### Post by jason on Aug 3, 2019 2:33:16 GMT

Now for the situation I wanted to do some math on, but wasn't sure were to start.

I want to try to calculate the effective value of range compared to attacks. To make this calculable, I am assuming an infinitely sized play field of an open flat plain with no objectives. This situation gives the greatest value to range as the ranged unit can always shoot if in range and can back up to increase range if the weapon allows, so the value of range is somewhere between 0 value (some sort of map/situation were the range can't be used) to the below calculations (best possible use case).

first vs a melee only unit that has a speed of 6. The melee unit will close 12 inches of the difference every turn. The ranged unit will increase the distance by 6 inches when able (if distance + 6 inches is still in range of weapon)

12" weapon, melee moves first -> ranged unit will get 1 round of free attacks on the melee unit

12" weapon, ranged moves first -> melee unit will close distance on same round melee unit can shoot

in both cases here the ranged get 1 attack before the melee unit's attacks.

18" weapon, melee moves first -> ranged gets first attack at 18", second attack at 12" (close of 12, backup of 6)

18" weapon, ranged moves first -> ranged attack at 18", second attack at 12" (close of 12, backup of 6)

in both cases here, ranged gets 2 attacks before the melee unit's attacks.

24" weapon, melee moves first -> ranged gets first attack at 24", second at 18", third at 12"

24" weapon, range moves first -> range gets first attack at 24", second at 18", third at 12"

looking at the pattern, ranged gets 1 free attack for every [melee advance/charge - ranged move] distance of the ranged units effective range over the melee unit (ranged units effective range is move + weapon range)

second is ranged vs ranged.

second is ranged vs ranged.

0" effective difference -> unit that moves into effective range gives the first attack to the other unit.

1"-[other side's move] effective difference -> unit with longer range gets first attack

>[other side's move] effective difference -> unit with longer range gets first attack, extra attacks based on other's movement (I believe calculated the same as the melee above)

looking at this +6" of range is at best valued as a +1x number of attacks, but with an upper limit based on the LOS/board size/movable space. This takes some more thinking to figure out the effective values of distance, because it is highly effected by the board size and layout. For example TAO Grunt has an upgrade that gives +6" to its weapon for 5 points. However for the same +6 points, it has an option that goes from 2 attacks to 1 attack, but with +18" weapon range [12 more inches]. However, on the board size we have been playing on - with at most 24" between the edges of the deployment zones, the weapon ranges over 24" (giving account for angles/cover/etc) have had almost 0 value, meaning that the 18" A2 weapon has been more value able then the 30" A1 weapon (all else the same). Under the situation, I could see situations on a large board, were you would want to camp a unit on a point, and the extra range could help with being able to make that unit able to help out elsewhere on the board.. However, with how point capture works in GF:F, if there isn't a unit that can threaten capture of the point (which means it would be in range of a 18" weapon or has ambush and is still in reserve), there is no point of camping on the point.

looking at this +6" of range is at best valued as a +1x number of attacks, but with an upper limit based on the LOS/board size/movable space. This takes some more thinking to figure out the effective values of distance, because it is highly effected by the board size and layout. For example TAO Grunt has an upgrade that gives +6" to its weapon for 5 points. However for the same +6 points, it has an option that goes from 2 attacks to 1 attack, but with +18" weapon range [12 more inches]. However, on the board size we have been playing on - with at most 24" between the edges of the deployment zones, the weapon ranges over 24" (giving account for angles/cover/etc) have had almost 0 value, meaning that the 18" A2 weapon has been more value able then the 30" A1 weapon (all else the same). Under the situation, I could see situations on a large board, were you would want to camp a unit on a point, and the extra range could help with being able to make that unit able to help out elsewhere on the board.. However, with how point capture works in GF:F, if there isn't a unit that can threaten capture of the point (which means it would be in range of a 18" weapon or has ambush and is still in reserve), there is no point of camping on the point.

Another way to look at it would be with an example -> over 4 rounds, a 30" A1 weapon gets 4 attacks, but a 18" A2 weapon that takes 1 round to get in range, gets 6 total attacks (something to consider). The other way to look at it is, if the long ranged weapon doesn't kill the shorter ranged weapon in the first/second attack, the shorter ranged unit has made as many attacks on round 2, then will out pace it every round after that.

Curious if anyone has any more thoughts on the effective value of range on weapons as this is probably one of the hardest items to 'math' out as it is very terrain/map dependent (an infinite featureless plane, while useful for math, is boarding for playing).