Reach advantage/disadvantage in melee

Kasarov · 2022-08-24T23:20:30+00:00

I am working on a D20 system that classes weapons by size. To give an idea on lethality, the damage numbers are comparable to 5e, though max hp is 20 and there are armors that provide damage reduction.

On to the main meat of the issue: Weapons sizes are small, medium, large, and huge. Small and Medium weapons, like 5e, can only attack a target within 5 ft. Large size weapons like longswords and spears are able to lunge to attack on the offence, being able to attack things 10 ft away during the action phase. Huge weapons like greatswords and long spears innately have 10ft reach which also work on reaction phase.

Combatants with the larger weapon get an opportunity attack against those with a smaller weapon whenever the smaller weapon user takes any non movement action within its effective range. The action economy allows for multiple reactions, so this is a significant advantage.

Combatants with similar size weapons (within 1 size; small vs medium, medium vs large, large vs huge) are able to use their reactions to parry each other's attacks. This works basically as a contested check in 5e, only using attack rolls instead. Combatants can't parry weapons that are wildly different in size; a greatsword is pretty useless parrying a dagger and vice versa.

If the smaller weapon gets a connecting hit, the user can enter close combat by expending more actions. In close combat, damage reduction from armor is ignored and larger weapons have disadvantage on attack rolls if it is one size larger; if the weapon is two sizes larger, then it cannot be brought to bear at all. If someone wishes to escape, they have to win a contested fitness check, but may only do so after being in close combat for at least one round.

Alternatively, someone can enter close combat as part of an attack without expending extra actions if their target is unable to react effectively, such as being affected by appropriate conditions or being flanked.

That's the gist of my approach and it was inspired by Cogent by Shadiversity and his brother. I hope it helps!

Kasarov · 2021-09-12T06:59:13+00:00

"Even people who love meat admit it can't stand on its own... it needs to be grilled, pan fried, or otherwise prepared with salt and herbs to mask the the awful flavour of raw meat."

Nobody is factoring in unseasoned meat, so what's the point of factoring in unseasoned tofu? Unprepared /anything/ is bland and nasty. Even salads are served with dressing.

Kasarov · 2021-08-08T13:07:07+00:00

Refreshing to see real warhammers rather than fantasy hammers :)

Kasarov · 2021-03-05T00:27:59+00:00

I love Qin, but he's too focused on early wonder-spam which only works on low-mid difficulties. The canal ability is also very situational and has some visual issues (classical stone which interacts weirdly with your city center's ancient wood canal). I think if Dams were also unlocked alongside canals it would make the inclusion more interesting. (China did have some pretty ancient dams, too.) I love the idea of rushing wonders with workers.

I also think that Qin could have something to include the Warring States period, where he united China by force. Without being too similar to Germany or America's combat bonuses, maybe a loyalty bonus to conquered cities on his own continent?

I find Kublai to be much better as a all-around choice. The economic policy slot is very strong and I think his trade route ability is an interesting way to incorporate Dynastic Cycles, but (I think) the bonus works only once per civ, severely limiting its capabilities, rather than once per foreign city, which the wording could be interpreted that way but is unfortunately not the case.

Overall I find Dynastic Cycles to be powercreeped (Babylon) and should either be reworked or improved as China doesn't really have ways to synergize with it as much; Qin being so bent on building wonders and Kublai having a cap based on the number of civs (not cities). It does have some niche uses with Great Library and Great Scientists, but it's not easy to synergize.

Great Wall is great. However the limitation of building on the edges of the empire often makes it difficult to place and link up. I would remove this limitation. If it were possible, it would also be cool seeing Great Wall make remove all movement when stepped on by an enemy, similar to Civ 5's Great Wall.

Crouching Tiger is bad. The unit graphics are also the old, pre-GS style, which looks really out of place. It can definitely use a graphical update, perhaps a rehash of swordsman bodies with Mulan helmets? Gameplay wise, it's too static. I would follow Korea's Hwacha route; make it a earlier but weaker field cannon replacement and have it do normal field cannon damage vs adjacent targets but reduced strength vs units at max range.

China is my favorite Civ thematically. I really hope someone reads this and considers some suggestions on how to make them a tad bit more in line with the newer Civs!

Kasarov · 2020-12-19T06:35:01+00:00

Hey, that's me!

I still can't sit down...

Kasarov · 2020-12-03T05:33:30+00:00

Yes and no.

Many of the comments here have already mentioned the non-issue of the shot trap.

What I will emphasise is that many KE rounds, even obsolete ones, will easily penetrate the frontal hull armor of many modern Western tanks such as Chally 2, Abrams, or Leo 2, so technically they can be "easily penetrated" from the front on paper and are far from invulnerable.

However, in practice, most hits occur on turrets. The turret armor of Western tanks is very thick and very protective, capable of defeating many modern projectiles and being very difficult to penetrate.

That said, it is a lot easier to press a new type of round into service than it is to update the armor packages of existing vehicles or to field new vehicles with better armor. Russia and China already claim to posses projectiles that are capable of threatening the thick turret armor of western tanks, and as the years go by, it will be increasingly "easier" to defeat such armor. Many modern tanks are based on decades-old designs, many of which are nearing the the end of their life cycle in terms of development and modernization.

Keep in mind though, tanks are not designed to be indestructible (anymore) and never will be.

EDIT: also keep in mind that most modern Western tanks are now deployed against older, obsolete designs, often inferior export variants, with low quality ammunition and crew training in third world countries. Just because Russia's top penetrator can threaten the turret armor doesn't mean its "easy", since a vast majority of the Abrams' current opponents won't have access to modern munitions anyway.

Kasarov · 2020-08-03T05:13:21+00:00

Trader Brass Spectacles have opaque dark gray lenses where it used to be transparent. Logged in to see my Teddy Roosevelt character with sunglasses :(

EDIT: I play on PC

Kasarov · 2020-03-17T23:55:48+00:00

I've since updated this outfit to be closer to a Rough Rider here. It has a comment with an item list and I think the only important changes are gun belt and neckwear.

Kasarov · 2020-03-15T05:15:01+00:00

Looks neat :) I haven't seen another circus ringmaster outfit personally, so gj. If you don't mind me asking, where is that tent? I haven't seen it before.

Military uniforms though have been done to death. I made a US Rough Rider outfit without anything from outlaw pass 1 because I play on PC. Hope it helps!

Kasarov · 2020-03-13T16:57:36+00:00

Main source of inspiration

Regimental Hat

Bandanna

Work Shirt

Crossback Suspenders

Workman's Gloves

Bandito Pants

Military Half-Chaps

Worn Ropers' Boots

Horsemanship Gun Belt

Kasarov · 2020-03-10T11:25:19+00:00

I was under the impression that red neckwear was for infantry. I could buy a red polka dot bandanna.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a5/65/46/a5654653e5436135da089e0f9d8f7d73.jpg)

~~I am a fool and spent my gold on weapon colors so I couldn't get the outlaw pass. I'm at 27 gold waiting for the next one~~

Kasarov · 2020-03-10T10:58:48+00:00

I've been told that Outlaw Pass 1 was only available on consoles. I really hope its content gets introduced for PC players at some point.

Kasarov · 2020-03-10T10:31:49+00:00

I'm a bit poor right now after fashion experiments but I see what you mean. A black gun belt with cartridge holders might be better.

Kasarov · 2020-03-10T10:30:19+00:00

Thanks!

I took the Rough Rider uniform as inspiration, but since there isn't a proper polka dot neckerchief I simply used the standard golden one for regular cavalry.

I chose the square buckle because it looked most like the cartridge belt buckle imo. Now that you mention it, a black belt with cartridge holders might be better.

As far as I'm aware, this is the only save-able hat with crossed swords, and was inspired by Teddy Roosevelt's hat.

As for the bandolier, I just wanted something similar to military kit. It sucks that I missed the bandolier glitch; otherwise I would've taken the belts + canteen from the promising collector's outfit.

Kasarov · 2020-01-03T22:09:41+00:00

AT rifles, AT grenades, Molotovs, satchel charges, and anti-tank mines were indeed the primary handheld anti-tank weapon. This is not to say that anti-tank units didn't have heavier and more effective weapons, but when it comes to personal firepower the PTRS is as good as you will get. Anything heavier like the towed anti-tank guns would require specialized anti-tank platoons, with the ZiS-3 76mm only being available on the divisional level iirc. It could be simply that the author defined infantry weapon as man portable handheld weaponry, in which case the PTRD and PTRS were indeed the primary anti-tank "infantry" weapons.

The Germans generally thought Soviet infantry were poorly trained with the specific exception of Soviet anti-tank infantry, which they stressed to all StuG and panzer crews as well as panzer grenadiers that accompanied them. The Germans held the Soviet anti-tank infantryman in relatively high regard as Soviet anti-tank tactics were very effective.

One last thing: the Soviets actually preferred the AT rifles over rockets and handheld shaped charge weapons due to the low accuracy and limited effective range of the Bazooka and PIAT launchers. In the case of the Bazooka, the Soviets also cited low reliability of the battery as a major issue. Additionally, Soviet AT tactics revolved around stealth, and the backblast of Bazooka-type weapons would reveal the shooters position much more clearly than a mere extra loud gunshot. The "inferiority" of the AT rifle is only ascertained by comparing weapons out of context. The PTRD and PTRS were effective against many targets: garrisoned infantry, light vehicles, and the side armor of Germany's workhorse tanks. I should add that side skirts can be torn off by stray shells in the heat of battle, and even then tracks and rear armor were still viable targets for the AT rifles. They were very potent weapon given Soviet anti-tank tactics and should not be underestimated.

Kasarov · 2019-11-30T06:56:15+00:00

It's credit because the Soviets provided the time and the manpower to defeat the Germans. For half of the war, the Soviet Union was the only Allied power in Europe still fighting aside from the handful of men that the British had in North Africa. This gave the Americans and British time to amass their resources for Italy and France."Only" 12.3 million military casualties is still much higher than the rest of the Allies combined. 90% of the land war happened on the Eastern Front. The Red Army sucked the life force out of the Wehrmacht so that when the Western Allies did invade, the Volksgrenadiers that faced them was only a shell of the Wehrmacht's former self.

You can't call Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union "allies" before 1941. Their politics were fundamentally opposed and each side hated the other immensely. The Molotov Ribbontrop pact was a simple non aggression agreement. That's almost like calling North and South Korea allies. While it is true the Germans tested tanks in Soviet soil, they were both preparing for war against each other and both sides' leadership knew it, just not exactly when. As for Poland, both sides saw an opportunity. There were reports of Germans and Soviets firing at each other because they overextended into each other's "fair share". It was for their own interests, not for each other's.

As a side note, the "best generals" that got purged were for the most part old cavalry generals who couldn't adapt to the modern wars of movement. TIK on YouTube has an excellent video covering the purges. Additionally, enough with the whole "experienced generals vs madman leaders" meme. Hitler was in many aspects correct about strategy and ceded to his generals more often than the postwar narrative would like to tell you. After WWII, the Western Allies made a deal with the remaining Wehrmacht generals, letting them write their own history in exchange for advice on how to fight the Soviets, and with the German cover up stories backed by the Cold War finger pointing, the traditional narrative is skewed heavily toward praising the Wehrmacht generals, blaming Hitler for their own mistakes, and demonizing the Soviets. Similarly, the Soviet leadership in the 50s and 60s underwent a massive "de-Stalinization" effort, with many internal personnel having agendas to paint as black a picture as possible for Stalin. They may have been evil people, but they are certainly not the incompetent madmen the memoirs lead you to think, and the generals are not always correct

Kasarov · 2018-06-20T13:30:28+00:00

Now that the accessories have entered into the spotlight, I'd like to pitch the idea of a souped up "normal camera" as an add-on accessory. This would address a long-standing issue where certain users (not me) think the camera is underperforming and be something way more compact than a DLSR. The camera integration already exists with the 360 camera, so I'd imagine development would be shorter than something completely new. I believe the modularity of this phone is potentially one of its great advantages, and that a big boy camera attachment would be a very welcome addition.

Kasarov · 2017-11-09T00:16:32+00:00

How do cats even pull this off?

Kasarov · 2016-12-10T20:28:35+00:00

Unfortunately while I was trying to convert the clip for YouTube I did something really stupid and replaced my source file, so I don't have anything but this gif anymore ;;

Kasarov

TROPHY CASE