One (probably unintentional?) result of CRT use in a wargame is the "higher level" view the player gets of any particular engagement, more like that of a staff general back at HQ as opposed to an officer in the field closer to the action. Let's look at Axis & Allies, where you have to roll a die result equal to or under a target number to score a hit on an enemy unit. A large battle has you rolling lots of dice in multiple rounds of combat, with you noting each individual hit or miss. There is a certain drama to this, but it lends a "field commander" view to the player, like you are watching the actual fight. CRTs resolve combat with usually one die roll. You don't get any view into the flow of the battle itself, you just see the result. This gives a "HQ" view of the conflict, since you only see the result, not the ebb and flow of the battle. For this reason I have always liked CRTs in grand scale strategic games, but don't like them in more tactical games. Ogre (by Steve Jackson) is an absolute classic, but I don't like the use of CRTs in that game because it is a tactical game of maneuver on a battlefield. I think that if it was developed today, and not in the 1970s, it would not use CRTs at all.
This is a really interesting perspective! I think you are right that the CRT almost assumes an operational perspective rather than a hands-on tactical one. I've never played ASL, but I'd be curious to know how CRTs feel in that game of squad level combat.
I wonder if Warhammer's Fists Full of Dice is the reverse of this, trying to give you squad member level of granularity while still operating at a HQ view of combat.
I've been toying with something similar for my NSR game without knowing the terms. A huge benefit is that combat can have many more outcomes than the "they die"/"TPK" binary that D&D combat often end up in.
Glad to hear you are working on something in this area. I keep thinking there has to be a way to take the best parts of a CRT, but not have them be slow, fiddly, and intimidating for new players.
I just want to say that you're incredibly good at writing and in particular at coming up with titles. I subscribe to you even though I don't have that much direct interest in games, but I always like to see your posts purely because the way that you use language around decisions and chance is really interesting and impressive. (I'm a statistician / economist.)
One (probably unintentional?) result of CRT use in a wargame is the "higher level" view the player gets of any particular engagement, more like that of a staff general back at HQ as opposed to an officer in the field closer to the action. Let's look at Axis & Allies, where you have to roll a die result equal to or under a target number to score a hit on an enemy unit. A large battle has you rolling lots of dice in multiple rounds of combat, with you noting each individual hit or miss. There is a certain drama to this, but it lends a "field commander" view to the player, like you are watching the actual fight. CRTs resolve combat with usually one die roll. You don't get any view into the flow of the battle itself, you just see the result. This gives a "HQ" view of the conflict, since you only see the result, not the ebb and flow of the battle. For this reason I have always liked CRTs in grand scale strategic games, but don't like them in more tactical games. Ogre (by Steve Jackson) is an absolute classic, but I don't like the use of CRTs in that game because it is a tactical game of maneuver on a battlefield. I think that if it was developed today, and not in the 1970s, it would not use CRTs at all.
This is a really interesting perspective! I think you are right that the CRT almost assumes an operational perspective rather than a hands-on tactical one. I've never played ASL, but I'd be curious to know how CRTs feel in that game of squad level combat.
Thank you for this comment!
I wonder if Warhammer's Fists Full of Dice is the reverse of this, trying to give you squad member level of granularity while still operating at a HQ view of combat.
I've been toying with something similar for my NSR game without knowing the terms. A huge benefit is that combat can have many more outcomes than the "they die"/"TPK" binary that D&D combat often end up in.
Glad to hear you are working on something in this area. I keep thinking there has to be a way to take the best parts of a CRT, but not have them be slow, fiddly, and intimidating for new players.
I just want to say that you're incredibly good at writing and in particular at coming up with titles. I subscribe to you even though I don't have that much direct interest in games, but I always like to see your posts purely because the way that you use language around decisions and chance is really interesting and impressive. (I'm a statistician / economist.)
Thank you so much for the kind words! I really appreciate it!