UshCha | 01 Nov 2018 1:21 p.m. PST |
The Goldilocks zone to me is for 1:1 figure to man games, where the ground scale is in the range of 5 to 8 times the figure scale. Now at this scale other than in Urban areas it is usually possible to represent all the linear features you would see no the map at approximately the correct spacing, a key issue if you are trying to simulate real terrain. Now personally I dislike intensely the so called exponential ranging of weapons in so-called simulations, its fine if you call it a game, but the errors that it introduces to be honest make it an insult to folk trying to do plausible simulations when they call it a simulation. However to some extent I have had to adopt some minimal range manipulation. A simple example is an early WW2 Panzerfaust hand held anti-tank weapon. This has an effective range of 30m. Now in the real world this is sufficient to fire across a narrow 4 lane road with some margin for the shooter to be away from the road in cover. Within the Goldilocks zone however the roads will be 30 to 500m or so wide even for simple 2 lane road in the ground scale. Thus the weapon cannot cover the width of the road and it degrades the tactical use of the weapon to almost useless. Now the problem diminishes as the range of the weapon increases. Our solution is to add approximately 50m (typical 2 lane wide road at ground scale) to the range of the weapon for weapons with effective ranges of a few meters to 250m. Have you had this problem and what was your solution? |
Zephyr1 | 01 Nov 2018 2:34 p.m. PST |
From my 28mm "game engine" rules (I've eliminated most range stats from weapons): Basic 4+ to Hit on a D10 with a steadily worsening Shooting Modifier as the Range increases (usually +1 per additional 12" over 12".) Pistols have a different range chart (and also worsening SM's as range increases, +1 per 6" over 6"), so I'd put your Panzerfaust in that category. |
McLaddie | 01 Nov 2018 6:49 p.m. PST |
Scale and purpose of the rules defines the 'goldilocks Zone' for me. |
MajorB | 02 Nov 2018 12:46 p.m. PST |
Your problem is that the weapon ranges are in relation to the ground scale (5 to 8 times the figure scale as you suggest) but the modelled road is scaled to the figure scale. |
UshCha | 03 Nov 2018 2:16 a.m. PST |
MajorB. that is correct and inevitable. This is the case even for real maps at most scales. |
MajorB | 03 Nov 2018 6:13 a.m. PST |
This is the case even for real maps at most scales. ??? How are real maps distorted? |
UshCha | 03 Nov 2018 12:32 p.m. PST |
The roads as marked are too wide (they have to be to be seen. |
MajorB | 03 Nov 2018 3:05 p.m. PST |
The roads as marked are too wide (they have to be to be seen. True. But that doesn't affect the use of a real map. Whereas roads that are too wide for the ground scale on a wargames table do affect the game as you have shown. |
Levi the Ox | 04 Nov 2018 6:36 p.m. PST |
I'm not sure what you mean by the "Goldilocks Zone", beyond your own preferred scale? This distortion shows up pretty much everywhere to some extent. In any period after the invention of the breech-loading rifle and smokeless powder, most ranged attacks would effectively be line-of-sight in any game that even approaches 1:1 troop representation. If you haven't yet tried a system where that is the case; such as Crossfire, Force on Force, or 5 Core; I'd highly recommend doing so. The important thing is to use plenty of terrain; hedges, fences, tall grass, even undulations in the ground that can allow troops to maneuver unseen. I do most of my gaming at a 1:1 figure:combatant ratio, mostly with either very small miniatures (6mm for ground and 1:6000 for naval) or in pre-gunpowder eras. This means my ground scale can effectively match my figure scale. I've seen plenty of systems that use arbitrary range bands or such; generally as long as weapons can fire farther than the largest building terrain you'd use in a game they do all right. I agree that having weapons that cannot fire across a road is problematic, but it may be that the game is trying to represent too much area for a 1:1 figure ratio, and simply "zooming in" would be sufficient. |
UshCha | 05 Nov 2018 3:28 a.m. PST |
Levi the Ox, The advantage with smaller scale like 10mm and bigger ground scales is that it generates "secnarios" which if written for a "Zoomeed in" stand alone game would either seem implusible or have too complex a set of boundary conditions to make it playable. However such "scenarios" really just a snapshot of a bigger game, become by far some of the most facinating and plausible games. Hence having to tweak some weapon ranges seems a small price to pay but if anybody had a better way that would be good. |