Less than 1:2 now AL

After watching Odessa suffer hugely because of lucky 1:2 AP results when the odds were lower, I like the new addition turning them into an AL. Even though I'm the guy who rolls a 1 on 8:1, those attacks are infrequent enough that I'm ok with the table as is on the top end.

Well ... if defender get's the miracle (by design as you noted), why doesn't an attacker get the same chance for a miracle victory at low odds, too?

Because the attacker DOESN'T HAVE TO ATTACK. The Defender HAS TO defend. And it's not a "pure" loss for the Attack at silly odds. It's ONE step. There are no DE or BT results vs. the Attacker's forces. To my mind, the CRT very much discriminates IN FAVOR OF the attacker.

Well ... if defender get's the miracle (by design as you noted), why doesn't an attacker get the same chance for a miracle victory at low odds, too? Currently an attack at 1:5 is a pure loss. At 5:1, the defender can still hurt the attacker.

I guess I sort of do see they they should. Look back at history and I'm sure we can find an attack that was up against overwhelming odds, but still stung the superior defender. Just like the defender can.

That's the crux of my question. Why does the ETO CRT discriminate against the attacker below 1:2?

Why? Should they? How don't see how, at some point, that reciprocates.

LOL. No worries Alan. Let me try again.

The defender gets the miracle at 8:1 and lower odds.

But the Attacker doesn't get a miracle victory at 1:3 and lower.

Why not?

"No, the attacker gets a 'miracle" at 1;3 to 1:8, just like the Defender gets a chance."

Sorry, Doc. I don't mean to be obtuse, but I totally don't get what you're saying. Hopefully the sub-1:2 odds change is sufficient for you.

No, the attacker gets a 'miracle" at 1;3 to 1:8, just like the Defender gets a chance.

I'm confused. You mean the Defender NEVER 'lucks out' on some die rolls at every odds column? That's strange, because I see that a lot.

Looking that the 8:1 column, there is only one DL result. There should ALWAYS been on "miraculous" result available on the die. That is a design philosophy.

Let me play devil's advocate then ...

How come we don't see that same "miracle" at 1:3 and lower up to 1:8?

Looking that the 8:1 column, there is only one DL result. There should ALWAYS been on "miraculous" result available on the die. That is a design philosophy.

An AL is the loss of one step. You can always choose not to launch a iffy attack, Think Dieppe. Any attack can fail or maybe just cause one lost step so 8:1 works as an upper limit. The less than 1:2 yielding an AL rewards commitment by the defender. Stopping an attack once you find out you were too weak to attack might have been a logic misstep.

In '41, the Germans have the possibility of HQ Shifts (including Dbl Shifts), often three Shifts from CS, the ability of Panzers to "ooze" or move up to 6 hexes before combat, Overrun at times in either Movement Step, frequently control Retreats (due to high odds), get some BTs, then have Reg Moves, and then pin down much of the Russian units that are Leg. In other words, a lot of bad things can happen to the Russians in '41 before they can respond. This is enough potency, especially given the many turns. The overall play is more important than single aspects. We have arrived at something good in '41, and the period before mid '42 is much more interesting with the new weather. I fear a possible step backward in overall play by such a change, though I try to keep an open mind.

Logic is simple.

One goes from 1:2 where there can be NE/AP/DP result, to all out AL.

That's going from like ... 1:2 to 1:5 in one odds shift.

So 8:1, which is already overwhelming odds, should go to a BT, same logic as the low end. Realistically, if there are no motorized units, then it means nothing. But if there are motorized units, are you arguing that at 9-1 or higher, those motorized units are not going to be able to have a BT all the time???? I see it as doctrine. If you overwhelm an immobile enemy, your doctrine (Allied, Soviet, or German) is to keep advancing. It can also stop the speed bump of the militia, small units, etc. That is sleeze historical play, albeit a good game play. What is the goal?

But Alan sees where the trap is ... it is the DL result at 8-1, 9-1, 10-1 and 15-1. If you catch my meaning now.

brian

Yeah, I could buy an auto DE, but an auto BT? I'm less sanguine about that.

Maybe a 9:1 Column with no DLs on it...?

Overruns are now allowed in most Weather types (see Module .5.5), but know that EC and Mud now allow Overruns (a change after .5.5's release--sorry), but with a -1 modifier. As for your points Brian, I don't follow your logic. One might argue for an auto DE at 8:1, but a BT. Hmm... In the Summer of '42, I have a concern (but it seems to be just me) that something needs to be done about weak linebacker tandems of Tk Corps and such, but allowing their Overrun seems to undermine defensive principles, and create a whole different game I don't like. For now, in '41, things are working well with the latest rules--I know it's hard to keep pace.

Then 8-1 should be automatic BT. You can't discriminate here. The fact that 8-1 isn't total annihilation is disturbing and can be gamed as well.

I'm glad TMS required this change. Another small step toward perfection. We'll never get there, of course, but one step in any case.