1D10 vs 2D10

[Orm]

I do not agree that 2d10 represents WW2 better.

I do not even agree that WWII was a attacking / counterattacking war. Especially not on the scale represented in MWIF.

[TeaLeaf]

So then you find the 1D10 representing WW2 better? Please share!
I know I often got a 'WWI-feeling' of the 1D10: Defender (France/Spain+CW/Russia) makes sure the attacker can only attack at 2:1 and the attacker in turn does either not attack out of fear for the dice or attacks in the hope of good rolls. Bad rolls stop the offensive quite quickly, good rolls collapses the defense. Dice won the game for you.

Now that I think about it more, I think 1D10 favors the defender too much, 2D10 the attacker.
Maybe there can be a middle ground where being allowed to choose the blitz or assault table also entitles the player to choose which CRT to use, either 1D10 or 2D10...

[paulderynck]

1D10 combined with guns and divisions will give the WWI effect. If you then add Blitz mods, you get mobility back. So it depends on which table is used with which options.

[brian brian]

The die modifiers on the 2d10 are frequently brought up in these discussions. I think that thinking is a little bit of a hold-over from playing "classic" wargames. Where there is just Attacker:Defender factors unit counters and 3:1 will take the hex but there remains a question of casualties. It is also a bit of a headache to learn the fine points of the 2d10 when the game already has a head-spinning amount of fine details.

I prefer the 2d10 because it rewards combined arms planning to a larger degree, and also using a good build strategy. Is having 6 squadrons of ground attack aircraft interdict every moving enemy in the area of the objective worth an extra odds level on a wargame CRT? Who knows? That is just as subjective as saying 41st Panzer has 9 attack factors and Russia's 23rd Army has 3.

Are holding your Engineers in reserve until they are then worth half an odds level when assaulting a major urban city? You will never know on the 1d10.

And you can play defense well on the 2D10. The defense has modifiers to put to use at times, but they also have to pay more attention to the terrain they attempt to hold. 1d10 with Blitz mods doesn't illustrate that nearly as much as 2d10.

There is also the question of using the 2d10 modifiers to take key hexes such as Gibraltar and Leningrad. For Gibraltar, I am fine with that. The hex is completely over-rated on defense in the game. It should be impossible to take by sea invasion. It should fall without much of a die roll if you completely control the skies of southern Spain and Spanish Morocco. I just don't see 7 divisions cramming into the place, but we can't have special exception rules.

For Leningrad, the 2d10 modifiers were never really tried, that I can recall from cursory knowledge of the siege (I am currently starting to read a volume on just that topic though). A Finnish ski-troop led assault across Lake Ladoga? Stalingrad-like massing of the German Pioneers? The siege artillery used against Sevastopol? Offensive Chit? Army Group North's total reserves? Here too I am fine with 2d10 die modifiers paving a route to success.

[Jagdtiger14]

Brian, you make a good point about 2d10 on defense. I also agree about Gibraltar...I don't think it should be possible to invade...and it should not be able to hold 7 divisions. But why not special exception rules, there already are...and for Gibraltar?

I would like to see you write something about what you are reading...sounds very interesting! I was always surprised the Germans didn't take care of that pimple. It seemed to me Hitler wanted to make the people there suffer more than he wanted to take the city. I just don't get it. Did not the Germans send the siege artillery they used vs Sevastopol to Leningrad?...or was that a plan that never was followed through on? I always wondered what Army Group North was up to while Case Blue was under way...seems like not much, but maybe they were neutered for the southern push?

[brian brian]

I'm sure I will learn some details on the Siege but I'm not too optimistic overall. Clearly written by an approved Soviet historian and composed entirely of survivor interviews; it took 40 pages for the first use of any gunpowder on June 22nd, though along the way I heard the details of several symphonies being played around the USSR on the third Saturday in June in 1941.

I do know that Manstein's 11th Army was transferred from the Crimea to the Leningrad front after the fall of Sevastopol. But Hitler remained wishy-washy on that and slowly disassembled the various assets into other sectors.

[AlbertN]

I feel the terrain has little impact - at least on the rolls. But in the 2D10 it mirrors in "extra losses" on the charts which makes it interesting.

So in the end that balances it out. But at times I feel a -1 a bit too little for a wood area or a city area (hex).

The main issue though is not related to the combat table, but that the defender often has limited choices of losses, meanwhile a careful attacker who plans well in advance in many cases has the MOT-Div or that MIL / INF-Div to immolate for the cause. That in my eyes would be the major problem. Some friends I know house rule that the first loss must always be corp sized (Which means in a Blitz attack, you lose a MOT first. Not sure what they do when ENG are involved, but ENG units are very precious since they required 5 turns to be rebuild and in most cases I'd be happy that the enemy - if attacking especially - burns out their ENG more so than a MOT).

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: brian brian
...but they also have to pay more attention to the terrain they attempt to hold. 1d10 with Blitz mods doesn't illustrate that nearly as much as 2d10.

How so? Half an odds column for AT is about it.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: TeaLeaf
So then you find the 1D10 representing WW2 better? Please share!

I do find the 1d10 table a better representation of WW2 combat.

In my opinion;

The 2d10 table reduce the importance of combat odds to much.

The importance of close air support is reduced to much in the 2d10 table.

As been mentioned I believe that the 'dynamic' nature of attacking and counterattacking in WWII is part of the actual combat die roll. During WWII one side was the attacker and the other was the defender and the defender did not launch army sized counter attacks all the time. How many times did France, or CW, counter attack (army sized) during the Battle of France?

[Jagdtiger14]

quote:ORIGINAL: TeaLeaf So then you find the 1D10 representing WW2 better? Please share! I do find the 1d10 table a better representation of WW2 combat. In my opinion; The 2d10 table reduce the importance of combat odds to much. The importance of close air support is reduced to much in the 2d10 table. As been mentioned I believe that the 'dynamic' nature of attacking and counterattacking in WWII is part of the actual combat die roll. During WWII one side was the attacker and the other was the defender and the defender did not launch army sized counter attacks all the time. How many times did France, or CW, counter attack (army sized) during the Battle of France?



_____________________________ Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

Its amazing to me how people see the 'world' so differently.

Odds were of paramount importance in pre-WWII history. WWII to modern warfare less so. Close air support is extremely important in 2d10...perhaps deficiencies in 1d10 make it even more so than 2d10?

France or CW could not conduct army sized counter attacks in the Battle of France...that's why it didn't happen. That's a 5 week window of WWII you selected.

[Orm]

I see close air support as ground support. And ground support has less relevance when playing with the 2d10 table.

If you just count the number of soldiers, tanks, guns, and so on, when you count odds I could understand your point. But if you calculate a 'effective' combat value then it is a different thing. Then a division could get the same value as a army. Hence odds makes perfect sense in MWIF.

So you didn't like the first battle of France then what of the Allied invasion of France and the liberation of France. How many army sized counter attacks were there during this campaign?

[Jagdtiger14]

Oh, now I understand you concerning 'close air support'...I thought you also meant ground strikes.

I assume you play with fractional odds? Depending on how important an attack is, and where you are in the turn (late), all available ground support could likely be thrown into the caldron in a 2d10 battle (however, oil might be a factor).

I assume you are only focusing in the west? As you probably already know...by 1944, the tables were turned, and with little air power, Germany could not conduct any kind of mass counter-attack on the western front other than the one they did with the cover of weather. There was the German Operation 'Luttich' which involved XLVII Panzer corp, 1.5 SS Panzer div's, and two Wehrmacht Panzer div's.

Could the counter attacks at Salerno and Anzio be considered? What about the Tunisian campaign? What about Libya/Egypt 1940-42?

[Orm]

I more or less consider all the campaigns and attacks you suggested to strengthen my point.

And I might have been focusing on the West in this discussion but that has more been because I have been lazy.

[brian brian]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: brian brian
...but they also have to pay more attention to the terrain they attempt to hold. 1d10 with Blitz mods doesn't illustrate that nearly as much as 2d10.

How so? Half an odds column for AT is about it.

Paul asked this question a while back, I've been out on a job for several weeks. Yep, there are still places in the world where you can't have all of humanity at your fingertips (or play WiF or MWiF) 24/7. Thankfully those places frequently do have Trout to catch though.

Anyhow as Paul notes the AT gun modifier is the only difference between 1d10 and 2d10 in terms of armor modifiers, though 2d10 features a few other die mods at a finer scale (divisional).

Although a -1 on the 1d10 is nearly identical to a -2 on the 2d10, mostly due to the structure of the results table on the 1d10, with the bell curve of die results with 2d10 a -2 (basically an odds level) has more weight to it.

So when the defender commits their armor to hold clear terrain, it is a more significant decision, and is a way the defense can work the 2d10 table to their advantage, as they can with other specialty units, etc. Just ask the German Army Groups that attacked at Kursk.

2d10 lessens the "dice won/lost the game for player A/B" quite a bit. I'm fine with 2d10 helping a well-planned attack, the attack was on the ascendence in WWII.


As for whether WWII and MWiF was a counter-attacking war / game, I agree with Orm that the MWiF scale doesn't really represent that. On a tactical to operation level, I think most armies had a doctrine of Counter-Attack in general. But when operating Corps and Armies and Army Groups, you have to hold a little initiative to be able to Counter Attack. Sufficient reserves, supplies, etc., must be available and there must be enough freedom of action to plan a Counter Attack. When the enemy has launched a wide-scale theater level attack against you, the defender can rarely respond with a large-scale operation of it's own.

I do think WiF shows you this some however. Sure, in a 1941 Barbarossa the Russians can mount a Counter-Attack, even a nice one with a handful of MECH/ARM units and perhaps an Offensive Chit. But they will have little to back it up with in that they can't exploit much success and if such a Counter-Attack fails, there will be nothing behind it to cover that failure. I think it takes a fair amount of time playing wargames in general to learn when not to attack, and WiF does a good job representing that.

[Jagdtiger14]

I agree WiF can not represent the true counter-attacking that occurred especially on the eastern front. Since both sides have perfect knowledge of what is where, etc... the operational/tactical counter attacking the Germans conducted in late 43/early 44 (48th Panzer corp actions as part of AGS) could only happen in a fog of war situation (perhaps that is a future computer WiF incarnation).

MWiF expansion: Fog in Flames.