If you haven't checked this out yet...

[raymond6751]

I have designed a game system that is truly unique for use with non-
video games. Whether your game is with miniatures, table-top map paper
games, or a pbem (email) game like mine, my system is easily adapted.

Typical combat systems for these games see you rolling dice, sometimes
a handful of them, to see who wins. My game has no dice and no random
number generator. Results are obtained by comparing the advantages
each side has in the engagement, and choices made by players.

An advantage could be weather, terrain, larger force by type, air
support, or any from a page long table of advantages. In addition,
each player earns Command Points for victories and loses points for
defeats. As the game progresses, your points can make the difference.

The game that I am using this with is a very detailed WW2 game.
Players who are history buffs or like thinking games will enjoy the
challenge of dealing with multi-level, multi-player interaction. While
the game is relaxed, it is not casual. There are 7 Manuals in addition
to the base rules.

For info: http://ww2thebigone.webs.com

[SteamWake]

Only comment I have is that even though a certain 'player' has tactical and logistical advantages it cannot assure a win.

For exapmple the M16 was a vastly superior weapon (when it worked) in Vietnam. Yet many was the time they were sorely lacking when needed the most.

Even real life uses a random factor

Anyhow good luck with your endevor, looks like fun.

[raymond6751]

I didn't say there wasn't randomness in the game, but that it doesn't use random numbers to determine results.

Example: You are trying to break through an enemy naval blockade. He has three zones across a waterway, left, right, or center. We like to orient them to a direction, such as North, Mid, and South. His units occupy any or all of the zones.

Each player chooses a weather choice from clear, rain/snow, or rough. If there is a match in zone and weather, there is contact.

As for the M16 value, our game is at the division/regiment level for land combat. Which weapons are used is not played out. Formations are infantry or armor and equipment types are generic. Strategic leaders can improve things by doing weapons research. That earns an advantage in battle.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by raymond6751

I didn't say there wasn't randomness in the game, but that it doesn't use random numbers to determine results.

Example: You are trying to break through an enemy naval blockade. He has three zones across a waterway, left, right, or center. We like to orient them to a direction, such as North, Mid, and South. His units occupy any or all of the zones.

Each player chooses a weather choice from clear, rain/snow, or rough. If there is a match in zone and weather, there is contact.

As for the M16 value, our game is at the division/regiment level for land combat. Which weapons are used is not played out. Formations are infantry or armor and equipment types are generic. Strategic leaders can improve things by doing weapons research. That earns an advantage in battle.

Even dice are more realistic than that...

How would you go about resolving land battles then? I can think of a number of operational and strategic level engagements where luck played a much bigger role than each side's comparative 'advantages'.

[raymond6751]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

Even dice are more realistic than that...

How would you go about resolving land battles then? I can think of a number of operational and strategic level engagements where luck played a much bigger role than each side's comparative 'advantages'.

Land battles are a lot more complex, but the action described above (blockade) was not a naval battle - just a contact determination.

In land battle the two sides deploy units to left, right, center and rear areas of the battlefield. In odd numbered real-time months the defender gets to set the local weather, the attacker the time of day.

We then have to phases of battle using a table of advantages that each side uses to find all that apply. Such things as weather, terrain, types of units and ratios, having air or naval support, and so on. The list contains 41 possible advantages and they won't all apply to every battle.

In addition, players at all levels earn Command Points in battle. They can also be loaned points from Operational Commander and Strategic Leader for key battles. The points invested by each side are compared for yet another advantage.

But there's more. Each player can have personal tactics to use in battle. Comparing his tactics to the enemy choice will further adjust the advantages. The winner of the phase is the one with highest advantages.

Then comes phase two, the counter-attack. Before this, each side gets to add reinforcements and additional/new support. Players can adjust their deployment too.

Final win goes to the player with the most advantages.

[SteamWake]

Do you include 'quality' of troops?

How much training have they had?

How about their leader?

Have they seen action before?

Are they physically fit?

Are they all suffering from disentary?

Its not just numbers

Player A has 100 troops with uber rifles.

Player B has 50 troops with so so rifles.

Player A's troops spent all night in a brothel and are hung over.

Player B's troops are battle hardened and had a good meal last night.

Now what?

Not trying to be contrary here I'm just wondering aloud.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by raymond6751

Land battles are a lot more complex, but the action described above (blockade) was not a naval battle - just a contact determination.

In land battle the two sides deploy units to left, right, center and rear areas of the battlefield. In odd numbered real-time months the defender gets to set the local weather, the attacker the time of day.

We then have to phases of battle using a table of advantages that each side uses to find all that apply. Such things as weather, terrain, types of units and ratios, having air or naval support, and so on. The list contains 41 possible advantages and they won't all apply to every battle.

In addition, players at all levels earn Command Points in battle. They can also be loaned points from Operational Commander and Strategic Leader for key battles. The points invested by each side are compared for yet another advantage.

But there's more. Each player can have personal tactics to use in battle. Comparing his tactics to the enemy choice will further adjust the advantages. The winner of the phase is the one with highest advantages.

Then comes phase two, the counter-attack. Before this, each side gets to add reinforcements and additional/new support. Players can adjust their deployment too.

Final win goes to the player with the most advantages.

Then how do you deal with cases where victory went to a side which was clearly at a disadvantage?

Take the Battle of Auerstadt for example, by all comparative assessment Davout's French III Corps should have been obliterated twice over by the main body of the Prussian army, seeing how it was outnumbered 3 to 1. Yet the French withstood the Prussian attacks, then charged and completely routed the Prussians.