Modified AT values. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Conflict of Heroes Series


major.pain -> Modified AT values. (5/25/2012 10:49:36 PM)

I have been playing around on the Vassal module for COH as i dont have the board game version only this PC release and wanted to try out how adding a +1 modifier to my AT roles within three hexes of the target would work out, I dont think that it unbalanced things but i only played for an hour or so and was wondering if anyone with more experience has tried anything along those lines, mainly to give you another option attacking with armor other than the bonus for being adjacent.

JFalk68 -> RE: Modified AT values. (5/26/2012 2:50:49 AM)

I guess you could make any house rules you like as long as everyone playing is in agreement.

I think if you implemented such a rule, you might make the Soviets overpowered and you would negate the maneuver aspect of the game because everyone would be trying to just head straight on and throw the dice at ranges of 3. I suppose this rule is to try to help German armor cope with Soviet armor?  Just some initial thoughts, I haven't played  a sesssion like that so I am only guessing myself.

major.pain -> RE: Modified AT values. (5/26/2012 9:59:30 AM)

Was just playng around with the idea that it would give you a reason to think about closing the distance to your target to get a little extra punch. Thats my only real grip with the rules of play is the way armor/AT guns hit with the same force at two hex as they do at seven or eight hex, the only bonus is for being adjacent or in a group. I think it would increase your options and encourage manouvre and positioning, you would be more inclined to try to get into a safe position that would put you within three hex of the target for the extra +1 but then again you would be so close to getting +3 for being adjacent would you charge on in for the greater +3 risk reward?

JFalk68 -> RE: Modified AT values. (5/26/2012 8:26:32 PM)

MRJ, I really don't like the idea for several reasons.  The #1 reason is because I think your messing with a formula that has won numerous awards on design, to me it's like putting ketchup on a dry aged porterhouse.  There are many nuances to the game and ways to add Fire Power (FP) to your die rolls if make the effort to do so.

Here are ways to add FP to your die rolls
-Higher Elevation Bonus +1 FP to you and -1 DM to the enemy (you can hit them easier)
-Adjacent give you a +3 bonus, Close Combat (same hex) gives you +4 FP
-CAP's can be use to give you a bonus up to +2 on your die roll
-Groups, desinate a fire team leader and get a +1 FP for each adjacent unit

So my take is, if you play the game with all the little factors built in you will be rewarded with a rich tactical game experience.  My fear is that if you add another +1 modifier to the roll you start to marginalize the manuever aspects of the game.  The German tanks are supposed to be outgunned, it's your job as the commander to figure out ways to overcome these shortfalls.  Group your units together, seek higher ground, find positions of cover to help your defense rolls and try to get flank shots when you can.

Lebatron -> RE: Modified AT values. (5/27/2012 3:18:40 AM)

You could expand this idea to its obvious conclusion and do this.
All units receive these bonuses.
+3 for being adjacent
+2 for being 2 hexes away
+1 for being 3 hexes away.
4+ hexes away the bonus fizzles out.

major.pain -> RE: Modified AT values. (5/27/2012 10:32:04 AM)

Thanks for your thoughts guys, its always nice to get others views on things, more so from those who have put the hours in and played the boardgame, which i have not.
My reasons for playing around with this are that i am considering picking up the Storms of Steel Boardgame to introduce to my nephew to get him away from his Xbox for a while and who knows if my old dad watches us playing around he may want to give it a go. Why i am hesitant in picking it up is with SOS being more armor focused how i could make the armor and AT guns firepower less abstract and a little more believable in that the closer you are the harder you hit, without going down the route of having to look through combat tables ect as the games pacing and flow is top notch.
I dont assume that this is going to be better than the origonal rules as this game has been around for a number of years and undergone thousands upon thousands of hours of play, won awards ect, it is just the one area for me that could use a little less abstraction
Lebatron, your suggestion makes this idea seem even more plausible.

Erik Rutins -> RE: Modified AT values. (5/27/2012 3:44:51 PM)


Keep in mind that hexes are only about 50 meters in size. The fact that you get a bonus for being adjacent or in the same hex and then the next modifier (for long range) at about 350-400 meters for the early war cannons seems fine and keep in mind the fact that the attack and defense values only consider penetration and armor as one part so they will have a diminished effect on the overall number and it seems realistic. The results in my experience are realistic. House rules are always fine to try and if it lets you enjoy the game more, go for it.


- Erik

JFalk68 -> RE: Modified AT values. (5/27/2012 5:54:38 PM)

I endorse any house rule that gets a nephew away from an Xbox and a family playing a boardgame together :)

Page: [1]

Valid CSS!

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI