1D10 vs 2D10

[nilssone85]

Hi!
We are just about to start over for e new game and is looking through the optional rules.
I the past I have always played with the 1D10 combat tables but many people seems to prefer the 2D10. What is the pros and cons between the two options? What optional rules should be activated to make sure the two options work the best?

As a start I guess the statistics will limit the extreme results with the 2d10 table.

[Jagdtiger14]

There has been discussion about this, although I don't think a thread dedicated to it.

Personally I am surprised 1D10 is even in MWiF. Why some play with it I don't really understand. 2D10 is the gold standard...as that is what the vast majority play. I have been to three cons, and do not recall any table playing 1d10 (not saying its never happened).

Get used to playing the 2d10 if you want to find more/better opponents.

[Courtenay]

See this thread:
tm.asp?m=3415372&mpage=1&key=1d10�

And this one:

tm.asp?m=3509358&mpage=1&key=1d10&#3509361

[paulderynck]

1D10 with blitz mods is not all that different than 2D10 and some people actually prefer it because they dislike losing a combat on a 1 or 2 percent shot.

[Jagdtiger14]

I cant believe a player would be that risk averse to be worried about a 1-2% chance. They probably don't like playing the Axis then either.

[nilssone85]

Well, saying that because everybody else is using something is really not a god argument, is it? See history of earth being flat for instance

[nilssone85]

Thank you!

[paulderynck]

You don't avoid making the attack. It's probably the same attack in 1D10 you'd make with a 10% chance of failure. It's just a lot more irritating when it fails on a freaky die roll.

[Jagdtiger14]

In this case Nilssone, if you want to play with the big boys, you better learn and adapt to the game they play. Its kinda like college football (1d10) vs Pro football (2d10). Also, say I suddenly decided that I wanted to play with 1d10 with my face to face group...they would look at me with confused looks on their face, then laugh with or at me (depending on if they thought I was joking), and if they thought I was serious laugh some more and simply state: NO!

When our group began to play WiF, I recall initial discussions concerning how we wanted to play (not just xd10)...the consensus was that since some of us had aspirations to play not only at cons, but also a rival group in south Florida, that we should play the game mainstream and not get caught up in crazy bs. So that was our "because everybody else is using/flat Earth/climate change" moment. I'm glad we did it since several of us went on to play some awesome games both in Michigan as well as Germany, and we kicked the you know what out of our rival group.

To each his own, but if you want to expand your multi-player possibilities...go with 2d10.

[AlbertN]

I'd not play with the D10. I admit I've not tried it - but the 2D10 provides better average results in general. Disastrous attacks which were highly successful on the "paper" of a plan can happen, so a desperate attack can go astonishingly good - but these are minor percentances.

The fact you average 2 dices instead of just rolling one tends to make combat results more predictable - but never certain unless it's an auto attack.

Also the added variables - in both results and modifiers - suits my tastes and adds a layer of complexity and planning from player side to not understimate. Well - complexity - in planning still.

The fact you can get extra losses on terrain, to disorganize half of your troops, that your HQ support is -reliable- on demand and not a random die roll which could or could not work ... just makes the 2D10 superior.
I am quite curious actually to even see the 3D10 - not that it will be coded in MWiF but I'd still like to see it.

[brian brian]

1d10 is like the lunch menu. 2d10 is like the full dinner buffet.

Sorry, no aphorism for the 3d10, barely glanced at it then my copy of the Annual went gone away again. World in Flames Annuals are worth every penny however, I should just buy another one.

[Orm]

After reading these posts I do recall one of the reasons why I do not go to cons.

[Jagdtiger14]

Orm, you have more than one reason to not go to cons?

FYI: Euro WiFcon is an awesome event. Well put together, the location is excellent. Lots of interesting people to meet...we made friends with three guys from Arhus Denmark (our opponents). Harry Rowland (creator of WiF) has been known to make his appearance there as well.

The only problem we had was that we brought our game from the US, and used national markers to indicate conquered minors (swastika symbol for the Germans). One day we went to lunch with our Danish bros, returned to find our German swastika markers all had damage markers on top of them. The organizer ran over to our table with a red face and told us please don't use those markers, they are illegal and the con could lose the location! Wow![X(] The other thing is, if a game has to be adjudicated, it will go as a draw.

I would recommend Warspite not go however, there is a group photo on the last day[;)]

[Orm]

The main concern is actually time and the distance.

I've been there once and I would really like to go again.

[Jagdtiger14]

Distance? Its in your back yard!

http://eurowif.de/

[Orm]

Unfortunately, a 800 miles, one way drive, is a bit to far even if it is in my back yard. [:)]

[Jagdtiger14]

I see it begins tomorrow!

Watch for Rudiger on table two...he's really good! One of my buddies from Denmark (Carsten) is on table 3. Two guys from Sweden as well.

[TeaLeaf]

ORIGINAL: nilssone85

Hi!
We are just about to start over for e new game and is looking through the optional rules.
I the past I have always played with the 1D10 combat tables but many people seems to prefer the 2D10. What is the pros and cons between the two options? What optional rules should be activated to make sure the two options work the best?

As a start I guess the statistics will limit the extreme results with the 2d10 table.

From my personal experience: you are right.
2D10 is much more predictable (Bell Curve). When playing opponents who know how to play, I find the 2D10 too easy to 'abuse'.
With maximum mofiers for your combat rolls, 2:1 attacks have a solid chance on a good result with the 2D10 (i.e. not getting too much units disorganised).
With the 1D10 however, it is much much harder to launch a 2:1 attack that is favourable.

It's a matter of style. IMHO, the game is best learnt 1D10, to play with the 2D10 later.
But in general I found that you will most likely loose the game if you play 2D10-style with the 1D10 CRT and vice-versa (unless you are extremely lucky).
1D10 style is more static because it is much easier to defend (just reduce the odds levels to 2:1). 2D10 style is much more dynamic because it is much easier to attack with good results.

I suspect that because of this, France and Russia are having a harder time in a 2D10 game, since early in the war (when they are attacked), the allies have few units, are on the defense, and the 2D10 favours the attacker (early game this is the axis obviously).

[AlbertN]

Technically WW2 is dynamic and not static. It should be attack and counterattack (albeit hard to mirror on a Corp / Army level and one could say is wrapped in the combat itself).

It favors attacks the 2d10 - I can agree to that. Gibraltar would be impossible or almost to seize with the 1d10 for example, because you'd struggle to get at the 2:1 ratio in most cases for instance.
So many landings against garrisoned islands would be pratically a nightmare.

If that makes the difference between dynamic game, and static WW1 alike game, by all means I'd pick the dynamic.

[TeaLeaf]

I agree with you Cohen -2D10 represents WW2 warfare best, for its dynamic nature.
In general with 2D10, defending becomes much less a priority (or an option, for that matter). Counterattacking is the key to success there.

I stil doubt where my preference would be... 1D10 and 2D10 giving quite different playstyles. 2D10 seems better for WW2 but I think also gives an unreasonable better shot at hexes like Gibraltar. With 2D10, best I can get to is 64% chance of taking that Rock in 1 roll, 1D10 50% chance of taking it in 1 roll. But that is only if all conditions are favourable to Germany and everything works out for them. Which are a lot of variables and uncertainties... IF, for example, the optional Defensive Shore Bombardment is 'on', and the CW can keep a large BB fleet around, then... Or if Germany fails to disrupt all defenders, etc. etc.

I learnt to play the game a few decades ago, when only 1D10 was available and I learnt to mount quite effective defenses with the soviets during Barbarossa (simply reduce the odds levels to 2:1). After starting to play 2D10, I learnt that Soviet defenses during Barbarossa mean next to nothing (even if I can reduce odds levels along the entire front line to 2:1), but armoured counterattacking results in a lot more German losses, as opposed to only Soviet ones.