Too much fidling?

That is what the 3d6 and 3d8 where for. Having only 3 dice. Making a big variety of results with all the cards.

However, the 100% accuracy cards would always hit 100%.

Now, I have been thinking. Should I have the exact same roll do something for the damage as well?
No, that would make the game imbalanced.

A 100% accuracy would have 1 to 8 damage.
A 12,5% accuracy would have 1 damage.

The average damage factor between the lowest and highest, would not be 8/1=8.
But 4.5/0.125=36. When comparing the 100% accuracy to the 12.5% accuracy.
The true weight factor would be:
100% of 4.5 = 4.5

Maybe... I could do this. And calculate for each accuracy, the new factors. Thus a chance to hit. And the hit has a damage value. The damage is on average for the whole range of the accuracy.

d8:
1) 12.5% of 1.0 = 0.125
2) 25.0% of 1.5 = 0.375
3) 37.5% of 2.0 = 0.750
4) 50.0% of 2.5 = 1.250
5) 62.5% of 3.0 = 1.875
6) 75.0% of 3.5 = 2.625
7) 87.5% of 4.0 = 3.500
8) 100.% of 4.5 = 4.500

d6
1) 16.7% of 1.0 = 0.167
2) 33.3% of 1.5 = 0.500 (This is suitable for the game)
3) 50.0% of 2.0 = 1.000
4) 66.7% of 2.5 = 1.667
5) 83.3% of 3.0 = 2.500
6) 100.% of 3.5 = 3.500

***

Another approach is a third set of dice, to roll. One that would be a factor to any die that was a hit. Just like in my proto-type game. Where accuracy could be 100%. But the damage roll would be d6-2, d6-1 or d6.

I don't know what else I could do.
d6 where the result is actually a factor on the hits?
If 3d6 or 3d8 are rolled. Each accuracy would have 0, 1, 2 or 3 hits.
Maybe roll 3 coloured dice. And all accuracy with 1 hit are influence by the white die.
All accuracy with 2 hits are influenced by the white and grey die.
And all accuracy with 3 hits are influenced by the white, grey and black die.

The result would be a factor of 0, 1 or 2 for each die.

The 100% accuracy still have a chance now on doing 0 damage. But if the white die has a hit, and the grey and black die have a miss. Then the 100% accuracy would deal relatively less damage than a lower accuracy that had only 1 hit.

So, now we have the player roll 3d6(red) and 3d8(blue) for the cards. Then another 3d6(white+grey+black)

What do you think?
Then the player rolls

That chance was rather easy for... me. Yeah, I know that a lot of people have trouble with probabilities and such.

So let me explain a bit.
Let's start with the 3 to 1.
If you need 2 hits for removing your opponents card. And the opponent needs 6 hits in order to remove your card. The ratio of card removal is 3 to 1.
The chance on rolling a 2 with that custom d8 is 25%. Or 1/4th.
The chance on rolling a 6 with that custom d8 is 12.5%. Or 1/8th.

1/4 * 1/8 = 1/32.

***

That would be a result for the cards that have 3 hits, yes.

Of course, you simply add up all the hits. Then divide by whatever you rolled with that last d8.

So it could be possible for a player to roll like roughly 91 hits and then roll the 4. In that case 91/4 is the number of cards to remove... Well, I guess it is chips at this point in the game...

Smarter players will probably do 40 hits, 40 hits, and thus remove 10 cards, 10 cards. Then 11 remains, which is a bit easier to handle. I guess 2 more cards can be removed now. And the remaining hits are not sufficient.

***

Now, for the medics and mechanics and engineers joining the battle.

If the custom d8 is playtested. I could see if these "shield" cards can modify the number of hits needed per card/chip. A +1 would make the
22333446 into 33444557. And that is a bit weird to balance. So I need to think of that one. Maybe not do it and simply have them function entirely different.

Yes, players are supposed to compare dice results with the cards.
Then see if a card will have 0, 1, 2 or 3 hits per projectile.(Which can become very complicated by design, I playtested a very weird sniper)
Once the number of hits are determined for each damage value, which they can track by placing chips as damage resources. Players will start distributing the damage over the enemy cards.
This part will be simple, since players are more or less forced to attack what has been determined before a roll. Unless the enemy had a big front. But in that case, optimal targets or tactical targets, are solved first.

The calculations are:
Comparison, Addition and Multiplying (the multiple projectiles times multiple hits times multiple cards)

Ah yes, in the testing phase and when we had our own battle's in the proto-type version. We always went for an accuracy roll like that. It isn't much of a change to turn this 180 degree's.

Noted.
Accuracy 8 will be, you have to roll an 8 in order to hit.
Accuracy 5 will be, you have to roll a 5 or more, in order to hit.

The balance accuracy 4, would be 5 in the game.
The balance accuracy 1, would be 8 in the game.
The balance accuracy 8, would be 1 in the game.

Oh, ok. Thought that was a bit too hard for some.

It is going to be:
QTY x Projectiles x HITS = Damage Resource

Why like this? The damage resource is simply the number of projectiles that the player now has.
When distributing the damage. The player will most likely do this most optimal or is forced.
In either case. Each damage resource is then multiplied by the damage. Making this a 2 step.
First the player decides in the total projectiles that hit.
Then where they hit with the help of the damage assigned to those projectiles.

The divider die should be renamed though. It is more like a "durability" die for the cards.
You need to remove the armor X times. And X is determined by this durability die. Is this way of explaining to the players, more understandable?

The divider die, or now renamed durability die. Is custom.

The sides are:
22333446

No 7, no 5.
But no division either. The players will simply make groups of whatever is rolled.
Thus if a 6 is rolled. The players make 6 groups of the required damage dice.
If for example a tank with 9 armor is attacked. And the 6 is rolled. The player that attacks this tank will get groups that each do 9 or more damage. It is entirely possible that in the future, inefficient combinations are used. Only in order to get the last group of damage complete.

I had chosen the d8, because on the d6. The distribution would be:
223446

We all are busy... I have yet to do gaming today. But it is bedtime tbh.

I have one (1) dice roll of 7 dice in total; 3D8+3D6+1D8(custom).
If the player has no need for the 3D8 or 3D6. The dice roll will be only containing 4 dice.
The 3D6 will have a high chance on not being used in the first decks to start with anyway. And perhaps, I will use them as a faction theme as well. Meaning, the player either needs that 3D8 OR 3D6, for the entire faction deck.

Still, using 3D8 AND 3D6 will bring forth a more balanced roll.

No...

It is mostly 4 dice. And the advanced players use 7 dice.

Just to see over complications.
I am literly going to copy a...6?? yeah, 6 year old example :D
But then translated to a card game.

***

A new game

For this example. We imagine that both players have an army, consisting out of only riflemen and combat tanks.

In fact, each player has 2 cards. 1 card represents all riflemen. The other card represents all combat tanks.
Both players have both of them. The number of chips however, indicate how many they have.

The cards
Rifleman
Costs 2
Armor 1
Damage 1
Accuracy 5 (heads up, lets do the roll public wants, roll 5 or higher for a hit)

Combat Tank
Costs 8
Armor 9
Damage 9
Accuracy 5

Please keep in mind, riflemen take only 1 damage from the combat tank per hit. If the durability die rolls a 2. This means you still need 18 hits in total.

How many chips do the players have?

For every Combat Tank, 4 Riflemen.

Seeing as how the cardgame works with a threshold. While the original proto-type board game had health tracking. I have no other choice than make sure the riflemen are at a level where they still matter to the players.

I calculated that the best roll will require 6 Riflemen. But provide a chance of (1/8) x (1/4) = 1/32.
The average roll will provide with 1.5 hits per Rifleman.
With the durability roll being 3 as average. You need 18 Riflemen in order to kill 1 Combat Tanks per round.

Now then, there is a threshold where the riflemen become overkill for the combat tanks. But I am not going to calculate that. Instead, I am simply going to give each player, 36 Riflemen and 9 Combat Tanks.

Round 1, A in turn

Player A is in turn and decides to attack. Before the dice are rolled. There are several steps the players undertake.

Player A has 2 cards of equal value. And has several options of formation:
- Riflemen attack. Combat Tanks don't.
- Combat Tanks attack. Riflemen don't.
- Both cards attack separately.
- Both cards attack together, with the riflemen as fodder.
- Both cards attack together, with the Combat Tanks as meat.

When attacking, you always, ALWAYS, select targets for your cards. They can have the same card as target. But it is also possible to choose many different targets.

Player A also has the choice to attack one of the following:
- The enemy Riflemen.
- The enemy Combat Tanks.

There are 10 different options with the 2 cards that player A has. But whatever A does. If a card attacks now, it cannot help defend in the next round.
For fun, I take a random decision here:
Both cards attack together, with the Combat Tanks as meat.
The attack is on the enemy Combat Tanks.

This means that there is one group that attacks

Once A has made its regrettable choice. B can react as following:
- The Combat Tanks don't return fire.
- The Combat Tanks return fire.
---
- The Riflemen don't help.
- The Riflemen help defend by being fodder.
- The Riflemen help defend by being support.

At this moment, there are 6 different options for B.
If B chooses to take the damage. It will loose Combat Tanks. However, then the Combat Tanks can attack in the next round without being stopped. Seeing as how the Combat Tanks of A are meat. B most optimal decision is to at least return fire with the Combat Tanks.

As weird as it sounds. B doesn't have much limitations here. In fact, the most important decision now is, will B use its Riflemen to help defend or not? And as stupid as it sounds, right now, it is smart to NOT use the Riflemen. Instead, B decides ( I decided for B, B has no free will ) to keep its Riflemen at bay.

If however B did use the Riflemen as well. They could simply take the damage instead, but that is not smart here. Or be support and make it a mirror match.
The attack that a player does is simply forcing the opponent to defend.

Time to roll the dice!!

Player A rolls: 236 / 3
Player B rolls: 568 / 4

We compare the accuracy dice with the accuracy. 5 or higher will be a hit.
A has 1 hit per chip.
B has 3 hits per chip.

These cards only have 1 projectile per chip:
QTY x HITS = Damage Resource

A targets the Combat Tanks. And thus the damage is taken in full.
1 Damage: 36 x 1 = 36
9 Damage: 9 x 1 = 9 (each damage resource here will do 9 damage)

The durability die is 3. Thus in order to defeat a Combat Tank. 3 times 9 damage has to be inflicted.
We have 9 damage resources of 9. 9/3 = 3. We can remove 3 Combat Tanks with this attack.
We also have 36 damage resources of 1. 36/3=12. We can remove 1 more Combat Tank with this attack.
After the attack round. B will have to remove 4 Combat Tanks.
B will then have 5 Combat Tanks remaining.

B targets the Combat Tanks of A. And thus the damage is taken in full. If B gets through, the damage would be overkill.
9 Damage: 9 x 3 = 27

The durability die is 4. Thus in order to defeat a Combat Tank. 4 times 9 damage has to be inflicted.
We have 27 damage resources of 9. 27/4 = 6.75. We can remove 6 Combat Tanks with this attack.
After the attack round. A will have to remove 6 Combat Tanks.
A will then have 3 Combat Tanks remaining.

If you think about it. B did make a gamble here.By not including the Riflemen. And succeeded.
If B rolled a durability of 3 or 2. Then the Combat Tanks of A would be all dead. But vice versa could have happened. And the Riflemen are strong enough that they count as if they are 4 more Combat Tanks, in terms of damage.
Either way, the riflemen stayed out of the combat and would all survive for certain. Defending cards that are not targeted and stay out of combat. Will not be harmed at all. Which is important for the next round.

Table:
A has 36 Riflemen and 3 Combat Tanks
B has 36 Riflemen and 5 Combat Tanks

Round 2, B in turn

The forces of A attacked last round.
And are now exhausted. They cannot defend anymore.

The forces of B are not exhausted anymore.

All B has to do is attack A.

B is very smart. B wants to B like me.

Player B has 2 cards. But they are not of equal value any more. But still has the same options of formation:
- Riflemen attack. Combat Tanks don't.
- Combat Tanks attack. Riflemen don't.
- Both cards attack separately.
- Both cards attack together, with the riflemen as fodder.
- Both cards attack together, with the Combat Tanks as meat.

Seeing as how no cards of A can defend properly. It is going to be one sided. B decides to make the most optimal attack.

All Riflemen are going to attack the Riflemen.
All Combat Tanks are going to attack the Combat Tanks.
Ehm... that would be option 3.

Of course, there is a risk that for a kill on one of the 2 or both cards. Can be avoided by missing just 1 damage.

Player B rolls: 355 / 2

We compare the accuracy dice with the accuracy. 5 or higher will be a hit.
B has 2 hits per chip.

QTY x HITS = Damage Resource

The damage resources:
1 Damage: 36 x 2 = 72
9 Damage: 5 x 2 = 10

The durability die is 2. Thus in order to defeat a Rifleman. 2 times 1 damage has to be inflicted.
We have 72 damage resources of 1. 72/2 = 36. We can remove 36 Riflemen with this attack.
After the attack round. A will have to remove 36 Riflemen.
A will then have 0 Riflemen remaining.

The durability die is 2. Thus in order to defeat a Combat Tank. 2 times 9 damage has to be inflicted.
We have 10 damage resources of 9. 10/2 = 5. We can remove 5 Combat Tanks with this attack.
After the attack round. A will have to remove 5 Combat Tanks.
A will then have 0 Combat Tanks remaining.

Table:
A has 0 Riflemen and 0 Combat Tanks
B has 36 Riflemen and 5 Combat Tanks

Hmmmm... only 2 rounds.
And the RPS wasn't really used yet...

I have been thinking about this one.
Have I not made this too low??

The card game has 2. But if a support unit has 6 projectiles. It means 3 units can be removed at once.

The proto-type game has 3. But 2 effects make this higher.

1. The attack range weight is 50% higher than the movement speed. With a default of 2 for both. The weapon is 20% more expensive than the body. In other words, only 100%/120% effective. Thus the durability is times 1.2

2. The damage roll makes equal or stronger weapons in RPS effects. 20% less effective as well. This just happens to be another 1.2

Thus my board game actually has 3 x 1.2 x 1.2 = 4.32 as durability for the basic units.

I think my card game is simply too fast. I had chosen 2 as H/D ratio because there is also a threshold to overcome.

But with the dice giving factors 2 and 1.5 in a 1/64th chance.... plenty of overkill.

The RPS can't really fight this either.
The first degree RPS is a factor of 1.5.

So....
36 riflemen fighting 18 assault buggies.
The buggies have 3 armor.
3d8 gives 3 hits per riflemen.
The durability die rolls a 2.
36 x 3 = 108 damage resources of 1.
108 / (2 x 3) = 18 assault buggies will die.

This is not what they are supposed to do tbh.

Right now, it is a factor 2 in costs. A factor 3 in armor or weapon.
The true RPS factor is 1.5. (3/2)
Which means, you are supposed to have 50% more troops if your tier difference is 1.

In order to increase this. And perhaps re-modify.
I can still keep the factor 2 in costs. But a factor 4 in armor or weapon. This means that tier 3 will go from 9 to 16.

Now the true RPS factor is 2.

***

I don't know if I make the right decision doing this. For starters. The armor value goes to 2 digits at tier 3.
I also had an imbalance added in order to fight against the cumulative effects. In a card game, these are very strong. But then again, I have much bigger armies now with more units.

I still could go the "public" version route. Where I skip tier 1, have tier 2 to 4. And adjust tier 3 by 1 point.
Then all the armor and weapon value's can be divided by 4.
And we are left with 1, 2 and 4.

Tier 1 and 3 are the new tiers in that example. Because tier 2 would be halfway. And the digits are 1 again. I could easily add tier 4, which would have 8 armor.

Thus, back to the costs of 2, 3, 4 and 6. While the value's are 1, 2, 4 and 8.
The true RPS factor here is also 2. While halfway would be 1.5 again.
Thematic, this is no problem. Still, the tank tier could be costing 8, and we are back to 2 digits in value, 16.... A positive thing would be having tier 2 being troopers, tier 3 again the light vehicles like buggies.

***

I guess, the important question is.
Can players handle adding up, till 16??

Well, all I can say now is that you don't need to read those posts.

All you need to know is that the game is too fast. 1 basic card can kill more than its own worth in other basic cards. And the chance on this is also too big.

I need to fix:
- H/D ratio
- Accuracy rolls need to be less basic
- durability roll needs to remain soft enough
- RPS needs to be sharper

My H/D ratio needs to increase.

And maybe I can combine the accuracy roll with the durability roll.

What was I thinking...
The H/D ratio was only 2 while the RPS factor of the first degree is 1.5.
A total factor of 3.

In my proto-type game it is 3 for the ratio and 2 for the first degree.
A total factor of 6.

The minimum H/D number is 1 with any accuracy roll. Even in my proto-type game. Where 1/6th means a factor 6 with a hit. The card game has 1/8 which becomes 8.
6/6 or 8/3. Tgat is a huge difference between the 2 games.

But the numbers in the prototype game are also treated individually. Not amass. And I constantly felt this would be a problem. Even if I where to use 1 die for accuracy.