Italian Wars Campaign Gameplay

[TheGrayMouser]

Challenge up for LDFLM
password: Turin
medium armies, open battle, pot luck terrain

[lascar]

I've been think about Fleet combat and the best that you can do is to make the enemy Fleet retreat. It is only destroyed in the unlikely event that there is no legal area to retreat to. The combat is resolved by both players rolling a die, with the higher score winning. You add +1 to your score for every Fleet in your Force that you outnumber the Fleets in the enemy Force.

There won't be any Battles of Lepanto under that scheme so I thought of a way to add a chance of a decisive victory. The die roll works just as before, but if the winner scores twice as much as the loser then the Fleet of the loser is destroyed instead of retreating. Supporting units are not destroyed. For example a 4 to 3 is a retreat, but 4 to 2 removes the Fleet instead.

What do you think?

I think that sounds like a good idea, more realistic. Perhaps nuance it a bit: 3 times the loser's fleet would be destroyed; 2 times would severely damage the loser's fleet and the fleet would have to spend a campaign season in a port for repairs and less than 2 times the fleet would retreat as normal, ready for action the next campaign turn. I think there should be higher a loss ratio to actually destroy a fleet.

What do you think?

[awesum4]

I support what Lascar is saying mostly. I would prefer something less dramatic than 2 to 1 for total destruction. Your fleet destroyed on 3 to 1 would be ok.

As fleets can be disbanded and rebuilt every spring, being unable to move other than to a friendly port in the following season on a 2 to 1 would be fair. So they can stay where they retreated to.

[awesum4]

William,

sorry your maths is slightly wrong with regards to rates of usury. Milan borrowed 5 Ducats for 1 year, interest at 20% is 1 so he has to repay 6 next summer not 7.

[w_michael]

William,

sorry your maths is slightly wrong with regards to rates of usury. Milan borrowed 5 Ducats for 1 year, interest at 20% is 1 so he has to repay 6 next summer not 7.

No, I think that it is OK. I am showing the cash inflow (loan) of 5d. When the money is paid back I will show the cash outflow of 6d (5d x 1.2). I assume that you are talking about the spreadsheet.

[w_michael]

I support what Lascar is saying mostly. I would prefer something less dramatic than 2 to 1 for total destruction. Your fleet destroyed on 3 to 1 would be ok.

As fleets can be disbanded and rebuilt every spring, being unable to move other than to a friendly port in the following season on a 2 to 1 would be fair. So they can stay where they retreated to.

If a Force of 2 Fleets rolls a 1 (score 2 = 1 + 1), a Force of 1 Fleet would have to roll a 6 for a decisive victory at 3:1, or a 4,5,6 at 2:1.

Using the 3:1 ratio for a 2 to 1 engagement, there is only a 1 in 36 chance of the smaller fleet rolling a decisive victory, and no chance at all in a 3 to 1 engagement. That seems too difficult to achieve and hardly worth bothering with.

Using the 2:1 ratio for a 2 to 1 engagement, there is a 4 in 36 chance of the smaller fleet rolling a decisive victory, and a 1 in 36 no chance in a 3 to 1 engagement. Those odds seem more "realistic" to me.

[awesum4]

William,

as the only real European naval power I will accept the 2;1 ratio willingly. If I get 2 fleets to 1 he will kill me 1/9 but I will kill him 1/3....I'll take those odds every time.

[w_michael]

I crunched the numbers for a 2:1 and 3:1 elimination threshold and here are the odds (assuming I have it right):

Fleet Combat Odds

FleetOdds.jpg (93.39 KiB) Viewed 2756 times

Now that I see the overview, I am persuaded that 3:1 would be better.

[GDod]

His Imperial Majesty and Bard.jpg (2.69 KiB) Viewed 2755 times

William, can we use any list as you have noted, or do we have to wait 44 years [for example] to use the late Spanish Imperialist list...in which case it is very unlikely to ever have the choice!

[w_michael]

His Imperial Majesty and Bard.jpg

William, can we use any list as you have noted, or do we have to wait 44 years [for example] to use the late Spanish Imperialist list...in which case it is very unlikely to ever have the choice!

Choose the list appropriate for the campaign year.

[w_michael]

Perhaps we can do something similar to the suggested Fleet combat change (die roll battle result) with Pike & Shot Campaigns battles where a 3 to 1 victory in Combat Losses percentages eliminates the losing army? For example 40% to 15% would result in a retreat, but 40% to 13% would result in elimination. It would be nice if gamed battles were more than just win/lose. What do you think?

[lascar]

Perhaps we can do something similar to the suggested Fleet combat change with Pike & Shot Campaigns battles where a 3 to 1 victory in Combat Losses percentages eliminates the losing army? For example 40% to 15% would result in a retreat, but 40% to 13% would result in elimination. It would be nice if gamed battles were more than just win/lose. What do you think?

I think anything that adds more nuance to the battles would be a good idea and would give a more "realistic" feel to the outcome. No need to keep to a simple binary win/lose (the entire army) result. What the actual numbers should be are up for discussion, but the basic idea is sound.

[awesum4]

I have a feeling that with famine, plague, bribery, being besieged, owing money to the mafia, being forced into situations where you can't retreat, for most of us the problem is getting and keeping armies going, rather than there being so many armies around that we need to find ways to eliminate more of them. Lets try playing a year or two with the current rules.

[ahuyton]

Thanks for the first round. So that I am not late again, hopefully, what is the deadline for the next set of orders? Maybe you posted it already and I missed it, sorry if that is so.

Alan

[w_michael]

I have a feeling that with famine, plague, bribery, being besieged, owing money to the mafia, being forced into situations where you can't retreat, for most of us the problem is getting and keeping armies going, rather than there being so many armies around that we need to find ways to eliminate more of them. Lets try playing a year or two with the current rules.

I think that is a good suggestion. It may turn out in practice that building in the possibility of elimination is not required.

[w_michael]

Thanks for the first round. So that I am not late again, hopefully, what is the deadline for the next set of orders? Maybe you posted it already and I missed it, sorry if that is so.

Alan

There is one battle to be resolved, and they have until Feb. 6th to do so. I will then close of this turn, and upload the start of Summer 1499 campaign map. Feel free to conduct diplomacy while we are waiting.

[lascar]

I have a feeling that with famine, plague, bribery, being besieged, owing money to the mafia, being forced into situations where you can't retreat, for most of us the problem is getting and keeping armies going, rather than there being so many armies around that we need to find ways to eliminate more of them. Lets try playing a year or two with the current rules.

I think that is a good suggestion. It may turn out in practice that building in the possibility of elimination is not required.

Does this apply to fleets too or only the armies?

[w_michael]

I have a feeling that with famine, plague, bribery, being besieged, owing money to the mafia, being forced into situations where you can't retreat, for most of us the problem is getting and keeping armies going, rather than there being so many armies around that we need to find ways to eliminate more of them. Lets try playing a year or two with the current rules.

I think that is a good suggestion. It may turn out in practice that building in the possibility of elimination is not required.

Does this apply to fleets too or only the armies?

I think both for now. I've proposed two methods to introduce a chance that a given battle can be decisive with the elimination of one of the two units, so we have that in our back pocket if we find units are just being pushed around and rarely lost.

[Chromey]

so.. who won the first battle of the campaign?

[w_michael]

so.. who won the first battle of the campaign?

We will all know when they post the results. It is still being played.