Imperious leader’s new innovative combat system for all AA games

IL’s Roll-per-pip combat system:

Purpose:

1. To reduce luck. This is somewhat like Low Luck in that respect.
2. To reduce time in rolling separately for each unit.
3. To account and model the vitality and true strength of Air-power and Armor.

Phase 1:

Keep all existing unit values, but from now on each point of strength is one roll hitting on a one in most cases.

So for example your infantry get 1 roll and hit on one, Artillery get 2 dice hit on one.

In battles you just add up all your units strength points and try to roll ones. Now you can do everything on just one roll.

If you got FMG dice your just looking for the icon of the nation, everything else ignore.

Phase 2:

Special abilities: Consider the value of air power and armor. They are really underrepresented in most games. In terms of scale the number of your planes is very small, but in the real war these must equate with perhaps thousands of planes.

New rule:

1. when planes attack naval and the other side has no planes defending, attackers hit at 1-2 ( same system except you hit on two pips) A fighter rolls 3 dice hitting at 1-2
   If the other side also has planes, then they are considered fighting each other, so they just hit at 1 as normal.

2. when armor attack and the other side does not have armor, your attacking armor are rolling at 1-2 rather than 1.

Phase 3:

This rule is a fix for all the boosts in the games: e.g. artillery boost infantry +1

Instead if you got artillery it can boost the hit rate also at 1-2 at a 1:1 basis
Tactical bombers hit at 1-2 instead of at 4

For sea invasions, all defending units hit at 1-2

For my blockhouse employ the same rule, but only for all defending infantry and artillery.

Now then, i have played this over the last few months after thinking about this while sleeping. You need my optional rule regarding land based air units.

No land based air unit can cross over two sea zones during a combat move. This is called the ONE SEA ZONE RULE. It only applies to the combat move.

So land based air can only really protect the coastal sea zones. Only carrier based planes can cross more than one sea zone.

Phase 4:

If a unit rolls a SIX in combat it must retreat. This works for either side. Most of you don’t understand the need or desire for allowing defender retreats, but this system gives some flexibility and also models the idea of units broken in battle from fatigue.

It seems to smooth out the luck. It also gets you to consider the success of your attack because you are always adding up the strengths. LL players constantly do this already, then divide by 6.

It also is easy to use all the dice rolling programs, so nothing needs to be reprogrammed.

I may also introduce alot more types of units with this system. You no longer need D12 or D10

for example: it is possible to assign national combat values…

German tanks 4-3 roll 3-4 dice hit on 1-2
Japanese tanks 3-2 roll 2-3 hit at 1
Italian tanks 2-2 roll 2 dice, hit at 1
American tanks 3-3 roll 3 dice, hit on 1-2

you now got another filter to give historical flavor to units.

You could even assign some German tanks as light, medium, heavy

light are 3-2 hit at 1…cost 5
medium are 3-3 hit at 1-2…cost 6
heavy are 4-3 hit at 1-3…cost 8

( just examples not really happy about the numbers)

you cant build medium till Germany has built 5 light, once they got 12 medium built, they can start making heavy.

The next nation could have entirely different force pool of light, medium and heavy.

You mention the undervalued misrepresentation of planes on the board in reference to air power. My fix for this is keeping tacs at 12 ipcs but making fighters now 6 ipcs with 2-2-4 against land and naval targets but 3-4-4 against other aircraft. this makes fighters more usable because your not so worried that you wont be able to afford to replace them if they get wiped out. Also the idea that a fighter can sink a battleship or carrier is ridiculous. maybe one in a million. The cost is also more in line with tanks but the new attack values keep it from becoming a flying tank!  l

Well i am trying to keep this KISS. Not really interested in changing stats on units, only the way they roll out.

It is true that ships don’t have the same combat effectiveness against planes as they have against other ships, but we can’t just redo everything. This is more about taking the randomness out of the dice and also modeling true attributes of planes and tanks relative to the way they are represented in OOB.

But that offers nothing to do with luck.

The idea is you could only one’s and in some cases ( if you employ phase 2-3 ideas), twos, or threes.

Most of the time they are ones. This has the effect of smoothing out the luck and making it less random by forcing all units on an even playing field.

Also, now armor and air power have greater play.

I know conceivably this is a whole new ball game, tanks and air might need to go up.

You may also consider this system can accommodate a lower piece density and higher cost per unit, which also speeds up play.

Perhaps tanks could cost 12  ( 2 per pip but hit on 1-2)
Infantry could be 3  (1 per pip but hit on 1)
Artillery would be 8 ( 2 per pip but hit on 1-2)
Fighters might be 14 ( 2 per pip hit on 1-2)
Battleships could be 24 ( 3 per pip hit on 1-2)
Bombers would cost 15 ( 3 per pip hit on 1-2)

etc…

Less pieces means less rolling and now you just count ones and roll at the same time. ON top of that you solved part of the randomness of the dice somewhat.

If you think about it you know fully well that it can be argued that multiple infantry can be a better buy than say one tank because you got two hits, vs. one. BUT NOW THE TANK ROLLS 3 DICE AT 1-2 VERSUS 2 DICE FOR INFANTRY AND HIT ON ONE.

Tanks are now god, but they cost alot and are harder to take out.

I suspect you might even make combat one round, due to the carnage. Either way the results come quicker.

Please try it and check it out. make sure the units have equal total strength values and note patterns under combat results. The results will show less variance on luck and even out more which is more predictable as well as preferred.

This whole concept is confusing on many levels and i am not sure that this is KISS. Taking out the randomness of the dice a good idea? If your gonna do that your changing the dynamic of the game drastically. Its to close to “your stack is bigger than my stack you die” sort of thing.

Oh no it has much more than that. All the units now even have greater definition and power of each unit is displayed. The difference of infantry vs tank is huge. Tanks are king!

The arguments about 2 infantry or 1 tank are over.

just play one battle and see how it effects the game

Ok a tank is 3-3 right?

so you roll three dice hitting at one, while 2-5 are misses, and if you use the other phase 2 or 3 rules  then 6 means a retreat.

So the tank rolls out: 1,1,5

Two hits and retreat.

The defender loses two units and the tank must retreat.

Example two:

tactical bomber attacking battleship:

rolls 2,3,1

again two hits ( tactical bombers hit on 1-2)

Battleship rolls four dice: 1,4,5,6

tactical bomber hit, BB sunk and retreat roll is ignored since it was sunk. ( its possible to be damaged and forced to retreat as well)

You will notice that battleships need air power because based on cost, the planes will be greater damage than before. Now carriers are more vital.

Just roll out your own battles.

I think it will lead to a whole new system for AA:

land units can have new prices
the total number of units can be reduced, making the game play faster
New units can be introduced as per FMG units ( early, mid and late war units or light medium heavy units)
Greater differentiation of units. some hit on 1 others 1-2, others 1-3 all with unique number of rolls

Pips are the dots on the dice. Each strength point of a unit gets its own roll rather than just one roll. Combat is now easier to show the outcome of and players will make better plans because you are always adding the pips up and comparing the odds. Also, a few of the units have real historical flavor, like tanks and air. I think combat can be just one round, or more elaborate systems like battle of the Bulge where you can introduce chits for ammo/fuel that players pay for combat and you face a ‘cost’ for combat. This is more consistent with better modeling. For example, Germany could not hope to attack everywhere in Russia each turn, rather they became increasingly selective on where they attacked as their supplies run down.

These rules are all part of a new process for AA. Cutting edge stuff IMO.  Id like to see them used in a Barbarossa style game, or even an Africa Corps campaign game.

Yes in my sleep actually. I get ideas from dreams. Usually I commit a problem to memory and chew on it during the night and eventually some answer appears about midday.

I think it could work for a Napoleonic game too. fewer units and greater differences between them.

Artillery could cost 3 per strength hit, 1-3
Cavalry could cost 2 per hit, 1-2
Infantry could cost 1 per hit 1, 1

one round of combat

Generals could boost movement +1 or ?

I think all combat would be done faster with this and also players are really forced into making better decisions because you got to add up the equity of the total rolls each turn and obviously you will compare the difference and make better decisions.