Zero Luck Option
Hi all, I'm opening this topic to suggest a not so complicated way to improve the LL system, in order to cancel the random factor in revised games.
First of all, imagine both players start the game with 2 sets of 6 dices, a white set for land battles and a blue set for air and naval battles. This means there will be 24 dice in game, 12 (6 white and 6 blue) for each player. Now imagine each of these dice have the same value on ALL of their 6 faces. Player A will have a white dice with the value "1" on all of its faces, a white dice with "2" on all of its faces, one with "3" on all its faces and so on. Same for blue dice. So, they are not really dice anymore, they are like cards, with a fix value. But lets keep the dice graphic, for both nostalgic and practical reasons.
Now, all throughout the game no dice will ever be rolled, they will be owned by players like expendable resources, just like cards. At the beginning of a fight, Player A is attacking with 2 inf, 1 art and 1 tank. By LL rules he will have strenght 13, which means he will get 2 hits and he will be forced to play a dice (or card) from his hand. Since this is a land battle he needs to play a white dice. Assuming he still has all of his 6 white dice in his hand he can pick any of them and play it. Anyway, the only dice that will produce an extra hit is the "1", since he has strenght 13. If he choose to play it he discards it, and his "1" will not be available to him anymore, not untill, in 5 subsequent round of battle, he will play the remaining 5 white dice in his hand. When he does, he will immediately get back all of his 6 white dice, ready for another cycle. After seeing the dice (or card) he has played, Player B, who defends with 1 inf and 2 tanks (strenght 8), get the chance (and the obligation) to play one of his own white dice, producing an extra hit in case he chose to play a "2" or a "1", thus discarding it. If player B was defending only with 2 tanks (strenght 6) instead of 2 tanks and 1 inf, he will not be entitled to play a dice, since he gets 1 hit and no remaining strenght to generate a dice rolling, or, in this case, a dice picking.
Since extra hits in naval battles imply greater IPC losses for opponents, they require a second set of dice, thus the need to have a blue set next to the white one. Blue dice needs also to be played when rolling for aa guns, since casualties are expensive just like in the case of naval battles.
Skilled players will have the chance to plan dice expenses just like they plan units expenses and sacrifice, not to mention attacks coordination. Both players will have this same set of options, thus making it a game of pure skill, where no luck is involved, and only pianifications will matter. No more dice whining, just skill and balanced games between similarly experienced players. I am sure this would be greatly appreciated by the most navigated players.
Besides, by transforming dice in a fixed resource, just like IPC are, it would also disappear the need for an external dice server, which is why i think the encoding of this system shouldn't be too complicated. I hope to hear some feedback on this, about the validity of the proposed Zero Luck System and the manageability of the relative encoding.
Thank you all, NOD.
As most luck comes from one player hitting with a low value and/or his opponent not hitting with a high value, the solution could be that only one dice is rolled for both players. You could even go so far bombard roll = AA roll...
@wirkey The same dice rolled for both players would be very distortive of game's dynamics; for example, 2 infantry attacking 1 infantry would become 100% win, thus everyone will preferably send 2 infantry instead of 1 infantry and 1 artillery or 1 infantry and 1 armour; something virtually nobody currently does. Of course, this is not a bad idea, but actually a good one; just it would make for a significantly different game, beside reducing luck.
NoOneDares last edited by NoOneDares
The point is not to reduce luck. The point is to totally cancel luck influence. If you have proposals to reduce luck you are posting in the wrong thread. This is about ZERO luck. One dice for both players is not ZL. For example I may need a 4 to hit and my opponent may need a 3 to hit, so a roll of 4 would mean I hit and he miss. This would be considered a lucky roll, thus not ZL.
I'm planning on playing Axis and Allies revised, the boardgame, later this week. There are a few "Zero Luck" or "No Luck" ideas out there, I'll try to get the group to try some of them.
I see a couple challenges with this suggestion though. The first is play by email, it adds a ton of steps. Even for live lobby games if the defender is taking 5 seconds to choose, its going to add length to games.
Another challenge I see, it creates too many options and I think it would only work if playing with timers in effect. If both players have 4 of the dice/cards in their "hands" and you expect to fight 6 battles this turn, there are hundreds of different paths that the turn could take. The players who like to min-max as they play will want to take time to think about all their options, but there are so many available I don't think they really can.
Separating naval and land dice is a great idea though. If some kind of lower/ lowest luck does happen, I think the option to create different pools of dice important.
I agree with everything you said. Not meant for pbem. Many options will delay game, but some players will be willing to accept it, in order to avoid getting diced, and yes, I also agree it would work best with a timer. But despite all of this, I think it would work. A Zero Luck system would slow the game anyway. By definition, there would be more to calculate. I dont think thats a problem for zero luck players.
@noonedares no can already do what you suggested using edit mode. You just have to keep track of the dice/cards used on your own.
I had a zero luck idea too. Mine however involved multi hit point units in addition to your similar concepts. The idea I had was leaning toward a totally new game with new units rules etc.. not just an alternative to "Low Luck".
A new game is acceptable though, as long as it is still remains fun. A hybrid of TripleA and chess. That has zero luck would be awesome.
@wirkey It would be a burocratic nightmare to use edit for this system.