Tuesday 30 January 2024

Thoughts on Firing


Pipe cleaner bow waves and cotton wool gunsmoke - the former indicating ships that have moved this turn, the latter for ships that have fired after their movement. Looking at the above you can see that the current game turn has ended and only the sloop would be free to fire at the start or end of its next move, the other two would have to wait until the end of their movement. If a ship does not fire at all during their turn then any smoke markers are removed. The markers you see will be replaced with something a little more aesthetically pleasing in due course!

During the recent test of the alternate move sequence and move/fire, fire/move idea - both of which seemed to work quite well - I was reminded of one of the small niggles that seems to have grown into something requiring a bit of a rethink. The offending system is of course that of firing.

I am happy with the two step approach - rolling to hit and then rolling for damage based on any successful hits scored - and would still like to use this but I am now less convinced that reducing the number of D6 rolled to hit by range makes for a fun game. All too often ships are rolling single D6s at range which just seems a little flat. I am now leaning towards allowing the full number of gun dice to be rolled, regardless of range but with modifiers to the D6 rolls to reflect diminishing accuracy. This is complicated by two things. Firstly, under the existing system potential hits are scored with a roll of 4 or 5 for a single hit and a roll of 6 for two hits. Clearly this is problem when using specific scores to hit because one could then have the situation where a maximum range shot requiring a 6 to score a hit would in fact mean that the roll of a 6 would score two hits! 

My solution would be to shift the 4 or 5 equalling a single hit and 6 being two hits to the damage resolution rolls so that firing to hit would be the number of gun dice the ship carries modified by range. The idea I have in mind looks something like this:

Guns with a range of 4 (penetration factor of 2 or less)

1 - 3, 4, 5 or 6
2 - 4, 5 or 6
3 - 5 or 6
4 - 6

Guns with a range of 6 (penetration factor of 3 or more)

1 - 3, 4, 5 or 6
2, 3 - 4, 5 or 6
4, 5 - 5 or 6
6 - 6

Damage rolls would follow the normal 4 or 5 for a single damage point and 6 for two damage points - this of course being modified by the penetration factor versus the armour factor. 

It is very early on with this alternative idea but I believe it has potential. My rationale is that rolling great handfuls of dice is an enjoyable mechanic and makes for a banter filled game! 

8 comments:

Phil Dutré said...

What I've done in some of my own games (and I only offer it for inspiration :-)), to deal with reducing accuracy with increasing range: roll equal to or over the range in hexes (or multiples of x cm). So a target on a range of 5 would require a 5+ on a D6, if it's at a range of 3, its a 3+ and so on. It's a nice mechanic that works well with discretized distances, and is a natural distance modifier.

The problem is that whe you have weapons of different ranges (e.g. 4 or 6 or 8) you might want to use different type of dice ==> D4, D6, D8. Some people object to that, but it fits the mechanic.

As for the double hits on a 6: why not allow any 6 to be rerolled for a possible additional hit?

Archduke Piccolo said...

David -
Now that you have brought up this topic, here's an idea that occurs to me. It's a bit complicated, so its practicalities would have to be considered.

I prefer a 'one die per gun' separated into main and secondary, of course. The first roll will be to achieve a 'straddle', the achievement modified by 'range band'. The range bands might be a fraction - a third or quarter - of the maximum battle range of the guns in question. At the maximum range band, a 'six' (D6) is required for a 'straddle'. Gather up the 'six' scores, and roll for actual hits. At all ranges, 5s and 6s constitute single hits.

Example:
Single ship duel: HRMS Red Rover (9 x 13.5") vs VRA Blue Meany (8 x 12")
HRMS Red Rover, 9 x 13.5" firing at mid range require 5s and 6s to straddle.
Roll 9 dice - 1,2,3,4,4,4,4,6,6 = 2 'straddles' Roll for straddles:
6,6 = 2 hits! (NOT 4, but you might have a 'critical hit' system for 6's)

VRA Blue Meany, 8 x 12" firing at just beyond mid-range - maximum range, requires 6's to straddle
Roll - 2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6 = 2 'straddles' again.
Roll for hits: 4,6 = 1 hit - again, a possible 'critical'.

This was just a 'paper battle' played out on the spur of the moment, but might be worth looking into.
Cheers,
Ion

David Crook said...

Hi Phil,

Both of your very good suggestions have given me food for thought and would be easy enough to implement. I have been kicking myself about the rerolled 6 though - sometimes one cannot see the wood for the trees!

I like the range idea and am looking to see how that would work with the different ranges etc.

Many thanks for your ideas Phil, they are very much appreciated!

All the best,

DC

PS Can I ask you to drop me a line on roguejedi@btinternet.com please?

David Crook said...

Hi there Ion (aka Archduke Piccolo),

I really like the idea of using 1D6 per gun and have drafted at least four sets of naval rules that use this system! Rolling to hit and then rolling to damage (assuming you hit in the first place) is a central pillar of the Portable Ironclads Wargame and so will stay put. In my rules ship has a given number of gun dice that is based not on individual barrels but on the calibre in question which can be adjusted by additional guns of the same type. A D6 is rolled per point of gun factor so a GF of 4 means rolling 4D6.

Range bands are something I am looking at for sure and so your ideas have given me a different angle to look at.

Really appreciate the ideas old chap - many thanks!

All the best,

DC

Phil Dutré said...

W.r.t. rolling equal or over the distance to the target, I remembered I wrote a blogpost about this mechanic some years ago:
https://wargaming-mechanics.blogspot.com/2017/05/range-bands-or-random-ranges.html

David Crook said...

Hi Phil,

Many thanks for the link! The post was definitely and interesting one - as was the one on using squares!

All the best,

DC

Conrad Kinch said...

You can spend a lot of time talking about probability curves and how likely certain outcomes are.

But fundamentally there's something very satisfying about rolling big fistfuls of dice.

David Crook said...

Hello there Mr Kinch,

You are absolutely right! Speaking as one that has never really followed (or even understood) the science there is definitely something to be said about the rolling of great fistfuls of dice and discussing the cruel vicissitudes of fate that invariably follows. I wonder how many wargame war stories are based on dice rolling?

All the best,

DC