Pyramid's Combat Effectiveness Rating for Foes

[Jürgen Hubert]

Finally, the latest issue of Pyramid (#77 - Combat) gives us clearly defined metrics on how to rate the combat challenge represented by enemies - in the form of the "Combat Effectiveness Rating" (CER), subdivided into Offensive Rating (OR) and Protective Rating (PR).

If I had the time, I'd attempt to calculate these ratings for all the enemies listed in the GURPS Repository. Unfortunately, I do not have the time - I have a deadline at work and I'm in the middle of a job hunt (with a first interview on Friday next week).

But... if anyone else is willing to start calculating the ratings for some of these monsters, I could add suitable tags to the entires and create automated tables which would list the monsters by their CER (and further tables listing them by OR and PR).

Any takers?

[Christopher R. Rice]

You're welcome. ;-)

Edit: Designer's Notes are here.

[Rasputin]

One thing that I'd like is a baseline DF party so one can give a general rating, like "Fodder" or "Worthy." Like the D&D 3rd iconics against which Wizards would test its monsters.

Edit: or general ratings corresponding to the CER, assuming a party straight out of DF1.

[doulos05]

OHMYGODOHMYGODOHMYGOD!

I must own this immediately. Curse you, budget!

[Tyneras]

One of my first thoughts was possibly using this to generate Troop Strength scores for Mass Combat. I've never been too happy with the ones presented or the way they are customized.

Until then, just for fun, I did a Draug from GURPS Dungeon Fantasy Monsters 1, since it was fairly straight-forward.

Offensive Rating
Attack Skill: 16-10=6
Damage: 16*1.5=24 (axe attack)
FP: N/A
Move: 7-6=1
Total OR: 6+24+0+1 = 31

Protective Rating
Active Defense: (12-8)*2 = 8 (Parry)
Damage Resistance: 4+3.75+2+6+1-18-6-6 = -13
* Head (8/2) + Arms/legs/torso (5/4)*3 + HPT 2 + ItMH 6 IT(No Blood) 1 +
Dependency -18 + Unhealing -6 + Vulnerability -6
Health: 15-10+2 = 7
HP: 27-10 = 17
Will: 10-10=0
Total PR: 8-13+7+17+0 = 19

Final CER: 50

I might be a bit fuzzy on where some of the advantages/disadvantages should go.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

One of my first thoughts was possibly using this to generate Troop Strength scores for Mass Combat. I've never been too happy with the ones presented or the way they are customized.

I'm working on this system right now for Pyramid. :-) No idea when it'll be published, but it'll be done within the month.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Rasputin

One thing that I'd like is a baseline DF party so one can give a general rating, like "Fodder" or "Worthy." Like the D&D 3rd iconics against which Wizards would test its monsters.

Edit: or general ratings corresponding to the CER, assuming a party straight out of DF1.

Because gear affects the ratings quite a bit, unlike monsters who rarely have equipment. Even if I used the gear from DF13 and the templates from the books as the baseline it would simply vary too much. I know because I tried to do this initially and had to discard it because it was a) too much work; b) too much word count; and c) be almost useless to most GMs because PCs vary from gaming group to gaming group.

[Buzzardo]

Well, this thread just sold a copy of Pyramid, maybe two when a friend takes a peek. :)

[Tyneras]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

I'm working on this system right now for Pyramid. :-) No idea when it'll be published, but it'll be done within the month.

Fantastic!

With that looking somewhere in the future, I'd like to say that personal experimentation has shown the Mass Combat system handles unequal class value just fine.

What I mean is, a TS 100 Arm, F unit is the same as a TS 100 Arm 100 F 100 unit. Mathematically identical when the dice hit the table.

Which means you can have a TS 100 Arm 50 F 55 unit, if they are armored, but not quite Arm 100 armored.

I wish you luck!

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

Fantastic!

With that looking somewhere in the future, I'd like to say that personal experimentation has shown the Mass Combat system handles unequal class value just fine.

What I mean is, a TS 100 Arm, F unit is the same as a TS 100 Arm 100 F 100 unit. Mathematically identical when the dice hit the table.

Which means you can have a TS 100 Arm 50 F 55 unit, if they are armored, but not quite Arm 100 armored.

I wish you luck!

Thanks! Yeah, I was one of the original playtesters for Mass Combat and I use it pretty often in my campaigns so I know the system inside out. David and I were talking about this earlier today too, funnily enough. I'm going to have to break out my original notes on what each mass combat unit looks like on a player scale and then go from there to get the numbers to add up.