I've not been around in the wargaming sense for a week or two, but we were back in SHQ this Tuesday.
You may recall that I enjoyed an ancient naval game at SOAC called "Oi Navarcoi!". These are available free from Alkedo Miniatures, and you can find out about them here. The models from the company are available through Irregular Miniatures. Not having enough models in my collection to play the game, and being a cheapskate, I knocked up some big counters using some pictures of the models from the rules page.
We had Chris K, Phil & Tim present for the game (well games, we played twice) . A long time ago Phil did some work to produce a squadron based naval game in the period, which alas came to nothing amidst incomprehension by some players who wanted to move individual ships instead of squadrons. As this was a squadron based game I thought he might find it interesting.
Chris K kept insisting it was DBA on the water. It isn't. The rule mechanisms have very little in common, except a requirement, ill defined in the rules, to conform to your opponent. Still, the rules are written in English by a non- native English speaker, so criticism of the text is a bit unfair. I thought Chris would like the core mechanisms as each requirement to roll dice to resolve combat/morale etc is reduced to a simple 2d6 on each occasion with minimal modifiers.
And this was, in a way, where it all fell apart. There are four main dice rolls to resolve what happens in the game. These are:
- Melee outcome: Roll 2d6 and score 6 or more. 72% chance of positive outcome, excluding modifiers.
- Morale: Roll 2d6 and score 6 or more otherwise rout. 72% chance of positive outcome, excluding modifiers.
- Diekplus/Periplus: Roll 2d6 and score 5 or more to succeed. 83% chance of success (although opponent is rolling for same odds too, so exact chance of winning when they don't is lower than 83%).
- Manoeuvre: Roll 2d6 and score 5 or more when changing formation, or become Disordered/Unformed. 83% chance of passing test.
I partnered Phil against Chris and Tim. In the first game I caught Chris cold with his squadron in column ("Epi kera") with me in a double line ("Epi pollon"). This meant he couldn't use a Diekplus (breakthrough) and fought at a considerable disadvantage. We both rolled less than 6, so had to take a morale check. Note here that most of the modifiers are negative, so Chris was -2 on his dice roll. That means there's nothing you can do, pretty much, to rescue yourself from the prospect of rolling low to start with. On the following morale rolls I failed mine and Chris passed. I therefore routed. The event roll then came up with a game end result and we'd lost in 3 quick turns, having done nothing wrong. We had been very unlucky. I think that the series of dice rolls to get that outcome has about a 3% probability.
I put the kettle on, and we had a drink and a natter. Then we set them up to have another go.
I went out wide to flank Chris, allowing Phil to draw them in whilst I fell upon the flank and rear to deliver victory. Surely things couldn't go as badly again?
Well, honestly they could. I did get it a bit wrong, and misjudged the distances, but it didn't matter. This time it was Phil's turn to get the 3% knockout blow, the game ending with a similar series of dice rolls.
So not an exactly brilliant introduction to the rules for the newbies to them, leaving me wondering if I'd remembered my original game correctly. I went back and had a look at what I wrote last time, and then crunched the numbers of the percentages above. At the SOAC game we had a lot more damage in melees, and a lot less everything ending suddenly. We had three squadrons aside, which means the lose on 50% losses doesn't kick in immediately, but even so I don't remember it being rolled anyway.
Where next? Well I think I might make an extra squadron or two when I can find the time, and have a check through the rules to see I've got them right.
All I have to do then is convince the players that it is worth giving them another go.
A quote from Granny Weatherwax: 'Million-to-one shots crop up nine times out of ten'. In wargames you'll probably find in just about every game, something highly improbably will happen. Often times, it has no large impact, but now and then it will turn the game. On top of that, contrary to assurances, in a given war game, there is no 'long run'. All you can do is hop that another improbable outcome will go your way this time, and even out the game. Yeah. Right.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, one wants a war game NOT to be governed by caprice. If the impressions of the game you have expressed here are accurate, I'd be concerned about the capricious nature of the rule set. One approach I would take is that if the non-chance play mechanics look good, then look into how one might 'massage' the chance aspects into something that yields a playable game that rewards superior planning.
Something else that I have noticed over the years: games with small forces - few tactical units - are apt to be very chancy. If you were playing with 2 squadrons a side - and supposing the squadron is your indivisible tactical unit - then I think you will often get weird results. Great for solo play.
Cheers,
Ion