1D10 versus 2D10

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: petracelli

2d10 has less extreme luck than the 1d10 and trust me makes for a much better game a d there are ways of defending against a 41 barb for Russia, which is build all their own arm mech and at guns. All their ftrs to make it difficult for Germany to flip and get the Wallies to put real pressure on Italy.

Phil

To me 2d10 is more extreme luck. Rolling 18 on that low odds attack or 3 on the high odds assault just annoys me. [:@]

[paulderynck]

I agree 2D10 has more extremes. In 1D10 there may be a 10% chance of something bad happening, but in 2D10 (at higher odds) it might only be a 1% chance. So if you roll the bad result, it seems like it was far more unlucky.

[mjjcpa]

The 2d10 is a sharper double edge sword imho.

[Snydly]

Where is the option for 1D6 ... like the good ole days in Version 4 of WiF . [:D]

Now that lead to some very ... my 'offensive is over type of results' when you rolled two or three 1's invading Russia.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I agree 2D10 has more extremes. In 1D10 there may be a 10% chance of something bad happening, but in 2D10 (at higher odds) it might only be a 1% chance. So if you roll the bad result, it seems like it was far more unlucky.

However, I like that. I always say to myself when that happens, that the intelligence community didn't do a good job: "you guys form intell said that there was only a MIL in Arnhem. However, you got my CW Para dropping on a couple of SS Panzerdivisions, so it got killed...".
2D10 simulates a kind of Fog of War with the odd very bad or very good result happening...

[composer99]

ORIGINAL: Centuur
"you guys form intell said that there was only a MIL in Arnhem. However, you got my CW Para dropping on a couple of SS Panzerdivisions, so it got killed...".

Heh heh heh

[chris3863]

I'm not a huge fan of the 2d10 because the modifiers are subject to gamey abuse. For example want to take Leningrad? Attack in the winter with a bunch of Finns and mtn units and just blow any defense away with the modifiers no matter how poor the odds are. Also with 2d10 it is complete suicide to defend in anything other than mtns and cities. Nothing is more discouraging than watching the 1st SS (12-5) a 9-4 infantry and the GD division get blown away in a 1-1 attack in France like they were never there. That attack would never have been made with the 1d10.

In fairness, if you want a really fast paced bloody game, the 2d10 is for you. The defenders are like a Stark at the Red Wedding; dead. I just feel that a well prepared defense should not be so easy to blow away but I don't feel so strongly that I would refuse to play with 2d10, I just prefer 1d10.

[brian brian]

the mods on 2d10 cut both ways. defend Leningrad with 2 white-print / elite and the engineer divesion. With a reserve ski division ready to ski in across the lake, or a ski or mountain division ready to be airlifted in at night to replace losses. still a very tough hex to take. Or put Koniev HQ and some oil in there for an extra -2 with HQ Support.

[gridley]

ORIGINAL: Snydly

Where is the option for 1D6 ... like the good ole days in Version 4 of WiF . [:D]

Now that lead to some very ... my 'offensive is over type of results' when you rolled two or three 1's invading Russia.

My wall still has dents from the 6 sided die...that truly was an unforgiving table.

Even the Naval table back then was brutal...I remember once the Japanese player rolled like, 4 six's and 2 fives...bye bye US Navy. The US player immediately started to calculate the odds for such a roll.[:D] It was funny to watch, took him a while to joke about it though...

[brian brian]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I agree 2D10 has more extremes. In 1D10 there may be a 10% chance of something bad happening, but in 2D10 (at higher odds) it might only be a 1% chance. So if you roll the bad result, it seems like it was far more unlucky.

there are two kinds of "extreme luck" - rolling a 2 attacking on the 2d10, or rolling a 1 twice in a row attacking on the 1d10. Which would you rather experience?

I will probably never play 1d10 ever again, even solitaire with MWiF. 2d10 smooths the results better, and lets operational tactics (skill) into the game much more.

[Zorachus99]

ORIGINAL: brian brian

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I agree 2D10 has more extremes. In 1D10 there may be a 10% chance of something bad happening, but in 2D10 (at higher odds) it might only be a 1% chance. So if you roll the bad result, it seems like it was far more unlucky.

there are two kinds of "extreme luck" - rolling a 2 attacking on the 2d10, or rolling a 1 twice in a row attacking on the 1d10. Which would you rather experience?

I will probably never play 1d10 ever again, even solitaire with MWiF. 2d10 smooths the results better, and lets operational tactics (skill) into the game much more.

Exactly this. Fear of the worst results cancelled many an operation.

[composer99]

Here's some number crunching that might come in handy thinking about the combat tables.


Scenario 1
Let's take a +12 assault against 2 defenders in, say, a city, on the 2d10 table, assuming +12 is the final die roll modifier. That's a pretty good attack - in fact, it's a great attack.

With that assault, you as the attacker have:
- a 15% chance of becoming completely disorganized
- a 30% chance of becoming partially disorganized
- a 55% chance of remaining fully organized
- a 1% chance of taking 3 losses (the dreaded 14)
- an 11% chance of taking 2 losses
- a 20% chance of taking 1 loss
- a 68% chance of taking no losses
- an 85% chance of taking the hex (in a hex with 3 defenders with the same die roll modifier you get a 79% chance instead)

A +12 assault would be a 6:1 assault on the 1d10 CRT, but the odds ratios useable are 5:1 and 7:1, so let's say that we're looking at a 5:1 attack with a +2 die roll modifier.

In that case, you as the attacker have:
- a 30% chance of becoming completely disorganized
- a 70% chance of remaining organized
- a 0% chance of taking losses
- a 90% chance of taking the hex, regardless of how many defenders are present

Comparison
The 1d10 CRT in this case is more punitive with respect to becoming completely disorganized (30% vs. 15% for 2d10) but is actually more lenient with respect to remaining organized (70% vs. 55% for 2d10).

The 1d10 CRT in this case is also vastly more lenient with respect to losses (100% chance of 0 losses vs. 68% for 2d10). Both tables end up comparable in terms of actually taking the hex attacked, although the 1d10 table has the edge.


Scenario 2
Let's take a +6 assault against 2 defenders in a city on the 2d10, assuming +12 is the final die roll modifier. That's a marginal attack (unless you have hot dice).

With that assault, you as the attacker have:
- a 64% chance of becoming completely disorganized
- a 26% chance of becoming partially disorganized
- a 10% chance of remaining fully organized
- a 7% chance of taking 3 losses (the dreaded 14)
- a 28% chance of taking 2 losses
- a 34% chance of taking 1 loss
- a 31% chance of taking no losses
- a 36% chance of taking the hex (in a hex with 3 defenders and the same die roll modifier you get a 24% chance instead)

A +6 assault maps, per the 2d10 CRT, onto 3:1 odds, so on the 1d10 CRT an unmodified 3:1 assault nets you the following as the attacker:
- a 90% chance of becoming completely disorganized
- a 10% chance of remaining organized
- a 20% chance of taking 2 losses
- a 40% chance of taking 1 loss
- a 40% chance of taking no losses
- a 40% chance of taking the hex against 2 defenders (30% chance against 3 defenders)

Comparison
The 1d10 CRT is much more punitive with respect to becoming completely disorganized (90% vs. 64% on 2d10), while on both tables, the attacker has the same 10% chance of remaining organized. The big difference is the added fluidity of the partial disorganized result of the 2d10 CRT.

The 1d10 CRT is much more lenient with respect to losses:
- no losses: 1d10 40% vs. 31% 2d10
- 1 loss: 1d10 40% vs. 34% 2d10
- 2 losses: 1d10 20% vs. 28% 2d10
- 3 losses: 1d10 nil vs. 7% 2d10

The CRTs are comparable in terms of taking the hex, although the 1d10 table has a slight edge.


One could perform similar number crunching for blitzes, other odds ratios, defenders' losses, etc.

(As a matter of personal experience, I always felt that the dreaded 14 result on the assault table came up much more often than could be expected as a matter of probability. Even when granting that each die roll is an independent event and it takes hundreds, or even thousands, of die rolls for the numbers to even out.)

[paulderynck]

1D10 with Blitz mods is not all that different than 2D10.

[composer99]

OK, I couldn't stay away. Here's more numbers.

Scenario 3
2d10, +12 blitz against 3 defenders, 1 of which is an ARM unit (this is significant for the loss profile in 2d10).

In this case, the attacker gets:
- 6% chance of becoming completely disorganized
- 22% chance of becoming partially disorganized
- 72% chance of remaining organized
- 19% chance of taking 1 loss
- 81% chance of taking no losses
- 97% chance of taking the hex
- 85% chance of getting a breakthrough

There actually is a 6-1 column on the 1d10 blitz CRT. With an unmodified 6:1 blitz, the attacker gets:
- 10% chance of becoming completely disorganized
- 90% chance of remaining organized
- 10% chance of taking 1 loss
- 90% chance of taking no losses
- 100% chance of taking the hex
- 90% chance of getting a breakthrough

(Note that the chance of getting a breakthrough is a subset of the chance of taking the hex.)

Comparison
The 1d10 CRT is better for the attacker in every respect, save for the chance to become completely disorganized; this minor flaw is outweight massively by the far superior chance to remain organized.

Scenario 4
2d10, +6 blitz against 3 defenders, 1 of which is an ARM unit

In this case, the attacker gets:
- 45% chance of becoming completely disorganized
- 34% chance of becoming partially disorganized
- 21% chance of remaining organized
- 7% chance of taking 2 losses
- 48% chance of taking 1 loss
- 45% chance of taking no losses
- 64% chance of taking the hex
- 36% chance of getting a breakthrough

This is equivalent to an unmodified 3:1 blitz on the 1d10, which gets the attacker:
- 70% chance of becoming completely disorganized
- 30% chance of remaining organized
- 50% chance of taking 1 loss
- 50% chance of taking no losses
- 60% chance of taking the hex
- 30% chance of getting a breakthrough

(Note that the chance of getting a breakthrough is a subset of the chance of taking the hex.)

Comparison
The 2d10 table appears to edge the 1d10 out for this more marginal blitz combat:
- the partial reorganization result makes up for the 2d10's lower-probability outcome to remain organized
- a slightly higher probability of taking the hex, to begin with, and getting a breakthrough when you do get the hex

Where the 1d10 table has the edge is in losses:
- you can't take 2 losses on the 1d10 at all, whereas coming up snake eyes on the 2d10 will do the trick
- the 1d10 has a non-trivial edge over the 2d10 for taking no losses

-----
pauldernyck notes the blitz mods of the 1d10 table. If you can get these than even a 3:1 1d10 blitz starts looking much better than the 2d10: each +1 to the die roll gets you a +10% chance of remaining organized, a +10% chance of taking no losses, and a +10% chance of taking the hex and getting a breakthrough - up to a maximum +30% to all of these.

[paulderynck]

But a 3:1 1D10 with mods is not a +6 at 2D10, it's more like a +11.

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: gridley

ORIGINAL: Snydly

Where is the option for 1D6 ... like the good ole days in Version 4 of WiF . [:D]

Now that lead to some very ... my 'offensive is over type of results' when you rolled two or three 1's invading Russia.

My wall still has dents from the 6 sided die...that truly was an unforgiving table.

Even the Naval table back then was brutal...I remember once the Japanese player rolled like, 4 six's and 2 fives...bye bye US Navy. The US player immediately started to calculate the odds for such a roll.[:D] It was funny to watch, took him a while to joke about it though...

I remember we had a big multiplayer game going and I was on the Axis side. We had a fairly brutal start and while Poland went down, the casualties were heavy due to bad dice. France wasn't a cake walk either and it quickly became apparent that attacks where Von Manstein was at were the only ones that were having any luck with dice. The Germans wound up riding Manny to victory in France and started setting up for Barbarossa. While that was going on, the Axis were rolling 1's and 2's in Africa and it was clear it just wasn't going to be our game, so the Axis made the decision to dispatch Manny to Africa to fix the situation. Sure enough, 5's and 6's followed and we wound up taking the Suez. Game more or less ended there in a moral victory for the Axis as that was about the only type of victory we were going to get out of that game. Hehe.

It got so bad, it became funny.

[lomyrin]

This table shows the result percentages for the 2D10 tables with a given die roll total modifier base.

w means weather other than fine, t means terrain other than clear.

ret - retreat, brk - breakthru

[composer99]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

But a 3:1 1D10 with mods is not a +6 at 2D10, it's more like a +11.

[&:]

In the probability calculations above I didn't add any die roll modifiers for the 3:1 1D10 attacks.

I did for the 5:1 1D10 assault to try to get it to come close to the 6:1 2D10 assault, because there is no 6:1 column on the 1D10 table.

[chris3863]

True, I got carried away, it's not quite as easy as I said but with proper planning its much easier than with 1d10. With a little luck with ground and artillery strikes and good planning I can get a +12-+14 modifier on the 2d10 table which translates to a 64-79% chance to take the hex on the 1st try versus 50-60% chance with 1d10.

(note: when I say proper planning that means planning this from the start of Barbarossa so you can get all the units in place you need for an attack in snow.)

[Numdydar]

Wow I had no idea of the differences and complexities involved when I started this thread [X(]

So to recap and make sure I undersatnd everyone's comments

1D10
Pros - can provide better results, simpler to figure out(?), can improve strategy used due to more likely extreme results
Con - Extreme results more likely, can be manulipited more easily

2D10
Pros - Extreme results much less likely, allows more attacks to occur
Cons - more partial results, i.e. one unit disorganized versus none under a D10, Allows more attacks to occur (yes something can be both a positive and a negaitive at the same time)

Is the above close?

Also is it also true that there is no definate consensus on which one should be used as a standard? What D system do the tournements use?