Point reduction charts.

[Downwood]

Been discussing the point reduction charts with Phil and have come up
with some tenative charts.

These are based on a 2d6 roll, and are weighted to give a roughly even
match more often than not.

<code>
Germans:

German 2000
Roll % off remain
2 0 2000
3 0 2000
4 5 1900
5 5 1900
6 5 1900
7 10 1800
8 10 1800
9 10 1800
10 15 1700
11 20 1600
12 25 1500

Points available by percent chance:

2000 8.3%
1900 33.3%
1800 41.7%
1700 8.3%
1600 5.6%
1500 2.8%


soviet 3000
Roll % off remain
2 10 2700
3 15 2550
4 20 2400
5 25 2250
6 30 2100
7 40 1800
8 40 1800
9 40 1800
10 45 1650
11 45 1650
12 50 1500

Points available by percent chance:

2700 2.8%
2550 5.6%
2400 8.3%
2250 11.1%
2100 13.9%
1800 41.7%
1650 13.9%
1500 2.8%

</code>

Still toying with all the numbers to make it come out reasonable, but
I think it's a good start.

-woods

[MHel...@gmail.com]

Well, aside from the slight variance from what we talked about, the
wieghting to point allowance is not unfair, at least in my opinion.

And while the point allowence tolerence appears to be tighter for the
Germans (not something that I think is either unfair or unrealistic
historically) the Sovs appear to have a higher ceiling than we
discussed. Granted that the 8.4% chance of that happeneing is not
that significant of an issue. But, a worse case v best scenario now
has a potential of a 800 point descripency...which is quite sizable.

Firstly, I'm not against the point allowence concept. Secondly, the
chart would appear to be reasonable as well. Thirdly, some times, die
rolls are just a MFer so, at some point in the future, the die gods
are suppose to all equal out...i suppose. The question I have now,
is, lets say for example that what happens if one of us gets maxed
points and the other gets min points? What stops either one of us
from saying, hey, ok, you guys get that many, heck, I'm only going to
retreat my units off the board and concede the map section?

There should be something other than just winning the map section if
one side or the either gets a favor condition? What would you guys
suggest as a remedy for that?

MIchael

[Formula]

Hi All,

My thoughts on this would be that the player with the lower point
total is the defender and if he just wanted to leave the map, you
could come up with a house rule that states that a minimun number of
turns would have to be played (2 or 3). This could be reflected by
saying that this is the amount of time needed to pack everyone and
their equipment up. There are rules for disengaging (no enemy with in
8" or you have to roll a skill check or die). If the defender took
less time, then any non self propelled guns/units on the table would
be left for the enemy to capture.

Ohio Mike

> > -woods- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[MHel...@gmail.com]

Interesting.

Although, the automatic fewer point totals are likely to have the
German's as the defender in most table top games. Just as a
suggestion, I like the idea of having the unit which initiates contact
on the campaign map be the attacker and the other is the defender.

So, it is quite possible that a field commander might be tasked to
attack and have a muster the following turn of x minus total of
allowable build. Which is, kinda, historically accurate. Otherwise,
the forced turn deployment has merit. As does the penalty of leaving
the field of battle too soon.

I like the shape this is taking....

Michael

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Downwood]

If bump the numbers so that the sov's run from 2550 to 1500, then best
german vs worst soviet is +500 and vs. best soviet is -500

best soviet vs worst german would then run out at a 1000 point deficit
for the germans.

Right now the table is balanced so that both sides hit 1800 on rolls
of 7 through 9. the chart just stretches further up for the soviets
cause there is more room to stretch. The numbers 10-12 have a slight
advantage to the germans.

A possible change to the chart would be as follows:

Soviet

3000
Roll % off remain

2 15 2550
3 20 2400
4 25 2250
5 30 2100
6 35 1950

7 40 1800
8 40 1800
9 40 1800
10 45 1650
11 45 1650
12 50 1500

with the following percentages:

2550 2.8%
2400 5.6%
2250 8.3%
2100 11.1%
1950 13.9%

1800 41.7%
1650 13.9%
1500 2.8%

This reduces the "over 2000" percentage for the soviets from 41.7% to
27.8% giving the Germans a much higher chance to score an equal fight.

As for attacker/defender/retreating, I don't have much in the way of
useful thoughts at the moment.

-woods

[Mike]

It only makes sense to me that no matter what percentage of forces you
have that the person initiating the contact should be considered the
attacker. Many times attackers had no idea what was infront of them
and were told just take that position no matter what is there. As for
the retreating thing there is always the fighting withdrawl senario
that could be utilized when someone doesnt want to stand and fight.
That seems more realistic to me and gives the chance to the attacker
to do some damage on the force who is trying to run away as well.
Jacobs