my unit can have the following outcome:

1- no damage
2- no damage
3- weak damage
4- weak damage
5- strong damage
6- Strong damage

Then the opposing unit will have the same chart, but the positionning is inverted, so that the opponent's 6 is put in my position 1.

1- no damage - enemy strong damage
2- no damage - enemy strong damage
3- weak damage - enemy weak damage
4- weak damage - enemy weak damage
5- strong damage - enemy no damage
6- Strong damage - enemy no damage

The problem is that there is now 1 chart for both units. An alternative would be to have an offensive and defensive chart. When I attack, my offensive chart get matched with the defending unit's defensive chart.

3- The targetting, who will target who, who will counter attack who.

This is the most complex portion as I don't know the composition of each side. I was thinking maybe using unit catagories like infantry, cavalry, artillery. Infantry target infantry, cavalry can counter attack other units. Else I could use front row and back row, the position of the unit change it behavior.

4- Selecting units to act

In W1815, you can select 1 unit per turn, which can be of any flank. Since each world map unit will be an army on a separate flank, If each army can act once per turn, that means multiple units will be activated each turn.

A solution that I though is that each army can activate once, but only 1 of the unit within the army is activated. So if an army have INF and CAV, then either the INF or the CAV within the unit can be activated. Else I could put all armies in a pot and resolve them as a single battle.

In W1815, the CRT efficiency is not relative to the number of regiments on the battle field, that means that players will not always select the unit with the most regiments. Allowing more choice.

larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008
I just re-tougth about it and

I just re-tougth about it and it's way to complex to play, even as a video game. Sometimes I just think too much. Almost feel sorry for my post.

To self-criticise myself, It seems that it barely solve the objective of making location be defended by more than 1 unit, have battles with lese units on the board and having semi automated battle without tactical movement. There is still tactical movement to reach the target location to attack, so that just puts the problem elsewhere. Implementing unit stacking would be much easier to understand.

Now I am thinking more about going 180 degrees, implementing tactical map, but removing world map movement. All your units teleports to destination when you choose to attack. The tactical map is spawned, but it's simply a portion of the world map. One of the objective is to remove micromanagement and fifflyness of moving units every turn while also managing civilization and other task. In this case, instead of removing movement during battle, I will remove movement before battle.

Like in Titan, you warp from battle field to another instead of connecting battlefield and moving between them. Also, when you are in a tactical battle you feel you are in a battle, and resolve it until it's over. It avoid the player to do multitasking by seperating concerns. It avoid situations like: "OK, I build a castle in that city, accept a trade traeaty with player X, spend gold on that new reward program and by the way, the crossbow man hidden in that forest attack's your archer."

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
I have movement, but the battle goes like this...

Maybe you get an idea from this.

Positioning on the map is on a strategy basis, on top of a hill, in a forest, accros a river, etc.
You could see the movement as a warp with a limited range ;)
Speaking of (attack) range, this is only applied on the map.

Tactics are only during a battle.

Each location (1 battle) contains a stack of units.
When a battle starts, the player decides on a front line, middle and back. The stack of pieces are placed on the battle board. Range will only determine the attack order. Those who had not enough range, stand here as shields.

Players can use certain Event cards as "a situation has arised to do a flank or sneak attack". In order to go around the shields.

Consider a first post, or any, as a brainstorm.
It can't get worse than mine, can they now?

larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008
After some discussions on

After some discussions on BGG, I have conclude that I should stick to the 1 unit per space but I should be more looking for deterministic combat resolution. I created a thread ot get suggestions of deterministic combat war game and got a few suggestion I am currently reading the rules.

So far, "Medieval battles" is interesing and it uses an RPG between units and gives a lot of importance to terrain as it game put you in advantage or disadvantage.

Another game as the notion of formation/status I am trying to explore further. So for example, a units formation could be broken making it easier for another unit to score a hit.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Effectivness during a round

What if every piece has an effectivness score during a round?

Let's say:
When dealing with other pieces. This score is adjusted with a RPS modifier. But also terrain etc.
If this piece has performed 0 tasks. 0 is subtracted from this effectivness score.
If the same piece already performed a task. It gets tired, worn out or whatever seems fit to the theme. Then points are subtracted for this effect.

A pikeman versus a knight on a horse, might have +3 points in effectivness, simply due to RPS. It will defeat the knight. It can defeat 2 more knights from the same angle. Before a tie occurs. If you don't want ties. Maybe design in such a way that RPS creates odd numbers. And effectivness is reduced by 2 points every round.

+3, becomes +1, then -1
Thus 2 knights can be defeated. Then the pikeman is defeated.

larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008
I am exploring war games with

I am exploring war games with deterministic resolution. The only solution is to give some "tools" to allow the player to change the strength of his units. So far I intend to use:

  • Unit type/categories: Having like your pikement more efficient vs cavalry
  • Terrain: Making certain units stronger, weaker in attack or defense. Giving special abilities
  • Formation: Certain "stance" could change the unit behavior or give additional actions: ex: fortify, ambush, etc.
  • Traps: maybe certain traps or trick could be placed on the map.
  • Manipulating units: like taunt, lure, push, etc. Could be another option.

Of course, there will be magic that will be available to break stalemate. I might not include all the features listed above because it could be too heavy. I would prefer promoting magic. But I still need something in case you do not have the right spells or units to gain the advantage.

Syndicate content

forum | by Dr. Radut