Anyone ever come up with a D12 combat resolution die system

I Just love Battlegroup. I have all the books, have played at quite a few 'friendly group game weekends' and have lots of figures (love tanks).

I must stress that I am very happy with the rules, but wonder if there is a way of stopping the it 'always ends up with needing a 6' when firing at distance and being in cover. Has anyone tried to use a D12 table?

It would be useful in other ways too, as you could start making allowance for German guns being more accurate and for irregular troops being less so?

Just wondering if anyone has ever come up with a successful house rule here?

Thanks

I can't remember the exact reasoning why they abandoned the project (something to do with statistics or something), but the game was tested using different dice mechanics, but the D6 was what they settled on.

It's also worth bearing in mind that suppression and the BR system allows you an avenue to win games without ever using aimed fire. Not too many battles were fought until everyone is dead enough to satisfy the average wargamers definition of a 'decisive conclusion' after all - and people at long range, in cover should be hard to hit, otherwise what's the point? Pin them and move for better shots... or just hope you brought more ammo and luckier dice than they did.

D8 was playtested iirc.

I'm generally in favour of any mechanic that makes use of the d12, because I think the d12 is cool.

However, working out the probabilities for a combat system using dice with 8.3333333% steps seems like too much work to me, when a d10 (10%) or d20 (5%) are available, and much easier to transpose directly from combat analysis reports.

There are, was some games that used 2d6 like fasa battletech and a few others, they had good systems. Now with d6 being so popular everyone is using it.

Force on Force allows D12 level troops (and indeed D6,D8 and D10) but anything with D12 level dice simply dominates the game when faced with lower quality troops.

A D12 is the same as D6, it has the probability of results (just with halves). For this I like it, and could see me using one in a future game. But for large battle games, with lost going on, a D6 has all you need. Too many results allows for too much detail, which designers will use because they can... even if they shouldn't. A D6 requires some strict discipline, that larger dice don't... that has always been my feeling. We tried D8 for a while... just for a novelty really, but it didn't work for me, players don't have a inate feel for a D8 (or I don't) as I do for a D6... and do now have way too many D8s though...

Madaboutarmour:

We do have a house system for playing BG with 2D6.
We have tried it for some time now, and has become the standard way of playing BG for us.
As Warwick said, it is not for everyone. Larger games could become troublesome if your players are not very well trained in the new modifiers.

I perfectly know the 2D6 bell curve has nothing to do with the 1D12 or D10. It is precisely for that bell curve that we chose the 2D6.
The mod does not increase the playing time by substantial amounts and do make the players happy with some few additional modifiers to hit (like moving fast, small target, etc.)

Best regards,

Diego

It is a known fact that D12's are the most rolly dice, strangely even rollier than D20's.  So obviously the game would take longer. And they cock a lot too, especially in cornfields.