OK, here's another SSR:

wrongway149

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
10,921
Likes
756
Points
113
Location
Willoughby, Ohio
#1
Premise: minor objectives controlled can be used to gain DRMs to modify reinforcement roll.

Rule as I am wording it now: :

4) For each of buildings 76H5 and 76M3 controlled by the partisan player at the end of each game turns 1-3, he receives one DRM point. Each DRM point is exchanged for an actual (-) DRMs on on the reinforcement tables: If the partisan player chooses to enter reinforcements on turn 3, he gets 3 rolls on each table , or 4 rolls if entry is on Turn 4. All DRMs must be allocated prior to any roll.
Table
roll Unit (s)
< 0 3-3-7, 8-0
1 3-3-7, 1-4-9
2 3-3-7
3 2 x 1-2-7 (HS)
4 1-4-9, DC
5 1-2-7 (HS)
6 Nothing.

Reinforcements entering on turn 3 must enter along the north edge, If entered on turn 4 they can enter along the north, east , or west edges.
 

Carln0130

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,459
Likes
672
Points
113
Location
MA
#2
Premise: minor objectives controlled can be used to gain DRMs to modify reinforcement roll.

Rule as I am wording it now: :

4) For each of buildings 76H5 and 76M3 controlled by the partisan player at the end of each game turns 1-3, he receives one DRM point. Each DRM point is exchanged for an actual (-) DRMs on on the reinforcement tables: If the partisan player chooses to enter reinforcements on turn 3, he gets 3 rolls on each table , or 4 rolls if entry is on Turn 4. All DRMs must be allocated prior to any roll.
Table
roll Unit (s)
< 0 3-3-7, 8-0
1 3-3-7, 1-4-9
2 3-3-7
3 2 x 1-2-7 (HS)
4 1-4-9, DC
5 1-2-7 (HS)
6 Nothing.

Reinforcements entering on turn 3 must enter along the north edge, If entered on turn 4 they can enter along the north, east , or west edges.
I am guessing these are dr's, right Pete? Ok, with that in mind, how about this?

4) The Partisan player receives a DRM point each, at the end of each gameturn, from turns 1-3, for control of each of buildings 76H5 and 76M3. Each DRM point affords the Partisan player actual (-) DRMs on the reinforcement tables. If the Partisan player chooses to enter reinforcements on turn 3, he gets 3 dr on each table , 4 dr if entry is on Turn 4. All DRMs must be allocated prior to any roll.
Table
roll Unit (s)
< 0 3-3-7, 8-0
1 3-3-7, 1-4-9
2 3-3-7
3 2 x 1-2-7 (HS)
4 1-4-9, DC
5 1-2-7 (HS)
6 Nothing.

Nothing earth shaking there, but is that slightly cleaner? Not sure if you need Partisan capitalized, but it is worth a look. Five Thirty here, so I'm not looking :).
 
Last edited:

Mister T

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
3,441
Likes
642
Points
113
Location
Bruxelles
#3
Here is a quick contribution, capitalising on the first two ones.

"4) For each of buildings 76H5 and 76M3 controlled by the partisan player at the end of each game turns 1-3, he receives one drm point. Drm points awarded are exchanged for actual negative drms when rolling for reinforcements.
If the Partisan player chooses to enter reinforcements on Turn 3, he rolls 3 dr on each table , 4 dr if entry is on Turn 4. Splitting drms is allowed, but all must be predesignated at the beginning of the entry turn."

Overall I like the idea. Calibration may require thorough analysis (ex. I may prefer a '4' roll to a '3' one but this requires situational analysis).
 

ecz

Partisan Captain
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
4,139
Likes
339
Points
83
Location
Italy
#4
In my opinion a 337 + hero is better than a 337 + 8-0. Thus I think these lines should be inverted.
That said I do not understand why the control of certain buildings could favor the arrival and the quality of the reinforcements
 

jrv

Vare, legiones redde!
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
17,706
Likes
2,922
Points
163
Location
Teutoburger Wald
#5
In my opinion a 337 + hero is better than a 337 + 8-0. Thus I think these lines should be inverted.
That said I do not understand why the control of certain buildings could favor the arrival and the quality of the reinforcements
Game mechanism to encourage an aggressive attack and defense?

JR
 

wrongway149

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
10,921
Likes
756
Points
113
Location
Willoughby, Ohio
#7
In my opinion a 337 + hero is better than a 337 + 8-0. Thus I think these lines should be inverted.
That said I do not understand why the control of certain buildings could favor the arrival and the quality of the reinforcements
First crack at it-- might make the choice an option (for example, what if the player rolls the same number each time? 3 x 3-3-7, and 3 x 8-0 would be a bit awkward.)
 

ecz

Partisan Captain
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
4,139
Likes
339
Points
83
Location
Italy
#8
Game mechanism to encourage an aggressive attack and defense?

JR
I understand, but I think each SSR should have an inherent link with reality. All cause -effect mechanisms cannot have only a "in game" reason.

For example:
- the control of a given building could improve-decrease the SAN assuming it is very high and dominates the battlefield;
- The control of a key crossroad near the board edge could allow the reinforcements to enter one turn in advance or from the closer board edge
- Who loses the last leader could see his ELR dropped by two;
- when the attacker controls the highest hill (or the Factory) he could get an ELR bonus
- The Panther at range < 3 hexes and CE could make the Panzergrenadiers with a los to the tank Fanatic

ecc ecc
I do not see why the mere control of a building could "produce" more partisans. Unless it is a barrack and the partisans are exiting by the said buildings when they grab a rifle or a pistol! But it's only my opinion...
 

Mister T

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
3,441
Likes
642
Points
113
Location
Bruxelles
#9
Control of a symbolic building may motivate more partisans to join the fray (or become discouraged if the battle seems to be lost). It doesn't strike me as something particularly non-realistic.
 

Brian W

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,901
Likes
802
Points
113
Location
USA
#10
Actually, my worry would be that it unbalances the scenario by reinforcing success. Realistic? Sure. Balanced?
 

jrv

Vare, legiones redde!
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
17,706
Likes
2,922
Points
163
Location
Teutoburger Wald
#11
Actually, my worry would be that it unbalances the scenario by reinforcing success. Realistic? Sure. Balanced?
It could be balanced but poised on a knife edge (like Blazing Chariots). As soon as it starts tipping one way there's little chance of recovering. That's not exactly the same problem as being unbalanced.

JR
 

Mister T

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
3,441
Likes
642
Points
113
Location
Bruxelles
#12
It could be balanced but poised on a knife edge (like Blazing Chariots). As soon as it starts tipping one way there's little chance of recovering. That's not exactly the same problem as being unbalanced.
JR
That's what i called the calibration process, which can be difficult. A way to ensure increased consistency and playtest predictability would be to limit the range of outcomes.
for instance (as not knowing the specifics)
<1 337 8-0
1-2 337 DC
3-4 127 149
5-6 127x2
 

wrongway149

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
10,921
Likes
756
Points
113
Location
Willoughby, Ohio
#13
Here is a quick contribution, capitalising on the first two ones.

"4) For each of buildings 76H5 and 76M3 controlled by the partisan player at the end of each game turns 1-3, he receives one drm point. Drm points awarded are exchanged for actual negative drms when rolling for reinforcements.
If the Partisan player chooses to enter reinforcements on Turn 3, he rolls 3 dr on each table , 4 dr if entry is on Turn 4. Splitting drms is allowed, but all must be predesignated at the beginning of the entry turn."

Overall I like the idea. Calibration may require thorough analysis (ex. I may prefer a '4' roll to a '3' one but this requires situational analysis).
Thanks, guys-- I might switch it to " or choice of a higher-numbered result"

Good suggestions all. Now I just need to think it through on my next jog in the park.
 

Rock SgtDan

Active Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2012
Messages
2,474
Likes
94
Points
48
Location
State of Confusion
First name
Dan
#15
Too abstract. They must be waving a flag from the roof or shooting a flare... to influence slackers lurking just out of play.
IMO more believable if it "activates" units already on board -- people willing to begin hidden and shoot (if they pass a dr) from their safe location but not move closer to the objectives.