Hi Young Grasshopper – I don’t see anything harmful in this unit roster, but I’m also not seeing anything revolutionary. Can you explain your analysis a bit for us? Like, OK, so you weaken fighters a bit, and strengthen cruisers a bit. That’s fine. What else does your new d8 system accomplish that justifies dropping $30+ on a large set of custom-colored d8’s?
I don’t understand, pretty much every unit is effected save a few, but even the units not effected marked with an (x) symbol are theoretically effected by all the other changes (including but not limited to Cruisers). For example: how many times have we heard that defending Submarines and Strategic Bombers are too weak, or that Tactical bombers with combined arms are too strong, and let’s not derail the thread here… but there seems to be some concern with the idea of an “obsolete tank”. Also, custom 8 sided dice would be a house rulers dream, just think of the value options with just 2 extra sides (and no… I don’t like 10 sided dice, they roll like footballs).
Interesting idea to explore.
Clearly get a way to tweak with combat values without changing cost.
MI+Art is 2+3=5/2=2.5 or 32.5%, this is right on OOB values.
MI+Tank A1+A4 = 2.5, same as OOB too.
MI and Inf on defense remains good D3 or 37.5%.
Maybe too good for Tank to not stall offensive…
I wonder if Tank should be A5 D4 for that purpose (forget about TcB bonus)…
Similar to Classic config A3 D2.
Cruiser with 62.5% to hit becomes interesting.
Battleship becomes a beast, as it should: 75%.
Destroyer is nice at 37.5%. Just a bit lower than 50% from attacking Fg.
TacB remains interesting at 62.5%
But, it might be more attractive like A5+1 D4 for the 11 IPCs cost.
Fg is A4 D5, a bit nerfed but it is so versatile.
StB is A5 D2 is appropriate.
TcB were far more better destructive weapons on moving target.
That’s why I think it should be as high as BB.
TcBs were battleship’s nemesis.
Remember that the UK Lancaster Heavy bombers used 2 years and more than 30 attempts before they sunk Tirpitz.
Many Fantasy Flight games use D8s.
It would have been a revolution if D8s has been introduced for Second Edition.
It would have resolved a lot of balance issues for sure.
Just 2 more increments allows many variations.
Nerfing attacking Inf to 1 and combos to 2 is a way to increase Tank effectiveness on offense but still keeping 50%.
No more need Tank to add +1 combos to TcB. Only escorting Fg might help TcB.
Nice trick.
:-)
@Young:
(and no… I don’t like 10 sided dice, they roll like footballs).
You are right about D8, keeps the feel of D6.
D10 rolls too much. Too easy to move unintentionally a few with a stack rolling.
D8 is more stable.
:-D
I like the idea, but am kot haply with a stronger Sub, given the Convoy ability and Stealth they already have . Not for the price of 6.
I like the better values for DD and Cruiser. These would help fleets attacked by the massed Air attacks we are used to seeing (and which ruin the game).
@wittmann:
I like the idea, but am kot haply with a stronger Sub, given the Convoy ability and Stealth they already have . Not for the price of 6.
I like the better values for DD and Cruiser. These would help fleets attacked by the massed Air attacks we are used to seeing (and which ruin the game).
While changing dices,
Interesting facts: Subs convoy with 3 or less for IPCs damage will be weaker.
It provides an opportunity to drop StB to A4 (50%), if 62.5% (A5) instead of 66.7% is not enough.
Had not thought of that. Thank you Baron.
@wittmann:
I like the idea, but am kot haply with a stronger Sub, given the Convoy ability and Stealth they already have . Not for the price of 6.
Does Subs really get this opportunity for Stealth?
From what I heard, many complain that DD easily block Surprise strike. They rarely see it in game?
Does your games full of Subs?
Unless you are talking about Subs being invisible to planes, if no DD present?
Tactical bombers with combined arms are too strong.
Instead of a +1A bonus, why not allow Tank to give TcB a Tankbuster capacity?
Each time a Tank is present, all TcBs successful hits allows to pick any ground unit as casualty.
I don’t want to derail but it is still your comment that makes me think about it.
This man got an incredible records:
Tank Killers
Rudel was instrumental in developing the tactics of using cannon-armed aircraft in the anti-tank role. The exploits of his Stukas during the Battle of Kursk was the inspiration used by the United States Air Force in designing the A-10 Warthog tank-busting aircraft at the height of the Cold War, when there was a requirement to counter massed divisions of Soviet tanks in central Europe. This aircraft was built around a multi-barrelled cannon specifically to counter enemy tanks.
As a leader of warriors, Rudel was unsurpassed. He led from the front and set a pace that few could equal. In the course of 2530 missions, Rudel personally destroyed 517 Soviet tanks – the equivalent of five Soviet tank brigades. This was on top of a battleship, cruiser, 70 landing craft, 800 trucks, 150 artillery pieces, as well as numerous bunkers, bridges and supply dumps. He also managed to achieve nine confirmed air-to-air kills. Perhaps more striking was the fact that Rudel was shot down 30 times by ground fire, and wounded five times. On top of this, he successfully rescued six of his pilots who had been shot down behind enemy lines. This was the mark of the man, who ranked leading his men into battle as the highest duty of any soldier.
@Baron:
@wittmann:
I like the idea, but am kot haply with a stronger Sub, given the Convoy ability and Stealth they already have . Not for the price of 6.
Does Subs really get this opportunity for Stealth?
From what I heard, many complain that DD easily block Surprise strike. They rarely see it in game?
Does your games full of Subs?
Unless you are talking about Subs being invisible to planes, if no DD present?
It’s true, submarines may get a few “special ability” opportunities in the opening rounds, but with a single destroyer negating surprise attacks and the ability to submerge, not to mention their vulnerability to aircraft with a destroyer present… submarines become pretty useless pretty fast.
@Baron:
@wittmann:
I like the idea, but am kot haply with a stronger Sub, given the Convoy ability and Stealth they already have . Not for the price of 6.
I like the better values for DD and Cruiser. These would help fleets attacked by the massed Air attacks we are used to seeing (and which ruin the game).While changing dices,
Interesting facts: Subs convoy with 3 or less for IPCs damage will be weaker.It provides an opportunity to drop StB to A4 (50%), if 62.5% (A5) instead of 66.7% is not enough.
That’s right, an 8 sider does drop the odds of hitting during a convoy disruption, and even with 6 siders when a single sub gets 2 dice…. we have always fount the gambit a 50/50 mechanic.
@Baron:
Tactical bombers with combined arms are too strong.
Instead of a +1A bonus, why not allow Tank to give TcB a Tankbuster capacity?
Each time a Tank is present, all TcBs successful hits allows to pick any ground unit as casualty.
I don’t want to derail but it is still your comment that makes me think about it.This man got an incredible records:
Tank Killers
Rudel was instrumental in developing the tactics of using cannon-armed aircraft in the anti-tank role. The exploits of his Stukas during the Battle of Kursk was the inspiration used by the United States Air Force in designing the A-10 Warthog tank-busting aircraft at the height of the Cold War, when there was a requirement to counter massed divisions of Soviet tanks in central Europe. This aircraft was built around a multi-barrelled cannon specifically to counter enemy tanks.
As a leader of warriors, Rudel was unsurpassed. He led from the front and set a pace that few could equal. In the course of 2530 missions, Rudel personally destroyed 517 Soviet tanks � the equivalent of five Soviet tank brigades. This was on top of a battleship, cruiser, 70 landing craft, 800 trucks, 150 artillery pieces, as well as numerous bunkers, bridges and supply dumps. He also managed to achieve nine confirmed air-to-air kills. Perhaps more striking was the fact that Rudel was shot down 30 times by ground fire, and wounded five times. On top of this, he successfully rescued six of his pilots who had been shot down behind enemy lines. This was the mark of the man, who ranked leading his men into battle as the highest duty of any soldier.
The idea of an 8 sided system would be inspirational for tons of house rule idea including the one you mentioned above, however, this thread is an investigation on how unit profile odds in the oob system can be translated into an 8 sided system forcing many units into different percentages better suited for them. Do you think BM that you could list all of the percentages for each attacking and defending unit in the 8 sided system I wrote so that I could include them in the OP?
@Young:
I have found that many of the problems with G40 unit profile values can be solved by using an 8 Sided die.
Attacking unit dice odds
1/8 - White 12.5%
Infantry (-) 16.7%
Mech Infantry (-) 16.7%2/8 - Green 25%
Infantry w/Artillery (-) 33%
Mech Infantry w/Artillery (-) 33%3/8 - Purple 37.5%
Artillery (+) 33%
Submarine (+) 33%
Destroyer (+) 33%4/8 - Blue 50%
Tank (x) same
Fighter (x) same
Tactical Bomber (x) same5/8 - Red 62.5%
Strategic Bomber (-) 66.7%
Cruiser (+) 50%
Tactical Bomber w/Fighter or w/Tank (-) 66.7%6/8 - Black 75%
Battleship (+) 66.7%Defending unit dice odds
1/8 - White 12.5%
AA Guns (-) 16.7%2/8 - Green 25%
Submarine (+) 16.7%
Aircraft Carrier (-) 33%
Strategic Bomber (+) 16.7%3/8 - Purple 37.5%
Infantry (+) 33%
Mech Infantry (+) 33%
Artillery (+) 33%
Destroyer (+) 33%4/8 - Blue 50%
Tank (x) same
Tactical Bomber (x) same5/8 - Red 62.5%
Fighter (-) 66.7%
Cruiser (+) 50%6/8 - Black 75%
Battleship (+) 66.7%*Special thanks to Big Al “Mike Tyson” for contributing in this idea.
Done.
:-)
Thank you very much Baron, I have one question…
Isn’t the Battleship odds the same?.. I’m terrible at math, but if 3/6 and 4/8 are both 50%, than isn’t 4/6 and 6/8 both 75%?
@Young:
Thank you very much Baron, I have one question…
Isn’t the Battleship odds the same?.. I’m terrible at math, but if 3/6 and 4/8 are both 50%, than isn’t 4/6 and 6/8 both 75%?
4/6 =2/3 = 0.667
6/8=3/4= 0.750
@Baron:
@Young:
I have found that many of the problems with G40 unit profile values can be solved by using an 8 Sided die.
Attacking unit dice odds
1/8 - White 12.5%
Infantry (-) 16.7%
Mech Infantry (-) 16.7%2/8 - Green 25%
Infantry w/Artillery (-) 33%
Mech Infantry w/Artillery (-) 33%3/8 - Purple 37.5%
Artillery (+) 33%
Submarine (+) 33%
Destroyer (+) 33%4/8 - Blue 50%
Tank (x) same
Fighter (x) same
Tactical Bomber (x) same5/8 - Red 62.5%
Strategic Bomber (-) 66.7%
Cruiser (+) 50%
Tactical Bomber w/Fighter or w/Tank (-) 66.7%6/8 - Black 75%
Battleship (+) 66.7%Defending unit dice odds
1/8 - White 12.5%
AA Guns (-) 16.7%2/8 - Green 25%
Submarine (+) 16.7%
Aircraft Carrier (-) 33%
Strategic Bomber (+) 16.7%3/8 - Purple 37.5%
Infantry (+) 33%
Mech Infantry (+) 33%
Artillery (+) 33%
Destroyer (+) 33%4/8 - Blue 50%
Tank (x) same
Tactical Bomber (x) same5/8 - Red 62.5%
Fighter (-) 66.7%
Cruiser (+) 50%6/8 - Black 75%
Battleship (+) 66.7%*Special thanks to Big Al “Mike Tyson” for contributing in this idea.
Done.
:-)
YG,
I have no problems with your numbers. I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY to play under these circumstances. Also, I think the extra 2 sides makes important units like planes even more valuable for getting hits. Aircraft of all types were so important since WW2 that all militaries created a completely separate branch for it during and or right after the war.
I hope I understand this right, Artillery rolls @3, but it bumps up inf/mech inf to @2? If so, awesome, I think artillery in their own right deserve a little “bump” versus infantry in attack. During WW1 for instance, the first 6 months of the war produced more casualties than any other 6 months of the war (mainly due to not enough defensive cover). I researched this during an Army Course as part of a final exam project. Especially in the first two months, entire units would be destroyed as artillery would be redirected on them till they were X off the map.
I think the extra 2 sides makes important units like planes even more valuable for getting hits. Aircraft of all types were so important since WW2 that all militaries created a completely separate branch for it during and or right after the war.
Well there are a few balancing acts with aircraft in this 8 sided system, first: Strategic bombers and combined Tactical bombers don’t get that strong powerful 4/6 to attack anymore, instead it’s just slightly less for both… but they’re still better than attacking tanks and fighters. This should act as a set back to “Dark Skies” without nerfing the whole strategy, and I find that the combined Tactical bombers are the main reason players pull off Sealion without fear… but now, combined Tactical bombers are not semi-guaranteed those hits slicing into the British infantry like butter. Secondly: it just makes sense to allow defending Strategic bombers to defend better than 1/6, and scrambled fighters although helpful don’t wipe out fleets with the 4/6 oob, but rather a smidge less odds making the choice to scramble more difficult… And third: if you’re attacking with aircraft you don’t have to wince so hard facing AA Guns, they are slightly less odds with at 1/8… but shooting down aircraft is now more exciting and rewarding if you can actually hit on white.
I hope I understand this right, Artillery rolls @3, but it bumps up inf/mech inf to @2? If so, awesome, I think artillery in their own right deserve a little “bump” versus infantry in attack. During WW1 for instance, the first 6 months of the war produced more casualties than any other 6 months of the war (mainly due to not enough defensive cover). I researched this during an Army Course as part of a final exam project. Especially in the first two months, entire units would be destroyed as artillery would be redirected on them till they were X off the map.
Yep… I would definitely love to see artillery units bought and used strategically more often (great video by the way).
I don’t like d8 approach because it offers marginal #pips over D6.
If you had to move to something different you want d12. Not d10 or anything else
However, if you made a system like Fortress America with all the dice D6-12, or even using D4…then you might have something with each type of unit rolling different dice
D4 infantry
D6 air units
D8 naval units
D10?
D12?
you don’t need different color dice, different dice by unit type instead. Under this nations could have different values for units
@Imperious:
I don’t like d8 approach because it offers marginal #pips over D6.
If you had to move to something different you want d12. Not d10 or anything else
However, if you made a system like Fortress America with all the dice D6-12, or even using D4…then you might have something with each type of unit rolling different dice
D4 infantry
D6 air units
D8 naval units
D10?
D12?you don’t need different color dice, different dice by unit type instead. Under this nations could have different values for units
All that is entirely different from my original post… do you suggest I scrap the whole idea and go back to the draft board? Surely there is something here with the 8 sided system you might like.
IMO, the first benefit is to keep number pretty near those on D6.
So, you don’t have to much adaptation.
Example: Infantry attacking @1 both cases. AAA defending @1.
