Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

Sword of Rome: 5th Player Expansion» Forums » Variants

Subject: Toned down Combat system rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Philip Thomas
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
One criticism of Sword of Rome is that the combat system is too wild in its swings. This is a modest attempt to curb that wildness.

First Change: Rolling a '1' no longer causes casualties to the loser. It is bad enough rolling a 1 in terms of the battle result, without adding injury to insult.

Second Change:2.1 Armies of 1-3 Cus only roll one die. Armies of 4-6 Cus roll two dice. Armies of 7 or more Cus still roll 3 dice. 2.2 vIf there is no combat modifier applied for relative size of the armies, both sides roll the number of dice which the smaller would roll under 2.1 (E.g, a size 7 army vs a size 6 army- no combat modifier for relative size, hence both armies use 2 dice).

The larger the forces involved the greater the potential for unpredictable results. Rule 2.2 is a partial protection against 'gamey' uses of 2.1. Of course, the rule still has the effect of greatly improving the value of large armies.

Criticisms welcome: I freely admit that I do not own the game, have not read the whole of the rules, and have only played twice.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Tyson
United Kingdom
Toddington
Bedfordshire
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Strangely enough I've been considering this as well Philip........

Admittedly I did make several obvious errors as the Carthaginians, but each of the four games I've played of SoR have seen someone suffering just because the dice go really horribly wrong for them that day.

I was wondering how the use of average dice would change things. (numbered 2,3,3,4,4,5 for those who don't know what I mean). I'd probably leave a losers own goal on the 2, but change the top end casualties to 1 for each 4 and 2 for each 5 for the winner and 1 for each 4 or 5 for the loser. No hits on 4's for forces of 1 or 2 CU.

The lower spread of possible pure dice results would hopefully benefit good play though use of larger forces and/or cards, and help avoid some of the strange results we saw last Saturday.

No doubt those who've played this a lot more or are better at number crunching can tell me why this wouldn't be a good idea

Richard
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Thomas
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Average dice is another way to go. It reduces the range of posssible results: instead of 1-1-1 to 6-6-6 it is 2-2-2 to 5-5-5. So a 15 point difference becomes a 9 point difference, which is good. And its less biased towards larger armies than my own system.

I still don't like the 'own goal' feature. A roll of a '1', or of a '2' using average dice, is alread an own goal in terms of making it likely you lost the battle. Plus the own goal system increases the damage done by those freak results. The low-rolling larger army is not merely defeated by the high-rolling smaller army but also has to sufffer additional casualties for rolling low- which translates into additional support points for the winner.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wray Ferrell
United States
Cary
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
The lose of a CU when the loser rolls a 1 is simulating the pursuit after the losing army has broken. An simple fix is just to ignore the additional CU loss for rolling a 1 if you lose.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Simon Andersen
Denmark
Valby
Danmark
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wray wrote:
The lose of a CU when the loser rolls a 1 is simulating the pursuit after the losing army has broken. An simple fix is just to ignore the additional CU loss for rolling a 1 if you lose.

Yes. But game play wise it can ruin the game for a player who happens to roll badly early in the game.

Also, as I recall (after 3 plays a few years back), you can loose units when you retreat across enemy controlled territory, which makes combats in enemy lands even more of a gambit.

I guess battles in those times were often either/or with the loosing side often being completely slaughtered. But if I were to play the game again, I would definitely use an alternative, more forgiving set of combat rules to avoid player elimination to early.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls