Idly thinking about attack mechanics again. Consensus appears to be that, as long as the number of attacks is kept low via beneficial rules, then it's better to roll once for a successful attack, and then make additional rolls to penetrate each applicable defense.
This is how High Guard does things, as well as several personal combat mechanics, and apparently this hits a sweet spot in wargaming.
1. ASSUME an attack can be stopped by several active defenses, with ratings (factors) from 0 to 9, and ONE applicable passive defense with ratings from 0 to 24 (but typically in the 0-15 range).
1a. CONSIDER that "hull configuration" is the Passive Defense when attacking with meson guns.
2. ASSUME ships have a TL, and the TL Delta is the Attacker's TL - Defender's TL.
3. ASSUME an attack has one primary parameter, Attack Strength (ATT), with a rating or factor from 1 to 34.
4. ASSUME a ship can be represented by something like the USP.
5. ASSUME numbered range bands from 0 to 14, with 8 being long range, and 9+ being beyond the range of combat.
THEN
To-Hit difficulty, in dice = Range - TL Delta.
To-Pen difficulty, in dice = Active Defense - TL Delta, for each applicable active defense.
TO HIT: To-Hit difficulty(Dice) <= Attack Strength - Passive Defense.
TO PEN: To-Pen difficulty(Dice) <= Attack Strength.
THE CHALLENGE
To use task language to describe attack and pen actions.
To account for defenses reasonably.
TL difference is important.
To not just roll an attack twice with minor modifications.
THE IDEA
The idea is:
(1) attack ratings are fine-grained
(2) attack ratings are on the same scale as armor
(3) active defenses are on the same scale as range and TL delta (!)
(4) active defenses can be powerful but are typically not a guarantee of safety
[FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]
This is how High Guard does things, as well as several personal combat mechanics, and apparently this hits a sweet spot in wargaming.
1. ASSUME an attack can be stopped by several active defenses, with ratings (factors) from 0 to 9, and ONE applicable passive defense with ratings from 0 to 24 (but typically in the 0-15 range).
1a. CONSIDER that "hull configuration" is the Passive Defense when attacking with meson guns.
2. ASSUME ships have a TL, and the TL Delta is the Attacker's TL - Defender's TL.
3. ASSUME an attack has one primary parameter, Attack Strength (ATT), with a rating or factor from 1 to 34.
4. ASSUME a ship can be represented by something like the USP.
5. ASSUME numbered range bands from 0 to 14, with 8 being long range, and 9+ being beyond the range of combat.
THEN
To-Hit difficulty, in dice = Range - TL Delta.
To-Pen difficulty, in dice = Active Defense - TL Delta, for each applicable active defense.
TO HIT: To-Hit difficulty(Dice) <= Attack Strength - Passive Defense.
TO PEN: To-Pen difficulty(Dice) <= Attack Strength.
THE CHALLENGE
To use task language to describe attack and pen actions.
To account for defenses reasonably.
TL difference is important.
To not just roll an attack twice with minor modifications.
THE IDEA
The idea is:
(1) attack ratings are fine-grained
(2) attack ratings are on the same scale as armor
(3) active defenses are on the same scale as range and TL delta (!)
(4) active defenses can be powerful but are typically not a guarantee of safety
[FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]
Last edited:
