Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Battle reports and play-by-post games
Forum rules
This is a game - This is fun - Your posts should reflect this

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby randolph » Sun Jun 03, 2012 8:15 pm

Tetrajak wrote:However, if all your units have 2Y, then you've sacrificed movement or defense, which you pay for when (not if) the enemy catches you. It's not worth putting 2Y on DF frames, because it lowers their defense or movement so considerably that they become ineffective within their weapon range (because they're too slow, or too poorly defended).

Sure, I can see the benefit that 2Y provides, but it's not worth what you lose in exchange for it when you're at anything less than artillery range.

range8.png
range8.png (253.09 KiB) Viewed 2284 times

Nobody can spot A for Unit 1 right now at all.
Unit 3 (or the center unit) would have to move 6 in order to do so - a perfect roll, and that's assuming they didn't need movement in a different direction in order to shoot, such as towards Unit 4's quadrant.
Unit 2 and 4 can't get there at all.

Your ideal case is:
1) Center Unit and/or Unit 3 already have spotted units to attack without moving
2) That unit rolls a Green or White 6, then moves into range to spot A for Unit 1
3) Unit 1 hits A
4) Unit 1 doesn't need to go anywhere else, rolls at least a 4
5) Unit 1 spots B for Unit 2/Center Unit

If Unit 3 and Center Unit have to move to hit something, you've either nearly guaranteed a wasted shot (unspotted), or wasted an attack entirely because you were out of range to shoot, choosing to spot A instead.

Instead, with 2Y:
1) Anyone spots A for Unit 1, after moving where they need to move to shoot who they need to shoot
2) Unit 1 shoots A, moves anywhere it likes, and Spots whoever needs shooting, including A again, if it's necessary to risk trying for the 6 movement with Unit 3 or Center Unit
3) Anyone spots B for Unit 2 or Center Unit, again, moving where they need to move to shoot who they need to shoot

It's absolutely worth it, because without a Spot, you're doing zero damage on average.
WangTech, Inc.
Inexorable. Progress.
Company Overview
randolph
Grizzled Veteran
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:10 pm

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby Axhead » Sun Jun 03, 2012 11:35 pm

d6Y d6Y doesn't need to go with any particular configuration. In the next hour I will have a new sim (*edit* the link is HERE) where d6Y d6Y is used to put scans on targets for HTH frames. The same d6Y d6Y frame repeatedly opts not to fire its d6Ra d6Rd at the same target in order to keep it from activating, so that the targeted frame can't run away from the HTH frames... Here the Scan is clearly more dangerous with the HTH attack, so much so that it is worth foregoing the d6Ra. This game is all about the anti-social networking :lol:

P.S. Awesome dialog here gents.

Runs off to upload Sim.
Axhead
Grizzled Veteran
 
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:12 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby Tetrajak » Mon Jun 04, 2012 12:56 am

Randolph and I discussed this further in the IRC channel to avoid writing essays. I think this theory needs testing more, and there is a little worry that the power granted by d6Y d6Y might be too powerful. However, further testing is required.
User avatar
Tetrajak
Talkative
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 5:54 pm

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby Axhead » Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:21 am

Yeah but this is forum (in both senses) for essays. IRC is cool, but it leaves everyone else outta the loop and leads to alot of reinvention of the wheel down the line.

I dont think d6Y d6Y is too powerful, two slots is big chunk of resources and it is very easy to break by just shooting off one of the d6Y . On a related note I have been thinking that d6B d6B is not worth the extra slot. There have been very few times I have used the cover benefit rule , but the number of times the second d6B has been idle or wasted is very high. It seems like it is most wasted when Attacking as I find alot of d6B d6B frames simply aren't targeted and so the benefit and use of two attachments is wasted.
Axhead
Grizzled Veteran
 
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:12 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby Zero Revenge » Mon Jun 04, 2012 12:51 pm

Axhead wrote:It seems like it is most wasted when Attacking as I find alot of d6B d6B frames simply aren't targeted and so the benefit and use of two attachments is wasted.

Isn't that useful though? It's help control your enemies' turn. They're aren't targeted, so then you can use the d6B d6B frame to move forward [perhaps slap a d6Rd d6G on them] and have them push forward.

Also, perhaps you're not using the "Granting Cover" system enough to warrant having 2 Blue then?

Also, can't wait for Sim #10. :3
Self-appointed lore buff.
http://mfzarcadia.wordpress.com/ - Keep up to date on the War for Arcadia
User avatar
Zero Revenge
Grizzled Veteran
 
Posts: 753
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:44 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby Mantisking » Mon Jun 04, 2012 12:56 pm

Axhead wrote:Yeah but this is forum (in both senses) for essays. IRC is cool, but it leaves everyone else outta the loop and leads to alot of reinvention of the wheel down the line.

True. But a better place for this might be the rules forum.
User avatar
Mantisking
Mod Team
 
Posts: 5617
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:17 pm
Location: Framingham, MA, U.S.A.

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby randolph » Mon Jun 04, 2012 1:08 pm

Axhead wrote:Yeah but this is forum (in both senses) for essays. IRC is cool, but it leaves everyone else outta the loop and leads to alot of reinvention of the wheel down the line.

While it's true that the hangar is the place for essays, we realized that we'd reached a point where we weren't adding a lot of further theory analysis in those walls of text - we need data.

Not to say I won't write any more walls o' text, just not on this specific topic until we get some more data.
WangTech, Inc.
Inexorable. Progress.
Company Overview
randolph
Grizzled Veteran
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:10 pm

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby Axhead » Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:24 pm

Mantisking wrote:
Axhead wrote:Yeah but this is forum (in both senses) for essays. IRC is cool, but it leaves everyone else outta the loop and leads to alot of reinvention of the wheel down the line.

True. But a better place for this might be the rules forum.

You are correct, I will start a topic over there. *edit* oops there is already a discussion about this going on here .

@ZeroRevenge: I will quote you over in the new topic to get the ball rolling.*edit* see above, and see you over there.

randolph wrote:
Axhead wrote:Yeah but this is forum (in both senses) for essays. IRC is cool, but it leaves everyone else outta the loop and leads to alot of reinvention of the wheel down the line.

While it's true that the hangar is the place for essays, we realized that we'd reached a point where we weren't adding a lot of further theory analysis in those walls of text - we need data.

Not to say I won't write any more walls o' text, just not on this specific topic until we get some more data.

I am all about the wild speculation, data is for sissys ;) Seriously though, we have some data and I am interested in some discussion. Later on more data = more discussion.
Axhead
Grizzled Veteran
 
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:12 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby Tetrajak » Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:31 pm

Once randolph and I have more data about the 2Y builds and their roll-on effects, we will provide said data for discussion and debate. Like he said, at the moment we're mostly running on speculation, and we need some more hard evidence before we draw further conclusions.

Sorry for not posting another sim this weekend, I got involved in designing frames instead, and then had friends over for a roast. Hopefully I should get another sim done next weekend!
User avatar
Tetrajak
Talkative
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 5:54 pm

Re: Battle Simulations (Sim 9 Posted)

Postby Ced23Ric » Mon Jun 04, 2012 5:01 pm

If results are presented, IRC is a far superior platform - you have pseudo-realtime conversations with multiple partners and heightend attention, and you can really crunch things through. It takes a brace protocollant to congregate the findings, but, still. Also, IRC is open to everyone. There is always something going on these days, be it design chat, parts help, theory crafting or company plannings. Well, or mindless fun. But that's what we have Soren for in the channel.

JOIN THE IRC. MEET SOREN. AND JOSH. ;)
Image Vesopia - An Ijad-controlled system, where SU and FC are still fighting.
"The moon will guide you on your path when the sun long has set." - Trinity Of-The-Many.
User avatar
Ced23Ric
Old Guard
 
Posts: 1681
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 3:07 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany

Previous

Return to Mobile Frame Battle Reports

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron