Some wish for CRT dice. Others swear when they see CRT dice.
There are plenty of variants.
But I wonder who has what kind of experience with CRT dice?
Why did it work? Or, why didn't it work?
CRT dice, do's, dont's, and effects on the games
Sat, 07/01/2017 - 10:51
Sat, 07/01/2017 - 12:36
#1
Ahh I see them now. I was a
Ahh I see them now. I was a bit confused when I saw you mention CRT dice. I thought it was a typo until I read this and looked them up. WOW. I did not know these existed. Are they all 6 sided? I imagine more sides would require a really big Die to fit info on. So it is limited in that regard.
Odds based CRT's, avoid fractions because of math anxiety, players get leaps between the odds ratios that don't produce good results in many peoples opinions. A buddy of mine created a new version of his long standing wargame with Fractional odds CRT to rectify this issue. But it did limit his game's market to people who do not have an aversion to using a simple calculator. at the table.
While the dice are means to avoid looking at a simple chart. It appear the other concepts are the same. You can read discussion on CRT's and the complaints about them ad-nauseum on the BGG forums. I think all the complaints really boil down to is, math anxiety, though.
Sat, 07/01/2017 - 22:57
#3
BG has numerous threads over
BG has numerous threads over the yeas, a search will yield some of them her is but one example
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/134084/combat-results-tables-agonizing-...
Combat Resolution, CRT , Combat Results Odds ratio, Al are terms that bring up threads about them.
I find Ironic In wargaming so many talk about having little time to play but, so many wargamers have so MUCH time to pontificate on Forums LOL. Me included.
Sun, 07/02/2017 - 07:03
#4
john smith wrote:I find
I find Ironic In wargaming so many talk about having little time to play but, so many wargamers have so MUCH time to pontificate on Forums LOL. Me included.
And you might as well include me.
There seems to be 2 ways to see CRT.
Combat Results Table
Combat Resolution Table
I don't know why, but the 2 words look to me as 2 completely ways of interpreting CRT.
Where I think that the first, simply gives results for the players to use.
And the second, is an all in, one roll only.
My game would use the first type.
Sun, 07/02/2017 - 10:25
#5
I think it just one of those
I think it just one of those quirks of the English language. I have never seen any variation in them other then the occasionally variation of title.
They are all based on the premise of the Military Maxim that successful attack reacquires at least 3 times the combat power that the defender has.
They are odds based or differential based. Odds being more true to the maximum whereas differential is another scheme to attempt to avoid the math involved.
Almost all of them are for systems where counters, tokens, or 3d Models are meant to represent a number of troops and equipment as opposed to a single individual or vehicle.
OutcomeBattle = PowerRed / PowerBlue
PowerRed = NumbersRed * VariablesRed * QualityRed
PowerBlue = NumbersBlue * VariablesBlue * QualityBlue
This basic system with comprises the basis for combat resolution/result on CRT. The Higher the ratio of power the attacker has verse the defender the more casualties and other negative effects the Defender will receive. IN commercial conflict situations. The roll of the die and results given under the odds columns is to achieve variation for the interest of the player. Many Military systems use the mean average. The term Deterministic is applied to those kinds of system by wargame hobbyists.
This is an example of a differential CRT https://boardgamegeek.com/image/632257/panzer-44?size=original
This an odds based CRT
https://boardgamegeek.com/image/705648/panzerblitz?size=original
Here's why some get a bit put off by CRT's http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_hvBsDbuV_Ng/S8SNXtDvIHI/AAAAAAAAB28/rQZFGGXBM3...
Sun, 07/02/2017 - 10:29
#6
P.S.
I forgot to mention that another complaint about many CRTs is that the Attacker suffers no ill effects.
here is an example of a CRT where the Attacker can also suffer from a poorly rolled or planned attack.
https://boardgamegeek.com/image/841524/normandy-44?size=original
Sun, 07/02/2017 - 11:50
#7
Interesting pictures.
The way
Interesting pictures.
The way how I look at them now is.
It all boils down to shifting the odds to a somewhat more balanced game play. However, the game is more complicated, simply due to the fact that players have to look into tables.
CRT dice take some away from this all.
But if you can avoid tables all together. I think, that would be the best for games.
Unless you have very special events with a die roll.
Mon, 07/03/2017 - 00:52
#8
CRT just show combat power
CRT just show combat power applied to a defender in form of a ratio.
IE My attacking units have a combined Attacking power of 24 and the defending unit has a power of 8. 24 divided by 8 = 3. So the odds are 3-1. You roll the dice and apply the result given under that 3-1 Column. Pretty simple and easy, it only takes a second to read. AS I looked at the CRT dice I think its clever but, I still have to look at it and read same as you would a chart. And with the CRT dice the print is smaller and more difficult to read. The other drawback is it would limit the CRT to a d6 where in many systems you need polyhedral dice.
Appears there is language barrier element here as well.
Complicated defined by the dictionary:
adjective
1. composed of elaborately interconnected parts; complex:
complicated apparatus for measuring brain functions.
2. difficult to analyze, understand, explain, etc.:
a complicated problem.
Pelle had mentioned that complex/complicated is more definition 1. But Complexity. complicated especially in the context of game design discussions I have had over the years appears to be definition 2. more often. That confounds me because I can't see anything complicated about a simple chart to help information be interpreted easier.
Mon, 07/03/2017 - 02:42
#9
Language barrier? Where'd
Language barrier? Where'd that come from?
I understood you clear.
I think, you are describing THE way, how CRT dice work. All internet pictures fit your description the best.
Which is ok. At least I am getting somewhere.
And I was also comparing to other ways, that have been described to me before,.. by others. And they called those CRT dice too.
Perhaps here, where I live, the name "CRT" is simply used for dice that work with multiple answers per die side, on this side of the sea.
One of those mistakes when a name is borrowed from another country.
I never had heared from applying the ratio of forces, before either. As strange as it sounds, that is new to me. But you explained it. We don't have those kind of games here. d20 is already a special die. And once again, it is proven that The Netherlands are rather an isolated board game country in terms of, terms and games.
I could describe other dice "mechanics" that I have seen. But I don't think it will progress the discussion any further. Except for a WTF moment for anyone who reads it.
***
On further notice. The way how things are progressing for my game. I think I will swear of any form of "CRT" dice or other kin of dice that have multiple answers per side.
Mon, 07/03/2017 - 05:51
#10
crts
I really like CRTs, and tables in general, a lot. Beats having to do all sorts of arcane maths on the dice, and without a table the possible results are never as interesting (possible exception: games that use a deck of cards for combat resolution; but that can often be seen as just a different way to express a table).
Interesting side note is that the oldest game I know of that used CRT dice actually predates the oldest CRT I know of: Reisswitz famous Kriegsspiel published in 1824 used a set of dice with combat tables printed on the sides. The Swedish simplified translation published in 1830 used standard d6 with a table instead. But CRT dice have really not been popular since. Too expensive to produce?
As a special case of differential CRT you can use combat values that are logarithmic and then when you subtract them what you get is the mathematical equivalent to having an odds-based CRT, but with simpler math. However the problem with that type of CRT is that it makes adding units together different from with odds-based CRT. There are a few discussions in the bgg forums about this, but I do not know of a single game that use them. (I hope to find a reason to use them sometime.)
Mon, 07/03/2017 - 07:03
#11
Physics of the dice
But CRT dice have really not been popular since. Too expensive to produce?
I can imagine that CRT and normal dice where equal in production costs back then. All hand made.
These days, the producer needs to make changes to an automatic process. That is more costly for a rarely produced die.
But there might be another reason.
Bigger dice are needed to be able to read the table's.
A player can hold less dice. And has the impression that the roll is executed more poorly.
A pool of dice, or just a few big ones. The feel is just not the same.
Mon, 07/03/2017 - 10:18
#12
I have no idea when someone
I have no idea when someone started making mass-produced cheaper standard dice, but you are probably correct it might not have been a thing around 1830. However a bigger die with a lot more things on it than just 1-6 dots is definitely more work anyway, and you are going to need several different dice instead of just more copies of that simpler die.
Please put a link to the topic on BGG that you are referring to.
Personally. I only made a start last year. For a way to reduce the number of dice that we use in our game.
A part of the game is rolling and removing dice. Until a number of dice remains. Then, we had start translating 123456 into 011233. But that was time consuming in half of the situations.
You know, sorting the dice. Then multiply a number with the number of dice and add that all up.
So we had a second stack of dice, modified with the new numbers. But we needed the double amount of dice to get the game going. 1 set with 123456, and 1 set with 011233.
And we had still to count the number of remaining dice from the first set, to know how much we needed for the second set. And that still costed valuable time.
And thus, our own CRT die was born:
1/0, 2/1, 3/1, 4/2, 5/3, 6/3.
We are at the dawn of a new CRT die. But perhaps, the whole idea is discarded. So, still wondering about opinions of others.