Gargantua's Hit-Handicap system ->New A&A Concept
The Key benefit of this is being able to quantify how good or bad things have been, and tangibly being able to present it, and have a baseline.
Suddenly one game can actually be compared to another on a somewhat similar scale for how good or bad it has been in general.
For example, lets say Karl7 says he got diced terribly, and I say oh no this game I played with Variance was worse. Now we can actually compare the differential, and enjoy our misery together Or say I played three games against a top 5 opponent, and won 1/3, I can then compare the handicaps to see if the luck mattered more than the strategies I may have employed. Or maybe some strategies (like continuing to take risks) need to change depending on the status of the handicap. If you’re down a bunch of units, maybe you should be playing more conservatively, or maybe you should press the attack. whatever.
Maybe we can have achievements on the new forums for winning a game with a great than 50 unit handicap lol or whatever lol.
I’ve seen bits of the discussion and I saw that my game with Gargantua had been referenced. I’ll first note that this has been easily the most luck I have had in a game since I started league play (and I’ve had more than my share of luck so far).
In G3, my German stack wiped out his Soviet stack on 50% odds. I didn’t just win though, but had about twice as many units surviving than the calculator predicted. Given the situation, I didn’t think I had a choice but to do this, but had the result been even slightly less in my favour, the Soviets could have countered and would have had Eastern Europe open to them. I had nothing following that stack, whereas the Soviets did. This gave me time to recover. Following that, he had a couple of more significant combats where his units significantly under performed and we have had several rounds (especially in the Pacific) where my destroyer blockers, defending lone subs, or single infantry get hits. None of these combats were individually critical but the net effect has been that his forces have taken far more attrition and have had fewer options as a result. There have been a few battles where the luck has gone the other way but no rounds where the luck consistently and substantially went against me (except the very last one played- J12).
Obviously, luck and the uncertainty it provides is a key component of the game and, in my mind, makes it far more interesting and fun to play. The luck in that early stack battle was a pleasant surprise but I didn’t feel any guilt around benefiting from it. One should expect that to happen sometimes. And having the odd round where one’s destroyer blockers hit at 80% is going to happen too. This kind of luck is at best usually the difference between defeat now and defeat next round. But the consistency of my luck and Gargantua’s bad luck has had the effect that in a game where I was ready to surrender after G3, I am now in round 12 and have a reasonable shot at winning. I am certainly far closer to winning than my play (especially early on) deserved.
On adding a hit differential calculator, I think having this additional info in the game would be quite interesting and useful even though I do agree that not all dice luck in the game is equal. Its more information but will sometimes lend itself to a misinterpretation of the actual luck of each player.
I do think though that if there is a way to avoid counting superfluous hits, that would make it more accurate. Some dice luck doesn’t matter to the game and so shouldn’t be counted. If 6 fighters attack one destroyer the consequences in game terms of a lucky roll of 6 hits is the same as an ‘unlucky’ role of 1 hit or an average roll of 3 hits. It doesn’t actually matter to the outcome of the game but the measure would make it appear significant.
A TUV differential might have other problems, but it would solve this since superfluous hits aren’t going to impact on it.
But I thought another way to do is to take this hit differential counter and modify it when the hits exceed casualties in a combat. That is to say, in combat rounds where the expected number of hits and the actual number of hits both exceed the number of casualties taken, the hit differential of the victor in that combat round doesn’t get counted in the hit differential. This assumes we can break it down by combat round and I’m not sure if that can be done.
If that can’t be done then perhaps in situations where the combat only goes one round, and the expected number of hits exceeds the number of casualties, we could just ignore the hit differential of the winner of that combat. That would at least remove all situations where you send a stack after a lone unit. I think?
If you're having problems, please send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org