War Card Randomness

[James Abbiati]

Hi folks,

Last night we had our firrst experience with a battle, fought out with war cards.
Our first impression is that the outcome of the cards is totally random, and not
based enough on having an advantage or disadvantage. For instance, our army fought 5
or 6 engagements. Our advantages ran from +1 to +3. Our opponents ranged from -1 to
- -3. We almost lost the battle because our side continuously got "no result" or "fall
backs", where the opposing army kept getting "hits". Yes, we are reading the cards
correctly. Yes, we are factoring in the bonuses on the war cards for unit types. Did
we just have bad luck, or are the battle cards that random?

Jim Abbiati

[Mark A Vandermeulen]

On Mon, 6 Oct 1997, James Abbiati wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Last night we had our firrst experience with a battle, fought out with war cards.
> Our first impression is that the outcome of the cards is totally random, and not
> based enough on having an advantage or disadvantage. For instance, our army fought 5
> or 6 engagements. Our advantages ran from +1 to +3. Our opponents ranged from -1 to
> -3. We almost lost the battle because our side continuously got "no result" or "fall
> backs", where the opposing army kept getting "hits". Yes, we are reading the cards
> correctly. Yes, we are factoring in the bonuses on the war cards for unit types. Did
> we just have bad luck, or are the battle cards that random?
>
> Jim Abbiati

Actually, something similar came up in a game we played, with a character
leading one side who had the Blood ability "Battlewise," which is supposed
to give him an advantage in Battle. The mechanics of it is that it is
supposed to shift the column that you read from over but so many (or some
similar mechanic, I don't remember exactly). However, we found that quite
frequently, this shift actually produced a WORSE result than not shifting.
Not all the time, of course, but often enough to be frustrating. To
partially resolve this, we decided that the player could chose the better
of the two options whenever a bonus shifted a result from one column to
another. This seemed to clear up the problem, but we haven't had another
battle yet, so I don't really know if this is a long-temr solution or not.

Mark VanderMeulen
vander+@pitt.edu

[Colleen Simpson]

Got to admit, I have trouble with the war cards as well. They're very =
random and don't allow
for specific maneuvres (such as attacking from the flank instead of head =
on) which means
that tactics and strategies which should give an advantage or which, if =
the other side
is prepared for them or if they fail, should disadvantage a player don't =
and the 'battle' is reduced
to a card game. Card games are fun but frustrating if you are looking =
for a good, tactical wargame.
Apart from that, it's not too bad as a combat system.

- ----------
> Hi folks,
>
> Last night we had our firrst experience with a battle, fought out with =
war
> cards.
> Our first impression is that the outcome of the cards is totally random=
, and
> not
> based enough on having an advantage or disadvantage. For instance, our =
army
> fought 5
> or 6 engagements. Our advantages ran from +1 to +3. Our opponents range=
d from
> -1 to
> -3. We almost lost the battle because our side continuously got "no res=
ult" or
> "fall
> backs", where the opposing army kept getting "hits". Yes, we are readi=
ng the
> cards
> correctly. Yes, we are factoring in the bonuses on the war cards for =
unit
> types. Did
> we just have bad luck, or are the battle cards that random?
>
> Jim Abbiati
>
> ************************************************** *********************=
****
> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the =
line
> 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
>

[James Abbiati]

My group is currently doing just that. We envision a chart, with the left-hand
column (top to bottom) ranging from +5 to -5 . The top of the chart (left to
right) will be a graduated break up from 1-100 (percentiles). Then the results we
feel will be appropriate will be loaded into the chart. At that point, the icons
and battlecards will go away and be replaced with a percentile roll. The war
cards will be played exactly the same, and will still include modifiers based on
terrain or military unit type. When it is done, I will post the chart.

Jim Abbiati

Colleen Simpson wrote:

> I've been considering the DBM "Hordes 'n' Things rules or perhaps Chipco's
> Fantasy Rules but I think I'll try and do some mods to the cards, probably
> involving dice as someone else has suggested.
>
> ----------
> >
> > The current rules for battles are the weakest part of the game in my
> > opinion.
> >
> > I know there is some debate over how much BR should be a wargame and how
> > much it should be an RPG, but it seems obvious that a lot of its appeal is
> > in the ability to rule in addition to the rich world setting. If you are
> > going to have the Domain aspect there will eventually be war, so then the
> > question is how to best resolve this in a way that is not so clunky yet is
> > not a huge investment in time and effort.
> >
> > Has anyone here played with the DBM or DBA battle rules? They seem pretty
> > good, very simple and intuitive.
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> > ----------
> > From: Colleen Simpson[SMTP:suricate@mira.net]
> > Reply To: birthright@MPGN.COM
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 1997 7:03 PM
> > To: birthright@MPGN.COM
> > Subject: Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] - War Card Randomness
> >
> > Got to admit, I have trouble with the war cards as well. They're very
> > random and don't allow
> > for specific maneuvres (such as attacking from the flank instead of head
> > on) which means
> > that tactics and strategies which should give an advantage or which, if the
> > other side
> > is prepared for them or if they fail, should disadvantage a player don't
> > and the 'battle' is reduced
> > to a card game. Card games are fun but frustrating if you are looking for
> > a good, tactical wargame.
> > Apart from that, it's not too bad as a combat system.
> >
> > ************************************************** *************************
> > > > 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
> >
>
> ************************************************** *************************
> >

[Colleen Simpson]

I've been considering the DBM "Hordes 'n' Things rules or perhaps Chipco'=
s
Fantasy Rules but I think I'll try and do some mods to the cards, probabl=
y
involving dice as someone else has suggested.

- ----------
>
> The current rules for battles are the weakest part of the game in my =

> opinion.
>
> I know there is some debate over how much BR should be a wargame and =
how
> much it should be an RPG, but it seems obvious that a lot of its appeal=
is
> in the ability to rule in addition to the rich world setting. If you =
are
> going to have the Domain aspect there will eventually be war, so then =
the
> question is how to best resolve this in a way that is not so clunky yet=
is
> not a huge investment in time and effort.
>
> Has anyone here played with the DBM or DBA battle rules? They seem pre=
tty
> good, very simple and intuitive.
>
>
> John
>
> ----------
> From: Colleen Simpson[SMTP:suricate@mira.net]
> Reply To: birthright@MPGN.COM
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 1997 7:03 PM
> To: birthright@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] - War Card Randomness
>
> Got to admit, I have trouble with the war cards as well. They're very =

> random and don't allow
> for specific maneuvres (such as attacking from the flank instead of hea=
d
> on) which means
> that tactics and strategies which should give an advantage or which, =
if the
> other side
> is prepared for them or if they fail, should disadvantage a player don'=
t
> and the 'battle' is reduced
> to a card game. Card games are fun but frustrating if you are looking =
for
> a good, tactical wargame.
> Apart from that, it's not too bad as a combat system.
>
> ************************************************** *********************=
****
> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the =
line
> 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
>

[Colleen Simpson]

Is Battlesystem still in print? I had heard otherwise.

- ----------
> At 04:01 PM 10/7/97 -0500, John Campbell(medm017@uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu)wro=
te:
> >
>
> >
> >How is "Battlesystem" better for important battles or ones with PCs =
in
> >them? Who makes "Battlesystem"?
> >
>
> Battlesystems gives a lot of details for each unit, and lets you use
> stratagy during your combats. Also they have rules that convert PCs, =
and
> NPCs, into "units" so they can take a place in the fighting. BTW,
> Battlesystem is made by our friends at TSR.
>
>
> Sepsis, richt@metrolink.net (ICQ:3777956)
>
> "War is a matter of vital importance to the State;
> the province of life or death;
> the road to survival or ruin.
> It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied."
> -Sun Tzu,(The Art of War)-
>
> BR Netbook: http://webpages.metrolink.net/~veleda/birth.html
> ************************************************** *********************=
****
> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the =
line
> 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
>