11 replies to this topic

[Trotsky]

I was in a discussion the other day with a real treadhead about MP. I had played a couple of games with him and although he enjoyed the game he could not get his head around the to Kill Table results. I explained to him the design of the game is to allow fast paced and large games to be completed in a reasonable time and so the Kill ratio is higher than historically accurate. He agreed this was necessary in order to command a couple of companies over an evenings play.This has led me thinking what would a ‘historical’ Kill table look like?

[Bob Benge]

Look at Gregory's MMG Kill Table, it is at his design closer to historcal.

[Trotsky]

Thanks Bob.Hi Gregory, Is the one on the website the one you are still using? How did you adjust it - trial and error or from some formula?Trotsky

[gregoryk]

Trotsky,You bring up an issue which involves both rules mechanics and design philosophy. First, the rules.Using one value for the varying armor of each aspect means that the Kill Table results determine the rounds effectiveness and location. For example, if a robust tank like the Tiger I takes a hit in the front from a weaker AT gun that knocks it out, it is assumed it caused enough damage, crew casualties, or disruption to the vehicle to render it hors de combat. Since the armor value for vehicles for each aspect is the best possible armor, whether it is turret or hull, the randomness of the Kill Table indicates where it hit and how effective it was. Basically, a '0' on the Kill Table indicates a gun round that can penetrate the thickest or best armor of the tank's target aspect, no matter what or where it is. Since the point at which a round has just become capable of penetrating a given armor thickness usually was effective 40-50% of the time, a 1-10 chance on the ‘0’ line is not unwarranted.The effectiveness of armor is based on actual tank data, with modifiers for slope. Bob Benge, aka "Britannica Bob," has devised an Excel table that gives the values for armor thickness modified by slope. The model does not give as great a armor slope benefit as ballistics data indicates for slopes >40 degrees, but this fits in with design philosophy, below. Fyi, if you are interested, I could forward the Excel file to you so you can see the method behind all this. It is not a secret.Design philosophy for Mein Panzer assumes that gamers want resolution of the battle, so the charts are consciously skewed towards more and greater damage, not less. Damage compression occurs in many games, so much so in some that it is possible to equal the number of tanks knocked out during the multi-day battles of Unternehmen Zitadelle in one hour! MP is not in any way that bad, but the system does privilege shooting and action. I can rehearse the reasons why this occurs, but I may just take up the topic in the MMG thread. Suffice to say that this is the decision of the designer, and it will continue.A final point: there is a very good game on the market that suffers in some quarters from a reputation that “nothing ever dies.” In fact, the designers may have the casualty rates exactly right, but I know several experienced wargamers who maintain it is the “worst system ever made!” Chacun à son goût!Cheers,Gregory

[gregoryk]

Trotsky wrote:

Thanks Bob.Hi Gregory, Is the one on the website the one you are still using? How did you adjust it - trial and error or from some formula?Trotsky

Yes, the one on the website is still in use. It is based on trial and error, which somehow always sounds like it is more subjective than it is. A formula may have been used originally — we just adjusted the table to bring it more into line with historical casualty rates. We looked at tank battles such as Kursk and in North Africa to see how quickly tank casualties piled up, and found that even with our less lethal table, we may still be above the casualty curve. The difficulty is that tanks would often get shot up quickly, but the overall survivability on the actual battlefield was greater than typically portrayed in RAW MP. Note that the Kill Table changes are in concert with a slightly increased speed for vehicles; an increased benefit for >40∘armor slope; and, a range decrease (6" RAW = 5" MMG). Taken together these give a greater maneuver aspect to the game, while still being a pretty violent affair.Cheers,Gregory

[Joe LePard]

Thanks for the info on game design. It might be a good idea to post it with the rules so that people can understand the design.One weekend we played another rule set and MP for a comparison to see how the other guys in my group liked each set. The first rules took a long time and the vehicles stayed healthy for a long time. The second time that we played it with MP the game went so much faster. The other thing was that the vehicles were getting blown up all over the table. We wondered about that.Our group has decided to play MP whenever we play microarmor. Makes for a great game.Joe

[gregoryk]

cabin4clw wrote:

...The second time that we played it with MP the game went so much faster. The other thing was that the vehicles were getting blown up all over the table. We wondered about that.

Can you be more specific — what exactly did you wonder about? Was it the kill rate, the distance at which hits occurred, neither, or both?Cheers,Gregory

[Joe LePard]

The big thing that we saw was that with the other rules, the tanks took a lot longer to kill. We would go a turn or 2 with maybe one kill. It got to be boring. Roll dice, hit, no effect.With MP it really seems to be easier to kill on the kill chart. I believe that with MP it's easier to kill. At least that's what we came up with when looking at the chart. I'm not denigrating MP at all. We like it. It's just getting used to the higher casualty rate. It makes for a more enjoyable game. You can actually see kills etc. on the table. You don't end up getting bored because nothing is going on.I hope that this helps.Joe

[ferguson glenn]

It would also depend on the time period and combatants that you are talking about too. As a Vet of Desert Storm I would say fron the U.S. point of veiw there should be nearly no kills of freindly forces and about 90% or better kill ratio of Iraqi forces. If you model your armor tables to be as accurate as possible and tweak the gun penetration power by 10% to 20% higher for all weapons plus up the chance to hit you get a more lethal system. I have found when playing MP that the game moves about the same speed because players are now looking for the best covered routes to the objective, moving evasively,or from hull down to hull down.

[Klebert Hall]

gregoryk wrote:

Yes, the one on the website is still in use. Cheers,Gregory

Where can I find this alternate Kill table? It sounds like it might be interesting to compare, but I haven't been able to find it on the site.Thanks, -Kle.

[Bob Benge]

Hey Kle.,Here is the location of the MMG Kill table modifications. It is an alternate Kill Table rules section that has Gregory's MMG Kill table within it.Main Repository Page -> Registered Users Private Access Libraries -> Mein Panzer Core Rules -> Older Files (Original Edition) -> MMG UploadsFiles are: MMG MP Chapter 08 Kill Table p.1 MMG MP Chapter 08 Kill Table p.2-4Apparently the MMG Reference Card has disappeared again and I will attempt to restore it as soon as I can. I'll post here when I have finished successfully.The path will be the same and the file name will be: MMG MP Reference Card v.4.0

[Klebert Hall]

Thanks for the pointer. For some reason, it didn't occur to me to look in 'old files', though it's obvious in retrospect.-Kle.