Lower Luck



  • I cannot be the only one to have cursed when some carefully planned went awry due to just one or two crucial rolls. Despite the Low Luck option, luck continues to exist. Many will want to have some element of luck but there may be a range of preferences as to how much.

    "Lower Luck" or "Low Luck with Carry" is one possible way to nudge luck down. The mechanism is that a failed roll carries some credit to the next roll and a passed roll carries some debit to the next roll. Eg I have units with total power summing to 19 (say a bomber, two tanks and six infantry in the basic game). So I get 3 autohits and a D6 roll seeking a "1" for a 4th hit. If I miss, then 1 bonus power is added to my next roll. If I hit, then I get that 4th hit, but -5 is deducted from my power in the next round, effectively "borrowing" from the next shot. This evens-up the luck over the battle rounds.

    Imagine the units in the example above are attacking a force of 5 infantry and 2 tanks (with defence 3), so 16 power, then with Low Luck the attacker will win with 5.1 surviving units on average. The distribution of 1000 outcomes is:
    Winners surviving...Count
    4 .............................246
    5 .............................442
    6 .............................250
    7 .............................62

    In contrast with Lower Luck, there are also 5.1 survivors on average but the distribution is:
    Winners surviving....Count
    4 .............................25
    5 .............................801
    6 .............................174
    7 .............................0

    Some may find the more predictable result to be attractive.

    What do you think?

    If anyone wants to see the code (only in VBA not triplea language) or the results analysis then let me know.


  • Admin

    Interesting idea.
    I'd be interested in the algorithm (Although I think I already have a decent idea based off your explanation). I'm not familiar with the actual implementation of low luck in the engine, so I can't judge if this would be easy to implement.



  • So you're saying that if you attack with 19 power and get 4 hits in low luck, next battle you have a -5 debit.

    Does this -5 debit mean that if you attack with 19 power you only get 2 auto hits and one roll at a 2? Or do you get 3 auto hits, no roll and -4 debit to carry through to the next roll. Or something else?



  • Main issue I have is that the order in which battles are fought can change the outcome of said battles.



  • nerdiest idea ever?



  • @RoiEX I think it would be very easy to implement. It’s just one extra line in the algorithm that determines the ‘carry’ and another line which applies the carry to the next roll.



  • @simon33 yes I meant per your first example. If you get 4 hits in the first round (ie you succeed on a 1/6 roll) then the 5 is deducted from the next roll. If you still have 19 power (for some reason you’ve taken no losses) then this reduces to 2 autohits and a 2/6 chance of a 3rd hit.

    At outset the 19 power ‘should’ produce about 3.2 hits per round. So having scored 4 hits in the first round, we want about 2.4 hits in the second round.



  • @erik542 sorry I don’t follow. My suggestion is only that the ‘carry’ applies through rounds of one battle. It’s not carried further from battle to battle. So some luck remains but I think it avoids your concern about the order of battles.



  • @Captain-Crunch is there some medal for that? In a forum about programming features for online dice-based fantasy wargaming, producing the nerdiest idea is probably an overly generous accolade.


  • Donators Moderators Admin

    @mattbarnes The platinum pocket protector.