Grasshopper's 8d System - Conversion tables for 1940 Global units

@Young:

So in plain terms Baron, what needs to be changed in your opinion?

The main issue, is about Tank vs Artillery off/def or MI defense.
(Almost like C5 or C6 Tank, between AA50 and Global Edition)

This seems also similar to Destroyer, Cruiser, Battleship progression.
D8s
Subs A3 D2 C6         Infantry A1-2 D3 C3, MI C4
DD A3 D3 C8            Artillery A3 D3 C4
CA A5 D5 C12           Tank     A4? D4? C6 or A5 D5 C6 or A5 D4 C6?
BB A6 D6 C20, 2 hits

Fg A4 D5 C10
TcB A4-5 D4 C11
StB A5 D2 C12

Tank A5 D4, would make it a better offensive weapon than Artillery, but still weak on defense due to cost.

Art+Inf: A5 D6 C7
MI+Art: A5 D6 C8

Tank A5 +MI : A6 D7 C10
Tank A5 +Art: A8 D7 C10

2 Tanks A10 D8 C12, 18 pts
3 MIs  A3 D12 C12
3 Arts A9 D9 C12, 18 pts

For the tank cost to fig I only see tank being  A3  D4.

Tac - Tank A4 D4
Tank - mech  A4 D3  or A3 D3 if mech is A2 D2

Take away the to high Attack value to tank but make up for it with tac or mech.

@Baron:

@wittmann:

I like the idea, but am kot haply with a stronger Sub, given the Convoy ability and Stealth they already have . Not for the  price of 6.

Does Subs really get this opportunity for Stealth?
From what I heard, many complain that DD easily block Surprise strike. They rarely see it in game?
Does your games full of Subs?
Unless you are talking about Subs being invisible to planes, if no DD present?

It is still a useful tool and a strength. The enemy need to
Buy more Expensive DDs, just to counter them.
I just think the Sub and the SB are too cheap for the extra options they give.

@Baron:

@Young:

So in plain terms Baron, what needs to be changed in your opinion?

The main issue, is about Tank vs Artillery off/def or MI defense.
(Almost like C5 or C6 Tank, between AA50 and Global Edition)

This seems also similar to Destroyer, Cruiser, Battleship progression.
D8s
Subs A3 D2 C6         Infantry A1-2 D3 C3, MI C4
DD A3 D3 C8            Artillery A3 D3 C4
CA A5 D5 C12           Tank     A4? D4? C6 or A5 D5 C6 or A5 D4 C6?
BB A6 D6 C20, 2 hits

Fg A4 D5 C10
TcB A4-5 D4 C11
StB A5 D2 C12

Tank A5 D4, would make it a better offensive weapon than Artillery, but still weak on defense due to cost.

Art+Inf: A5 D6 C7
MI+Art: A5 D6 C8

Tank A5 +MI : A6 D7 C10
Tank A5 +Art: A8 D7 C10

2 Tanks A10 D8 C12, 18 pts
3 MIs  A3 D12 C12
3 Arts A9 D9 C12, 18 pts

@Young:

But how could I justify a tank attacking better than a fighter and/or tac bomber?

It is a conundrum.
Making TcB as a flying Tank: A5 D4 C11.
Fighter would rise it to A6, but not Tank.
That way, TcB A6 would be double Artillery or Infantry defense as OOB.

You can slightly increase TcB and Tank, costlier offensive units knowing that you have increase defense strength of all cheaper units too. All inf now defend 37.5% instead of 33.3% and have lost offensive power too 12.5% instead of 16.7%.
This defensive boost would be compensate by better Tank and TcB.

@SS:

For the tank cost to fig I only see tank being  A3  D4.

Tac - Tank A4 D4
Tank - mech  A4 D3  or A3 D2 if mech is A2 D2

Take away the to high Attack value to tank but make up for it with tac or mech.

@wittmann:

@Baron:

@wittmann:

I like the idea, but am kot haply with a stronger Sub, given the Convoy ability and Stealth they already have . Not for the  price of 6.

Does Subs really get this opportunity for Stealth?
From what I heard, many complain that DD easily block Surprise strike. They rarely see it in game?
Does your games full of Subs?
Unless you are talking about Subs being invisible to planes, if no DD present?

It is still a useful tool and a strength. The enemy need to
Buy more Expensive DDs, just to counter them.
I just think the Sub and the SB are too cheap for the extra options they give.

I agree for StB, too much range. Cut it to 5+1 with AB and things will be different.
But Subs is countered with 1 DD and other Subs as fodder.
How often do you use your surprise strike?

I don’t understand your post SS, your combat values are changing from one line to another but I cannot catch the relevant factor.

I believe YG is asking how can he have a tank having a value higher than a fig.

My post was asking to make the tank A3 D4 do to lower cost of tank. Thats what the chart is with Tac boosting tank and tank boosting mech to make up for the lower tank A D values.@SS:

@SS:

For the tank cost to fig I only see tank being  A3  D4.

Tac - Tank A4 D4
Tank - mech  A4 D3  or  A3 D2   if mech is A2 D2
Fig should be A4 D4  you paying higher cost for fig do to the options figs can do.

Take away the to high Attack value to tank but make up for it with tac or mech.

@Young:

@Imperious:

I don’t like d8 approach because it offers marginal #pips over D6.

If you had to move to something different you want d12. Not d10 or anything else

However, if you made a system like Fortress America with all the dice D6-12, or even using D4…then you might have something with each type of unit rolling different dice

D4 infantry
D6 air units
D8 naval units
D10?
D12?

you don’t need different color dice, different dice by unit type instead. Under this nations could have different values for units

All that is entirely different from my original post… do you suggest I scrap the whole idea and go back to the draft board? Surely there is something here with the 8 sided system you might like.

YG, your numbers are fine. Seriously agree with this statement. People, please stay on topic with the posts.

Remember, most of the D8 Attack/Defense ratios are still close to the D6 OOB. So, if you disagree, at the MOST, you should only have a DIFFERENCE of opinion with maybe ONE UNIT. We play this game all the time with a D6 and it is still working out just fine! A D8 is significantly more dynamic than people realize.

Also, Baron, sorry but Idon’t read your posts because I was never a fan of Calculus II in school. I recommend just posting about one unit at a time if you won’t articulate a message beyond posting a E=MC 2 formula.

Sorry Ichabod,
I’m a little lazy with Punch formula:
A means Attack, D means Defense, C means Cost, HP means Hit Points.

The issue is about D8s Artillery A3 D3 C4 being too strong compared to D8s Tank A4 D4 C6.

2 Tanks A8 D8 C12, 2 HPs for 16 pips compared to OOB A6 D6 C12, 2 HPs for 12 pips
3 MIs   A3 D9 C12, 3 HPs for 12 pips                           A3 D6 C12, 3 HPs for 9 pips
3 Artys A9 D9 C12, 3 HPs for 18 pips                           A6 D6 C12, 3 HPs for 12 pips.

Even OOB, Tanks were not better than Artillery for defense or offense.
But now, they become still weaker.
Just compare D8s Tank pips vs Artys pips (16 vs 18) against OOB Tank vs Artys (12 vs 12)

Who will want to purchase such?
As such, it creates an anti-tank bias.
Germany will turn toward Artys+ MIs + planes.

That’s why I suggested to rise D8s Tank into A5 D4 C6.
(In a way, it is configured like Classic Tank with better offence than defence.)
So, 2 Tanks A10 D8 C12, 2 HPs for 18 pips

It will be the same pips than Artillery but 1 HP less.

But YG said this Tank will be better than Tactical Bomber A4-5 D4 C11.

Don’t matter what you do with the numbers there’s always going to be a piece that won’t be right. Back to KISS.

That was YG idea that changing for D8 sides will make things KISS.

Probably D10 sides make better KISS…

But YG does not like football dice.
:-D

I already know that. I am talking about d8 to. D12 is the best and yes I do want my dice to roll. D6 dice just slide.

I’m assuming from YG comment about how do I justify the tank being stronger than the fig.
If you make tank A5 D5 that’s yo sttong.

@SS:

I already know that. I am talking about d8 to. D12 is the best and yes I do want my dice to roll. D6 dice just slide.

Very true.
Indeed.

:-D

@Baron:

Sorry Ichabod,
I’m a little lazy with Punch formula:
A means Attack, D means Defense, C means Cost, HP means Hit Points.

The issue is about D8s Artillery A3 D3 C4 being too strong compared to D8s Tank A4 D4 C6.

2 Tanks A8 D8 C12, 2 HPs for 16 pips compared to OOB A6 D6 C12, 2 HPs for 12 pips
3 MIs   A3 D9 C12, 3 HPs for 12 pips   A3 D6 C12, 3 HPs for 9 pips
3 Artys A9 D9 C12, 3 HPs for 18 pips    A6 D6 C12, 3 HPs for 12 pips.

Even OOB, Tanks were not better than Artillery for defense or offense.
But now, they become still weaker.
Just compare D8s Tank pips vs Artys pips (16 vs 18) against OOB Tank vs Artys (12 vs 12)

Who will want to purchase such?
As such, it creates an anti-tank bias.
Germany will turn toward Artys+ MIs + planes.

That’s why I suggested to rise D8s Tank into A5 D4 C6.
(In a way, it is configured like Classic Tank with better offence than defence.)
So, 2 Tanks A10 D8 C12, 2 HPs for 18 pips

It will be the same pips than Artillery but 1 HP less.

But YG said this Tank will be better than Tactical Bomber A4-5 D4 C11.

Baron, I think you’re taking this too far.

“The issue is about D8s Artillery A3 D3 C4 being too strong compared to D8s Tank A4 D4 C6.” Uh, they’re not too strong. A 4 attack is larger than a 3 attack. There, it’s simplified.

No, this will not create an anti-tank bias. I personally value the 2 movement points and the 50% hit chance still sounds pretty good to me when trying to charge all the way to Bryansk. Your math didn’t take into consideration the dynamics of 2 movement points. Got it, the cost ratios won’t always be perfect for every unit as larger quantities are involved. Artillery (slow movers) still could only be purchased on G1 (maybe G2) and not really until the Russian factories are secured. Didn’t we all debate the 12 IPC cost cruiser to death or whether bombers are too effective. I will still buy tanks in large quantities. But like my previous post suggested, I like how artillery now have a little bump and are now more important. Field Artillery is not called King of Battle for no reason. During WW2, artillery was probably one of the largest contributing factor for the US Army beating the crap out the German Army.

@Young:

I just modified the values in the OP… thanks for all the feedback guys, please keep it coming.

What do you think of these changes?

Attacking unit dice odds

1/8 - White (12.5%)
Infantry (-16.7%)
Mech Infantry (-16.7%)

2/8 - Green (25%)
Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
Mech Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)

3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
Artillery (+33%)
Submarine (+33%)
Destroyer (+33%)

4/8 - Purple (50%)
Tank (0%)
Fighter (0%)
Tactical Bomber (0%)

5/8 - Red (62.5%)
Strategic Bomber (-66.7%)
Cruiser (+50%)
Tactical Bomber w/Fighter or w/Tank (-66.7%)

6/8 - Black (75%)
Battleship (+66.7%)

Defending unit dice odds

1/8 - White (12.5%)
AA Guns (-16.7%)
Strategic Bomber (-16.7%)

2/8 - Green (25%)
Submarine (+16.7%)
Aircraft Carrier (-33%)
Infantry (-33%)
Mech Infantry (-33%)
Artillery (-33%)

3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
Destroyer (+33%)

4/8 - Purple (50%)
Tank (0%)
Tactical Bomber (0%)

5/8 - Red (62.5%)
Fighter (- 66.7%)
Cruiser (+50%)

6/8 - Black (75%)
Battleship (+66.7%)

*Special thanks to Big Al “Mike Tyson” for contributing in this idea & Baron Munchhausen for his calculations.

Trying to figure what changed from the original post?

@Ichabod:

Baron, I think you’re taking this too far.

“The issue is about D8s Artillery A3 D3 C4 being too strong compared to D8s Tank A4 D4 C6.” Uh, they’re not too strong. A 4 attack is larger than a 3 attack. There, it’s simplified.

No, this will not create an anti-tank bias. I personally value the 2 movement points and the 50% hit chance still sounds pretty good to me when trying to charge all the way to Bryansk. Your math didn’t take into consideration the dynamics of 2 movement points. Got it, the cost ratios won’t always be perfect for every unit as larger quantities are involved. Artillery (slow movers) still could only be purchased on G1 (maybe G2) and not really until the Russian factories are secured. Didn’t we all debate the 12 IPC cost cruiser to death or whether bombers are too effective. I will still buy tanks in large quantities. But like my previous post suggested, I like how artillery now have a little bump and are now more important. Field Artillery is not called King of Battle for no reason. During WW2, artillery was probably one of the largest contributing factor for the US Army beating the crap out the German Army.

Due to dice change (A2/6 vs A3/8), Artys odds rise by 5% offense and defense compared to OOB.

OOB it takes 9 Tanks (54 IPCs) to be even with 11 Artys (44 IPCs).
You need to purchase 10 IPCs more of Tank to bring same firepower.
As you said, we accept this because of M2 mobility.

With this little change in D8s, to be even:
You need to purchase 10 Tanks (60 IPCs) to get similar power to 11 Artys (44 IPCs). It is now 16 IPCs more.

Compared to Inf:
OOB it takes 9 Tanks (54 IPCs) to be even with 11 Infantry (33 IPCs).
You need to purchase 21 IPCs more of Tank to bring same defensive firepower.

With this little change in D8s, to be even:
You need to purchase 10 Tanks (60 IPCs) to get similar power to 11 Infantry (33 IPCs). It is now 27 IPCs more.

Now, YG change Artillery and Infantry defense value to 2/8 or 25% but keep Artillery A3 (37.5%).

This is probably a way to make Tank less powerful on offense than Artillery (as you wish) but Infantry, MIs and Artys will be 8% less effective compared to OOB.
And this allows Tank a much better ratio of 12 to 17 or 0.70 (OOB it was 0.82 and first YG version 0.90).
In number of purchase:
You need to purchase 9 Tanks (54 IPCs) to get similar power to 13 Infantry (39 IPCs) or Artys (52 IPCs). About 15 IPCs more compared to Inf, but just around 2 IPCs to get similar defensive power to Artillery.

Why do you need to keep all the pieces even. Piece cost more than it’s stronger. Don’t see why you need all this mumble jumble. You want pieces even then buy more tanks or etc.

D8

Art A3 D2. Boost inf +1

Tank A3 D4. +1 on A with a tac

I’m with Ichabod. I think tanks are too strong in any die system.
This gives you option to buy more art.
So it helps Russia defend a little better with tanks but Germany just brings more art and tacos and has to buy a few more tanks on Normandy front.