Jump to content

Alternative Combat die resolution scheme


Recommended Posts

Hey all,

 

I am curious on what you all think about this alternative die rolling scheme. Do you think it would be quicker and cause less headaches overall?

 

Target lock

1.) attacker adds his/her target lock(+ modifiers) and subtracts the

opponent's ecm. Once this number is agreed upon go to step 2.

2.) attacker rolls 2d10 for target lock and consults the modifier

table for the modifier score.

3.) add the values in steps one and two. If value is greater than 0

then target lock succeds

 

 

Damage

1.) attacker adds his/her damage potential for the weapon

(+modifiers/target lock/etc) and subtracts the opponent's armor(with

opponent's modifiers).

2.) attacker rolls 2d10 for each weapon and consults the modifier

table for the modifier score.

3.) add the values in steps one and two. The resultant value is

looked up on the damage table

 

 

 

MODIFIER TABLE

2D10 roll Modifier

2 -9

3 -8

4 -7

5 -6

6 -5

7 -4

8 -3

9 -2

10 -1

11 0

12 1

13 2

14 3

15 4

16 5

17 6

18 7

19 8

20 9

(btw the modifier table is easy to remember, all it is is roll

2d10 and subtract 11)

 

 

comments appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

And the problem with the current method is.............???

 

I'll give you a nod for creativity but frankly I don't see why someone would want to change a perfectly good method of determining TL. We both roll a d10 and add our modifiers... if I beat your score then I got TL. Why bother with referencing another chart? Keep the mechanics simple so players can concentrate on just playing/enjoying the game.

 

Seems to me that most players prefer a contested dice roll instead of relying on the luck of the opponents' solo dice roll.

 

Any particular reason for wanting to change the mechanics?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator

I've noticed the big slowdown with CAV is the time people spend staring blankly at their datacards going "uuuuuh...", either before they roll their dice, after the've rolled their shots but forgotton to roll target lock, after they've rolled their armor but forgotton to declare which die went at which shot, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about D20 but I wanted to keep the probabilities intact so I kept with the 2D10 roll. There is no difference between the probabilities between the current method and the alternative method. I am trying to see if there are any adjustments that can be made that doesnt damage the integrity of the game mechanics but yet make the game go faster. I know quite a few people that do not like the opposed die rolls at all (most people dont have much of an opinion). IMHO, opposed die rolls isnt a big selling point in the game system.

 

I can actually go one step forward with the method as follows:

 

Target lock

1.) attacker adds his/her target lock(+ modifiers) and subtracts the

opponent's ecm. Once this number is agreed upon go to step 2.

2.) attacker rolls 2d10 for target lock.

3.) add the values in steps one and two. If value is greater than 11

then target lock succeds

 

 

Damage

1.) attacker adds his/her damage potential for the weapon

(+modifiers/target lock/etc) and subtracts the opponent's armor(with

opponent's modifiers).

2.) attacker rolls 2d10 for each weapon.

3.) add the values in steps one and two. The resultant value is

looked up on the alternative damage table below:

 

Damage table

25+ Critical

24 4DP

23 3DP +SUP

22 3DP

21 2DP + SUP

20 2 DP

19 2 DP

18 1 DP+ SUP

17 1 DP

16 1 DP

15 1 DP

less than 15 No Damage

(please note that Damage starts at an 'easier' value of 15 with suppression at 18,21, and 23 <hmm think legal ages and you have the first two>. 25+ is a crit. All in all, I believe that they are easier numbers to remember)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've noticed the big slowdown with CAV is the time people spend staring blankly at their datacards going "uuuuuh...", either before they roll their dice, after the've rolled their shots but forgotton to roll target lock, after they've rolled their armor but forgotton to declare which die went at which shot, etc.

Hey, I do that!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Frosch,

 

The probabilities are the same due to that all I am doing is having the attacker roll the defender's die as well. The roll is just re-translated thats all (i.e. a bad roll is when the attacker rolls a 1 and the defender rolls a 10 which would be a -9. The translation to the alternative scheme is that a bad roll are double 1s).

 

I think there is less interaction between two people during damage resolution which I think will make games go faster. I also think that the alternative scheme gives a different 'perception'. In the alternative scheme, a high roll is a high roll and there is nothing that the opponent can do about it (hence one's self is responsible for all one's luck) and I would like to suggest that its less frustrating to roll poorly all game in the alternative scheme than with the current scheme. Why I say that is that there is less of a chance of a player getting irritated at the opponent (the whole, *$%@ when I roll 10's he rolls 10's complaint, kinda like 'he always makes his invulnerable saves').

 

All in all, I think this scheme has merit and I am going to playtest it when I have an opportunity to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...