Skip to Content
 

The accuracy mechanic. Redo?

5 replies [Last post]
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013

To speed things up in my game. And making things easier (to play and to create), I am looking for improvements. However, my mechanic with the ruler/thin rope is in the way.

The summary is in the last block.

*****

For a better understanding, allow me to sketch the current situation in my little war game:

We have a hexagon map, here the hexagons can be turned 60 degree's and still fit perfectly in the map. This perfect shape is needed. However, everything is printed. And there is no 3D (yet).

Let's say that unit A wants to shoot unit B over a distance of 7 hexagons on this map.
We count the 7 fields towards the target. But, we use a ruler/thin rope that connects the centres of both hexagons where unit A and B are standing.

All hexagons in between, touched by this ruler/thin rope are of influence to the accuracy. Forests and Mountains could greatly reduce the accuracy. And sometimes lead to 0.
The hit is determined with a couple of dice rolls in severe situations. Following the start of the bullet to the end.

*****

The problems that I face are indicated with [...]

[units on the board are in the way for the ruler/thin rope, they often have to move, I don't like that]

There are 3 improvements that I want to make:

- For now, I also have different heights of the terrain. However, currently this height is indicated with a number. The board itself is flat. I want this number to be removed and actually introduce 3D height. For starters, higher placed prints. This would greatly improve the tactical insights for the players.

[3D is in the way for the ruler/thin rope]

- There are programs out there that allow creating good looking hexagon maps. But the hexagon is not perfect in shape. which would be of no use to the mechanic. However, I still want to give those programs a try since they actually speed up the creation of maps.

[The ruler/thin rope touches the wrong hexagons when the hexagons are out of shape. Especially with the longest ranged units]

- The centre of each hexagon. Even though I have a nice little nuclear symbol pointing towards the centre.I would like to see a clearer hexagon instead. Thus this centre should be removed at some point.

[Once removed, I can't use the centre any more for determining where the ruler/thin rope has to be]

*****

Summary:
The mechanic with the ruler/thin rope has to go, or has to be improved. Only then I can move forward in developing my game.

But how to determine the projectile paths?
Is there a better way? In honesty, I liked the straight path which was certainly fair. But I think I have to start bending now.

Can't I simply select the hexagons instead? But then a player could shoot around the corner or let the bullet dodge mountains. No one wants that.

The 4 of us are stuck with idea's.
Any help is appreciated.

zdepthcharge
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2014
Have you seen Battlesuit? I

Have you seen Battlesuit? I don't recall how they handled elevation, but probably worth looking at as it was doing something similar.

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3271/battlesuit

laperen
Offline
Joined: 04/30/2013
Since this is going to be a

Since this is going to be a physical product that goes with the game, I would like to know what is the physical dimensions of a hex, and if there has been a maximum distance decided for the range of projectiles.

The second information I would like to know is how widely spaced are units at any one time

IDEA 1

if its small enough, like 30cm or so, Id suggest a wooden bar with markings along it indicating the size of a hex.

maybe a clip on the bar can dictate the measured distance

IDEA 2

as a backup idea, i would choose to go for a combination.

When you place a straight line between the shooter and target, you get to see the hexes the straight line touches. those hexes would be legal hexes to be used for accounting range in this particular trajectory. the shooter then counts the number of legal hexes determined by their range. if the target is within range, calculate probability of a hit.

GENERAL COMMENT

As for measuring from "center to center", if you measure it from corner to corner, it will be the same length as center to center. so select a corner, and stick with it.

if your units are widely spaced, placing the wooden bar or string should not get too much in the way

Infact, if you use a string, the board can have holes at the corners of the hexes, and the string can start with a peg which would be anchored when placed in any of these holes

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
A reply

zdepthcharge wrote:
Have you seen Battlesuit? I don't recall how they handled elevation, but probably worth looking at as it was doing something similar.

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3271/battlesuit

I like the looks of it.

The maps are somewhat on the same level of design. Although I have the actual hexagons drawn on paper and integrated them into the rules. The guy who created battlesuit has much more freedom in his/her map design if it comes to pen and paper. I did consider such designs in the past as well. But me and my buddies like the fact that terrain influence is only partially, not 100% or 0%. So we even have the difference between 1/6th, 2/6th, 3/6th etc in rocks and/or forests.

It just so happens that a group of units is designed in such a way that 3/6th hits offers a tactical advantage in a "kill but survive" situation, in comparison to a 4/6th hits or 2/6th hits.

laperen wrote:
Since this is going to be a physical product that goes with the game, I would like to know what is the physical dimensions of a hex, and if there has been a maximum distance decided for the range of projectiles.

The current maps have hexagons with size 3 cm on the sides, so from corner to corner 1 hexagon measures 6 cm.

The maximum distance at this moment is 9 for projectiles.

The biggest maps still fit on my table. Where the middle hexagon allows for the range of 9 towards every corner.

I do hope to have a bit more in the future. Perhaps I even start using just an inch for that. A range of 12 hexagons gives good design figures.

laperen wrote:

The second information I would like to know is how widely spaced are units at any one time

Depending on the map. On top of each other, or even a fighting distance of 9 to 10 is possible. Average is about 3 to 4, which are perfect for moon shaped choke points. The outlines of bases are at least range 12 from each other.

laperen wrote:

IDEA 1

if its small enough, like 30cm or so, Id suggest a wooden bar with markings along it indicating the size of a hex.

maybe a clip on the bar can dictate the measured distance


I already have this, my goal is to discard the extra work, for speeding up the game and simplifying.

laperen wrote:

IDEA 2

as a backup idea, i would choose to go for a combination.

When you place a straight line between the shooter and target, you get to see the hexes the straight line touches. those hexes would be legal hexes to be used for accounting range in this particular trajectory. the shooter then counts the number of legal hexes determined by their range. if the target is within range, calculate probability of a hit.


I already have this. But we count first. Than we place the thin rope for determining the legal hexes. No need for determining the legal hexes if it is out ranged.

laperen wrote:

GENERAL COMMENT

As for measuring from "center to center", if you measure it from corner to corner, it will be the same length as center to center. so select a corner, and stick with it.


In that case, every corner should be reviewed. The centre is the better option.

laperen wrote:

if your units are widely spaced, placing the wooden bar or string should not get too much in the way

There is a lot in between. So it does get in the way... a lot. :(

laperen wrote:

Infact, if you use a string, the board can have holes at the corners of the hexes, and the string can start with a peg which would be anchored when placed in any of these holes

Now you are getting somewhere!

It is so simple that I bang my head in the wall for not thinking of this myself.

Even though it is not the discard of the string and the mechanic. It does give us a chance to dodge all those unit cards on the board. This also opens up the possibility for the 3D effect. Even though not to the height of 1 cm per altitude difference.

The only down sides are the holes in the board. And the, "perhaps the hexagon isn't legal".

*****

Still stuck with "the need" of perfect hexagons though. It would even be awesome if the map only had rectangular or so.

No need for the thin rope would be perfect.

laperen
Offline
Joined: 04/30/2013
with regards to your doubts

Your hexes and distances seem fine, which means the only thing causing the problem is possibly your miniatures or playing pieces.

With regards to your doubts about length between corners not equal to length between center...

 photo equalLenght2_zps5b6a1852.gif

The red line is of equal length throughout, the only thing changing is its position.

And an idea that just popped in, related to my suggestion of pegs, holes, and strings. But the idea requires that 1 hex contain only 1 unit. Your units would have a peg at the base and a hole at the top, while the board has holes at the hex centers and is where the unit will be placed. This way, you can hide your hexes and make the terrain as beautiful as you like, as long as the holes are placed correctly.

When you need to calculate range, you place a string with a peg on one end into the hole of the shooting character, and measure from there.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Quote: In the game, one

Quote:

In the game, one hexagon can contain on average about 6 to 18 unit pieces. Already group cards none the less for the smaller units.

O, I never doubted the exact distances between the hexagon corners.
But I think you do agree with the fact that using a corner of the hexagons would leave out some hexagons that where supposed to touch the red line.
And the main view point of an army is from centre to centre. At a distance of 9, you even have situations where a hexagon simply touches with a bit of an corner. Only viewable when using that thin string.
It is that corner that will say yes or no to the entire army. When viewing from corner to corner, you could completely miss this blocking hex.

At the bottom of this page, we have some old maps:
http://forum.dune2k.com/topic/21598-creating-a-board-game-based-on-rts-g...
(I don't know if you can view them large?)
Each entire map, from corner to corner (when printed correctly) 90 cm.
Credit goes to my buddy for some of the tactical designs.

It is these maps that showed us how important it is to lay down the correct projectile path. Especially when you fire into a canyon alongside the mountain ridges. A bit off, and you hit the mountain instead, which means 0/6th chance of hitting.

*****

2 suggestions tested.

1
We already tested out the suggestion that you made. It is a mediocre solution, but still the best that we had.

The problem that occurred:
If the string is placed to high above the board, the pin might not be strait. And the viewpoint has to be right above the thin rope, not side ways. When doubts start to arise: We need to get the pin as strait as possible. And we have to place the rope as low as possible. None the less, it works for us.

2
From another source, I got another suggestion. Simply following a path alongside and/or over the hexagon corners.
We tested that out as well. But confusion arises again when covering long distances. There are a lot of zigzaggy path's. There is no clear way to have a fair path either. So even though that idea was brilliant in the first place, it failed too. Perhaps allowing players to choose the most optimal path also doesn't work. Because then we get shooting around the corner again.

*****

I guess I have no other choice but to keep things the same as how it is now. And simply apply the 3D effect for the board any way. The pin does help, so we are keeping him too. Thank you.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut