|
Orm -> RE: 4 player game (10/17/2018 2:47:14 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjdenver
CW commentary: Playing with 1D10 is definitely a different experience. So far it seems to make attacking easy. All of my other experience is with 2D10, where losses of 3 units can happen, rolls are more toward the middle (since 2D10 has higher probability of producing numbers in the middle compared to 1D10 that gives equal chance to the extreme results of 1 and 10 - maybe i'm seeing high rolls so far and that's why attacking seems easy), and where modifiers like # of factory stacks, armor bonuses, etc seem really important. So far it feels very tough to defend with 1D10. But maybe this impression will change as we progress. My general feeling about 1D10 is that I don't prefer but if playing 1D10 it seems like it should be played the way of WIF3 (or one of those old version) - without divisions. But I am endeavoring to adapt. I keep thinking in 2D10 terms then have to try to check myself and re-think in 1D10 terms. Strange feeling. :)
I think most claim that the 2d10 is more attacker friendly than the 1d10, even when the blitz bonus is in play.
Two of the attacks I did would have had decent odds even with the 2d10 table. And that odds could have been increased further with the 2d10 table since two armoured units were "resting".
If I did my math correctly the attack on Lille would have been +15 with 2d10. The Blitz attack +13. And the Strasbourg attack might have been cancelled since it was only a +6 attack. Although with the 2d10 table there would have been some effort to produce stuff, from both sides, that modified the bonuses.
|
|
|
|
