Which CRT to Use? Or, 1D10 vs 2D10?

[rkr1958]

Paul,

I would like to get a copy of your VBA odds calculator. Would that be possible?

Ronnie

[rkr1958]

I also find the "extreme" results of the 1D10 CRT not as extereme as the 2D10 table. For example, even at a 2:1 the attacker is only risking the loss of 2 units and that's on a roll of 1 on the Blitz (10%) and rolls of 1,2 and 5 on the assault (30%). And it it's a Blitz the attacker with no die roll modifier has a 50/50 chance of taking the hex if 2 or more defending units and 70% if only 1.. On the assault table that chance reduces to 20% if there's 3 defending units, 30% if 2 or more and 60% if 1 defender.

[paulderynck]

Another way to look at it is this. In Barbarossa, would you rather make a Blitz attack at 7-1 on the 1D10 or the 2D10? On the 1D10 the result is a guaranteed 2B*. On the 2D10 you'd have a +14.
1% lose a unit and flip and defender just retreats
5% half flip and defender just retreats
9% (or 4% with no extra loss in play) lose a unit and half flip and defender is only B'd
0% (or 5% with no extra loss in play) half flip and defender is only B'd
6% only a B*
7% only a 1B*

In other words, you get less than a 2B* result 28% of the time with 2D10 as opposed to 0% of the time with 1D10. That's what your bell curve (really a ^) does for you.

[TeaLeaf]

I like the statistics explained in here!
But, correct me if I'm wrong, in spite of having a small chance of giving slightly worse results, doesn't the 2D10 charts allow for much better continuation of offensives during bad weather/cracking cities/rivers/fortifications?
I remember a game where my German opponent removed Leningrad from my control during a snow impulse as if it was nothing. IIRC, with the 2D10 charts, in winter turns winterized units each provide +to the dice roll as well. Attacking Leningrad (for example) during snow with only winterized units (Finns, mountaineers, etc.), engineers and HQ, provides a lot of +to the combat roll, even if the attack is made at a relatively weak odds level. With the 1D10 chart, try to take Leningrad at a lower odds level. You'd have to get lucky.
But with 2D10, a lot of winterized units/eng/HQ attacking at 2:1 can provide as much as +13 to the dice roll. Just attack with Finns and (built-ahead) mountaineers (including mountain divisions). Luck is not a factor anymore here. Bad luck however, still is .
To top it off, I remember it is the same for cities and rivers.

So, with the 2D10 chart, cities, winterturns and rivers don't really exist against a player who has built a lot of +to the dice roll for every situation (cracking cities, cracking river lines, cracking winter turns)... Quite a difference from the 1D10.

Back to the topic:
I think (but I haven't tried this myself yet), Germany + Italy must build more submarines than the usual WIF game sees, base them in Bordeaux to increase their reach, and then swarm a few sea areas (1 or 2, or even 3 if you really have a lot of subs) with hordes of them in the highest box.
The thing with subwarfare is that you will need surprise (sounds logical, not?), and the side that doesn't get it suffers the most. So you'll need a bit of luck with the BotA. Although I think the subs have a better chance of getting surprise, since it is much easier for them to find than it is for the CONVs (if they have a NAV for protection) or the lone/few cruiser(s) in the 4 box. The NAV ofc tones down the effects of being surprised by the subs, but getting surprise is what both sides need in the BotA.
And if the CONV side gets surprise, it usually means only the cruiser(s) in the 4 box can do something with it (avoid combat).
That's my 2 cents. It's just a thought so far, need to see it through yet .

EDIT: calculating winter attacks (if I got it correct), Leningrad could be attacked with a +12 to the dice roll. Frozen lake hexsides count as rivers and if I get it right, bonuses are halved if the combat factors are halved.
All mountaineers, engineers and Finns must have been built (ahead) before the winter is over. The +12 can be further modified by attacking/defending HQ support and possibly an offensive chit. Not sure if the winterized bonus get halved if a winter unit is halved for river and then doubled for the chit (so effectively not halved).
But I think the chit doesn't help here, other than just raising the odds level... pretty sure though that engineers negate halving of winterized bonus because they negate halving for rivers.

[Jagdtiger14]

I don't know anything about the 1d10, never played with it, no one in my face to face group even thought about using it. If what Tealeaf wrote in his first two paragraphs are true, then that is huge! What else is omitted from 1d10 that the 2d10 has?

The point I was trying to make is that with the 2d10 I am more in control (the bell curve is a targeting mechanism). In your example, its not always about the odds...other modifiers come into play as well...seems there are more modifiers on the 2d10 than the 1d10.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

I don't know anything about the 1d10, never played with it, no one in my face to face group even thought about using it. If what Tealeaf wrote in his first two paragraphs are true, then that is huge! What else is omitted from 1d10 that the 2d10 has?

The point I was trying to make is that with the 2d10 I am more in control (the bell curve is a targeting mechanism). In your example, its not always about the odds...other modifiers come into play as well...seems there are more modifiers on the 2d10 than the 1d10.

For me, the 1D10 table seems less putative than the 2D10 table. And it seems easier, again to me, to take a hex occupied by 3 units with the 1D10 table than the 2D10.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: TeaLeaf

I like the statistics explained in here!
But, correct me if I'm wrong, in spite of having a small chance of giving slightly worse results, doesn't the 2D10 charts allow for much better continuation of offensives during bad weather/cracking cities/rivers/fortifications?
I remember a game where my German opponent removed Leningrad from my control during a snow impulse as if it was nothing. IIRC, with the 2D10 charts, in winter turns winterized units each provide +to the dice roll as well. Attacking Leningrad (for example) during snow with only winterized units (Finns, mountaineers, etc.), engineers and HQ, provides a lot of +to the combat roll, even if the attack is made at a relatively weak odds level. With the 1D10 chart, try to take Leningrad at a lower odds level. You'd have to get lucky.
But with 2D10, a lot of winterized units/eng/HQ attacking at 2:1 can provide as much as +13 to the dice roll. Just attack with Finns and (built-ahead) mountaineers (including mountain divisions). Luck is not a factor anymore here. Bad luck however, still is .
To top it off, I remember it is the same for cities and rivers.

So, with the 2D10 chart, cities, winterturns and rivers don't really exist against a player who has built a lot of +to the dice roll for every situation (cracking cities, cracking river lines, cracking winter turns)... Quite a difference from the 1D10.

Back to the topic:
I think (but I haven't tried this myself yet), Germany + Italy must build more submarines than the usual WIF game sees, base them in Bordeaux to increase their reach, and then swarm a few sea areas (1 or 2, or even 3 if you really have a lot of subs) with hordes of them in the highest box.
The thing with subwarfare is that you will need surprise (sounds logical, not?), and the side that doesn't get it suffers the most. So you'll need a bit of luck with the BotA. Although I think the subs have a better chance of getting surprise, since it is much easier for them to find than it is for the CONVs (if they have a NAV for protection) or the lone/few cruiser(s) in the 4 box. The NAV ofc tones down the effects of being surprised by the subs, but getting surprise is what both sides need in the BotA.
And if the CONV side gets surprise, it usually means only the cruiser(s) in the 4 box can do something with it (avoid combat).
That's my 2 cents. It's just a thought so far, need to see it through yet .

EDIT: calculating winter attacks (if I got it correct), Leningrad could be attacked with a +12 to the dice roll. Frozen lake hexsides count as rivers and if I get it right, bonuses are halved if the combat factors are halved.
All mountaineers, engineers and Finns must have been built (ahead) before the winter is over. The +12 can be further modified by attacking/defending HQ support and possibly an offensive chit. Not sure if the winterized bonus get halved if a winter unit is halved for river and then doubled for the chit (so effectively not halved).
But I think the chit doesn't help here, other than just raising the odds level... pretty sure though that engineers negate halving of winterized bonus because they negate halving for rivers.

And the Russians? Typically we see two 6 factor winterized units plus the 1-3 engineer there.

Let's see. That's -2 + -2 (two winterized units on defence) + -1 (engineer) + -3 (city + 2 factory stacks) = a minus 8. Your +12 against a -8 yields a +4. How often will you kill 3 units with a +4 attack? About 1 in 4 is the answer.

Edit: and don't forget you start out with a minus 4 for winter, which more than cancels out any pluses you get for odds, so make that a one in 5 or worse.

[TeaLeaf]

Okay [:D], I did this out of scratch, so let's get the CRT for reference.
I see I got some things wrong indeed (thanks for the correction!), but not everything (phew). Winterized units indeed subtract from the roll (-4) and the snow itself as well (-4). The City-modifiers I got correct, because with so many attacking ENG, the city modifiers will be 0 anyway. HQ support is also handled diferently than I thought in 2D10 (+3 for Mannstein, hurray).

Only looking at bonuses from winterized units and HQ-support (City modifier=0) I then get to +15 + -8 = +7. A 2:1 odds-level would add another +4, for a total of +11. Is this correct?
Assuming this is correct, looking at the table I find rolling an '8 or more' will do the job (on an '8', attack the leftover disorganized defender again next impulse). I'd estimate the chances of succes on ~70%.

That's still ~70% chance of killing Leningrad with only a 2:1 odds ratio.
But I see my 'beef' with the 2D10 isn't as bad as I thought, because if you'd do the exact same thing against Leningrad with the 1D10, it would not be fair to assume only a 2:1 odds ratio. Without 'the chit', the odds will be 5:1 easily (swamp=forest in snow, lake=frozen, most river sides are negated by the many attacking ENG, >half attackers are winterized). 1D10 will therefore give that 70% chance, while 2D10 will have a final +17 (+10 for the odds, not +4) to the roll, which gives a 99% chance of taking the City immediately and a 1% chance that you will have to attack again. All without the Chit.

Regarding Leningrad it is not as bad as I thought, but still, 70% chance of success (1D10) versus a guaranteed success (2D10) is quite a difference.
In general, I find that the 1D10 CRT allows for better defensive options. Another example:
Defending a hex in the open behind a river with-> only INF/INF+AT/INF+ARM+AT, I calculated the chance of taking the hex without losses for the attacker, attacking from 2 hexes with ARM+MECH+ENG and using the 1D10, at (roughly) 70%/50%/40% respectively. I assumed odds of 3:1 moving down to 2:1 against the better defenders, and no disorganized units. With the 2D10 this is 90%/64%/45%. I may be slighly off, but the point I am trying to make is that the 2D10 favors the attacker to such an extend, that the defensive side (Russia during Barbarossa) is also much better off attacking than relying on Germany killing itself assaulting strong (cohesive river) defensive positions. The 1D10 works much more like the latter.
Which CRT is used looks to me a matter of what playstyle is preferred, but the 2D10 is definately more difficult to fully exploit.

PS: I seem to hit the wrong 'reply' button. I want to post a general reply, not specifically to paulderynck. I hope you can forgive me, paulderynck [:D].

[Mayhemizer_slith]

Paul, can you please give us odds to following attacks using both 1D10 and 2D10? Blitz table is used, weather is fine and defender can retreat.

I'm interested in what are odds for all possible results
-Take the hex 1D10/2D10
-Do now flip 1D10/2D10
-Destroy units 1D10/2D10

Let's pretend that ARM HQ is just ARM, no attacking HQ support is possible. In both attacks one of the defending corps are disorganized.

Thank you in advance.

[paulderynck]

It looks like you are not using fractional odds which would decrease the probabilities of success in the first battle for only the 2D10 table because the Div only gives a plus one-half for its armor shift. Fractional odds only slightly increase the probabilities of success in the second battle for the 2D10 but make a much bigger difference on the 1D10 table because the attackers have better than a 2 and a half to one. Each half odds increase gives an extra pip for 2D10. Anyway, below are the results I got:

Note that Do Not Flip treats Half Flips in 2D10 as a success and that Destroy Units treats the loss of any enemy unit (i.e. could be only one lost) as a success.

First battle with fractional odds, 2D10 would be a +9.5 not a +10 Blitz(1D10/2D10)%:
Take the Hex: 80/87.5
Do Not Flip: 60/82
Destroy Units: 70/51

First battle no fractional odds (1D10/2D10)%:
Take the Hex: 80/90
Do Not Flip: 60/85
Destroy Units: 70/54

Second battle, with fractional odds (1D10/2D10)%:
Take the Hex: 75.3/85.4
Do Not Flip: 45.3/79.4
Destroy Units: 65.3/48.4

Second battle, no fractional odds (1D10/2D10)%:
Take the Hex: 70/85
Do Not Flip: 40/79
Destroy Units: 60/48

Based on those two examples you might conclude that 2D10 is more attacker-friendly for Blitz combat because it takes more ground and keeps more attackers face-up, but in the long run, a lot more defenders come back to fight another day, and they'll be the best unit(s) that were in the defending stack. 2D10 also has more attacker casualties.

How about some examples involving the Assault table?

(BTW, I'm thinking we need to rename this thread. [:)])

[Mayhemizer_slith]

Thank you very much! Very interesting results.

Actually we use fractional odds. I think it shows +9,1 as +9 before fractional odds roll.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
(BTW, I'm thinking we need to rename this thread. [:)])

Done!

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Mayhemizer

Thank you very much! Very interesting results.

Actually we use fractional odds. I think it shows +9,1 as +9 before fractional odds roll.

Perhaps the game shows the "expected" additional shift due to fractional odds, i.e. if they work out to be point 5 or higher, perhaps it then shows: "Fractional Odds: +1" in the summary. I think I've seen that in the past in my games.

I need to pay closer attention to confirm that. I may have been misled by them being so small in your examples.

[rkr1958]

I have to say that I'm having a blast playing without Cruisers in Flames and with the 1D10 CRT (w/Blitz bonus and divisions). I just finished the first impulse of the July/August 1940 turn. France is on the ropes and so is the CW in Egypt. The Italian RM last turn swept the RN from the Eastern Med and now fully control it. The CW will be forced to take a combined because they need to address both the situation on the ground in Egypt and on the seas of the Eastern Med. Also, the Battle of the Atlantic saw German u-boats and Italian subs sink 5 CW CPs and force another 5 CPs to abort.

I'm probably over reacting, but comparing this game (so far) against 3 others I played with cruisers in flames is showing me how unbalancing cruisers in flames is for the allies. With this option, the Italian RM and German and Italian subs never, ever seemed a threat to the RN and their control of the seas. Now, without this option, I'm seeing a real battle for the control of the Med and worry from the RN about the threat of German u-boats and Italian subs operating in the Atlantic. With cruisers in flames the CW had plenty of ships to patrol in force all sea areas potentially threatened by the Germans and Italians. Without this option, the CW had to carefully weigh where to put their limited naval resources to best defend their convoy lines and try to keep the Italians in check in the Med.

On land, while the Germans and Italians have been stung occasionally by the 1D10 CRT, they've been able to get the upper hand both in France and Egypt.

[TeaLeaf]

Thanks for the additional insights for 1D10 vs. 2D10, paulderynk!

Even though in theory my defenders can come back to haunt the attacker, I am much more fearful of the 2D10 as defending Major Power.
Russia during barbarossa, for example.
During the long summerturns the Germans can exploit the much better 2D10-chances for staying face up and gaining ground, because this usually also means the defenders suffer 'R' results. 'B' or 'S' results should also be converted to 'R' results mostly (except very late in the turn), as retreating disorganised defenders can then be pocketed and killed. As Russia, I found launching my own armored attacks to be the only thing helpful against a 2D10 Barbarossa. Ofc first Russia needs to regain consciousness after the German sucker-punch (usually late during the turn, starting several turns after the surprise turn). But that's all my humble opinion, after playing a very experienced WIF-crack on a wargamers convention. The 2D10 I then played for the first time. So my experience may very well be rather subjective, I must admit. But since then I reverted back to playing 1D10, regarding the 2D10 as a balancing tool to give the axis a better shot if playing against more experienced allied players. Thoughts on this?

@rkr: good hunting [:)]. If you want help with the CW I'm sure there's plenty people that can give tips on how to have a good chance to stay in control of Egypt (and at least the eastern med) with the CW.

[paulderynck]

2D10 is more Blitz friendly so a lot depends on how you defend clear hexes - either avoiding them or defending with an armor and a mech corps along with an AT/AA gun or a mech Div. And in addition have a fighter in range to intercept ground strikers. Choosing to retreat units rather than put them on the track can mean you'll just keep fighting them a couple more times if you're up against an experienced defender. Also the retreat priorities often prevent you from retreating them to where you really want them.

[TeaLeaf]

Thanks again!
You've touched a raw nerve here [;)].

I have ofc considered the exact same thing, but the thought of needing to put ARM/MECH in the front lines for defence (sometimes or more often, remains to be seen) gives me the shivers.
I much rather want to keep them in reserve, outside harms way and attack with them when I deem it relatively safe. If Germany wants to ground strike them in order to mop them up later, they certainly have no shortage of FTR either!
Well, I'll definately give the 2D10 some more tries again then, after I refreshed some more of my basic WIF-knowledge [:)].

[Jagdtiger14]

Not putting ARM/MECH on the front lines is a luxury if you are on defense. If you are concerned about their loss, then provide them with air cover. I consider FTR's and pilots more valuable than ARM/MECH...without at least air parity, they are just rusting hulks on the battlefield.

[paulderynck]

The other thing with that type of defense is to configure your line so that each defending hex can only be attacked from two hexes, not three. (If you look at the defensive boni, they are double the offensive boni.) The Russians have enough Armor/Mech/ATG to do this in the south where all the clear terrain is. Up north there's enough forest, swamp and cities that their good infantry can defend without being out in the open.

[brian brian]

I wouldn't chalk up the results in 1940 in any one game to meaning the _____ D10 table is better than the ______ D10 table. Change a few weather and initiative rolls and the whole game could be quite different, let alone changing just 2 or 3 key land combat rolls. As the game moves along and there are more combats, you might not notice the results as much. Also, the more you play the game, the more you can get out of each Major Power's possibilities, and generally every time you play, the Major Powers under your command do better than the previous game, barring roll Storm weather for 57% of the impulses in a year or something.

The 2D10 table takes luck out of the game quite a bit more. You can think about it this way - it is extremely unlikely that you roll a "1" on the 10 sided dice twice consecutively. Obviously, a 1% chance of course. But rolling a "1" twice consecutively on two land combats is quite a bit worse than rolling a single "2" on the 2d10 table, even though both are equally likely.

I look at the results quite a bit more simply than the x/y/z % chance of result a/b/c. I think on most 2d10 activity, I have a 25% chance of utter failure, a 25% chance of perfect success (no losses, no flipped attackers), and a 50% chance of probably taking the hex but probably losing something along the way. Of course that is nowhere near the reality. The reality is, when you make an attack in World in Flames, what you are probably weighing in terms of probability is whether you can afford to wait any longer or not far more than your odds of success in a single battle.

It is common to mention the many modifiers used with the 2d10 table; this is frequently with an unspoken context that it is some sort of cheat to use these modifiers in a key battle. All those modifiers add more nuance to the game; once you get used to using them they seem quite authentic to the historical modeling we all came for. For the most part I think players come to enjoy the way combined arms aid you on attack or defense, and the 2d10 rewards attention to detail in military command. I've never known any player who goes back to 1d10 later.

Leningrad is an infamous hex in the game and frequently serves as an example of game activity. A maximized 2d10 attack on the hex is something that never happened in the real war. After the fall of Sevastopol, Manstein and the siege warfare assets of 11th Army were briefly deployed in the region, but Hitler soon changed his focus to the new offensive at the other end of the front. Waffling rarely works out in warfare, and neither does it in World in Flames. Using an HQ and multiple specialized units and possibly an Offensive Chit is a major allocation of your resources - and you are still not guaranteed to take the hex even with a bunch of nefarious dice modifiers. The real way to take a hex like Leningrad is to build up a force with depth, i.e. the ability to attack more than once in a turn. (Same for defense - the Russians can fly in a MTN corps at night....)