raw/veterans

[martin goddard]

Topic 1  Raw and Veterans shooting.

I quite like the 1/6 but agree it can be  missed in the heat of battle.

The difference between raw/vet cannot be achieved with a fixed +/- because the number of D6 vary from a few (1) to tens(30). This would make any fixed adjustment ( e.g ignore first hit) much bigger with few D6 and much smaller with many D6.

The best approach is to do something to all the D6 or a fraction/proportion.
Proportions/fractions are difficult as whole numbers of D6 cannot easily by divided by player mental calculation.

Doing a "1 per x" type calculation  might be an idea but not easy because  players may find the maths difficult?

We could however try it.
Such a mechanism needs to be reflected/mirrored  from raw to veteran.
e.g. +1 per 3D6 for vet would be -1D6 per 3D6 raw.

The proportion would need to be quite low if applied to all shooting. Part of the 1/6 difficulty for players is knowing when to use it.

Here is what I think we should try.
Veterans get 1 more D6 per 5 or part thereof.
The "thereof" ensures that Veterans benefit when they only have a few D6.
Raw get 1 fewer D6 per 5 or part thereof.
The thereof for raw means that 1D6 becomes 0D6.

5x Tables is easier than 6 or 7 x table?
Maybe players can line up their D6 in rows of 5 and remove 1/add 1 from/to each row?


If the shoot D6 are adjusted it will make better troops out shoot poorer ones.
No need to adjust saving rolls otherwise the combined effect would be too great because a 1 out of 6 save change has a much more profound effect than losing 1D6 per 5 when those fewer D6 still need to become 6 scores.

e.g Rolling 12 D6  expects 2.3 hits.
Raw 12D6 becomes 9 D6 expects 1.5 hits
Veteran 12D6 becomes 15D6 expects 2.5 hits.

If raw save 1 worse and veterans save 1 better on basic 4,5,6.
Raw save on 5,6 . 1 hit has effect 0.7
Average save on 4,5,6 hit has effect 0.5
Veteran save on 3,4,5,6 hit has effect 0.3


This makes shooting at raw 2.3 x more deadly than shooting at veterans
The 1 in 5 is roughly 1.6 x effect.
These are not exhaustive as 6 is guarantee save and 1 is guarantee kill etc...

Overall the 1 in 5  has lower effect on dead than touching saves.

This would need testing, but could work (?) and be easier(?) than the 1 and 6??

The big downside is that it would be applies to all small shooting which outnumbers proximity shooting by about 3x. A lot of extra maths.


martin


OR OR Or
Try a re-roll for all small shooting but that has its own bag of problems as raw players see their great shot lost. Lost of decision pause too.



 

[John Watson]

How about all factors for shooting/assault are the same regardless of class of troops but similar to assaults the better class troops get a re-roll. So raw shoot at average or veterans roll one handful of dice. Average or raw return fire and roll a handful of dice. They either take the first result or roll again and take the second result. If troops are the same class (vets v vets, ave v ave, raw v raw) no re-rolls. Only applies to small arms fire. Other shooting remains as is. Moral remains as is.
The idea of adding and taking away dice is ok in principle, but what if you only fire 1 raw rifleman?? No dice. Also a veteran MG34 firing once is going to get 5 dice. If it fires three times it will get 2+2+2+2 extra = 8 +2 = 10 dice. You could crowd a square and end up roll 40 to 60 dice. I'm not sure players would accept that.
John

[Colonel Kilgore]

Are we at risk of creating more complexity here?

What is broken with the current (i.e. pre "1 and 6") shooting?

Simon

[martin goddard]

The problem with a re-roll is that players can often take a while to have a think.
This  will result in a big slow down for players who do like to have a think.

I did mention about re-rolls and about the raw =0 D6 for 1D6 shot.
The MG bonus is claimed once per own turn for MG34 and MMG for some years now.

A +/- 1 to save is a really big difference and if applied  in 2 directions it is overwhelming I think.

I do want symmetry in raw/veteran modifiers. Modifying a  D6 score by 1 in two directions is a big step.

The problem with the earlier +/- to save means that veterans in wood/buildings  will kill double the amount of average. 2 to 1 is too high a difference I think. Most shooting is probably at men in buildings/woods or taking cover in partial scenery.

If raw have a -1 applied to their save then they die on 4,5,6 at short range in buildings , veterans die on 2,3,4,5,6 in buildings. That gives 3 to 1 kill ratio.

Don't worry we will get there.

A problem is that there is no common average/common number of D6 used in a shoot.
Veterans and raw are a "bit" better /worse.

In war a 15% better is usually enough for units to be written up in the history books as veteran.

Wargamers often read these accounts and translate that into 100% better reflecting the ability of veterans.

An "edge" is often enough to win.


martin

[John Watson]

I take your point about re-rolls but we live with them anyway. What also slows things down is when you have so many dice to roll that it takes two handfuls. In one instance on Saturday I had three handfuls.
I am trying to work out what has happened to the rules that is making the difference between raw/ave/vet an issue because I don't remember it being a problem in the old set. Has something changed in the updates that has upset the equilibrium?
John

[martin goddard]

You could make the difference the AP allotment.
Vets +1  raw -1.
That would reduce raw shooting a bit. Would also make it very difficult for them to assault.

Average D6 score moves from 3.5 to 2.5.

Could try it?
It is simple?


martin

[John Watson]

Worth a try.
John

[Nigel_s]

I am trying to work out what has happened to the rules that is making the difference between raw/ave/vet an issue because I don't remember it being a problem in the old set. Has something changed in the updates that has upset the equilibrium?
John

Catching up on posts as I prepare for games this Friday.

The new rules removed the AP difference, the +1 to save and the +1 assault for Vets. Perhaos the view is that what is left has narrowed this difference and Martin is seeking simple ways to extend this differential without making Vets of comic book strength (who doesn't love Union Jack Jackson, Sgt Rock etc?).

I think putting back the +1/-1 to APs goes a long way to addressing this. It makes it much harder to get raw troops to assault, probably requiring the command attention of the Company Commander to drive the assault home. That feels realistic for me, and good for the game narrative.

I'm not sure whether the AP roll adjustment is as well as or instead of the add one / remove one shooting dice per 5 or part thereof. Which also seems a sensible and easy to remember and implement way of reflecting more difference between troop quality to offset the points difference.

[martin goddard]

I am hoping the add and take 1 AP will allow veterans to do more and raw to do less.
It should also make the saves etc much clearer (less modifiers).

In theory (yes I know) Veterans will get 4.5 AP per turn and raw 2.5AP per turn.
This should lead to less shooting etc. by raw and more shooting etc by veteran??

4AP for assault can be  tricky to get for raw. Russians and Japanese will be OK but most raw will need either a good roll, officer with in order to get are-roll, CC to get +1 etc..


martin

[Nigel_s]

I played the +1AP adjustment across four games where one of the sides was veteran.

We ran out of game time to try the -1 for raw. That game is up first next time.

The AP adjustment has the benefit of being in the current published rules. So we know it works.

I find the simplicity helpful, and it does allow the Vet more shooting, moving and assaulting and Raw less.

However, the effect felt greater due to changes to how APs are rolled and the company commander +1AP.

The veteran platoon commander with the CC attached adds a further +1.
So that is +2.
And the PC square gets to reroll.
So the platoon with the CC+1 did seem to get consistently high APs, especially with the PC in square reroll.
That can be rationalised by the combination of command control and better quality troops.

A related question, is the +1 / -1 adjustment applied to the 5 APs given by excellent officer asset?