My recent interest in Solo Crossfire got me thinking about the probabilities inherent in the Crossfire rules mechanisms. That means infantry direct fire / barrage / minefields, anti-tank direct fire, smoke, close combat, and rallying. Only read this post if you care about statistics of gaming mechanisms.
Infantry Direct Fire, Barrage, Minefields
Infantry Direct Fire, Indirect Barrage Fire and minefields all use a number of dice with a hit on 5+. The more hits the more the impact (1 hit = PIN; 2 hits = SUPPRESS; 3 hits = KILL).
Dice | 0 Hits | 1 Hit | 2 Hits | 3 Hits | 4 Hits | 5 Hits | 6 Hits | Mean Hits | Natural kill (3+ Hits) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1d6 | 67% | 33% | 0.33 | 0% | |||||
2d6 | 44% | 44% | 11% | 0.67 | 0% | ||||
3d6 | 30% | 44% | 22% | 4% | 1.00 | 4% | |||
4d6 | 20% | 40% | 30% | 10% | 1% | 1.33 | 11% | ||
5d6 | 13% | 33% | 33% | 16% | 4% | 0.4% | 1.67 | 21% | |
6d6 | 9% | 26% | 33% | 22% | 8% | 2% | 0.1% | 1.99 | 32% |
When firing at a bunker the hits are on a 6 instead.
Dice | 0 Hits | 1 Hit | 2 Hits | 3 Hits | 4 Hits | 5 Hits | 6 Hits | Mean Hits | Natural kill (3+ Hits) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1d6 | 83% | 17% | 0.17 | 0% | |||||
2d6 | 69% | 28% | 3% | 0.33 | 0% | ||||
3d6 | 58% | 35% | 7% | 0.5% | 0.50 | 0% | |||
4d6 | 48% | 39% | 12% | 2% | 0.1% | 0.67 | 2% | ||
5d6 | 40% | 40% | 16% | 3% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.83 | 4% | |
6d6 | 33% | 40% | 20% | 5% | 0.8% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 1.00 | 6% |
Close Combat
Close combat is resolved by rolling 1d6 each and highest wins. There are a bunch of modifiers, but in practical terms the odds depend on the attacker modifiers. If the attacker can arrange a +5 modifier they have a 100% chance of victory.
Attacker Modifier | Attacker Victory | Defender Victory |
---|---|---|
0 | 50% | 50% |
1 | 68% | 32% |
2 | 81% | 19% |
3 | 91% | 9% |
4 | 97% | 3% |
5 | 100% | 0% |
6 | 100% | 0% |
Smoke
Off table mortars and artillery fire either barrage or smoke. Barrage is covered by the To Hit tables above. Smoke has a different mechanism. You throw 1d6 and on a 3+ the smoke lands. That is a simple percentage of 67% chance of success and 33% failure.
Rally
Rally rolls are 1d6. A PIN rallies on 4+ and SUPPRESS on 5+. Troop Quality gives a modifier: -1 Green; 0 Regular; +1 Veteran. Commanders also give a modifier but I’ll ignore this for the purposes of this chart.
Status | Troop Quality | Failure | Success |
---|---|---|---|
PIN | Green | 67% | 33% |
Regular | 50% | 50% | |
Veteran | 33% | 67% | |
SUPPRESS | Green | 83% | 17% |
Regular | 67% | 33% | |
Veteran | 50% | 50% |
Same data presented with Troop Quality v Status:
Troop Quality | PIN | SUPPRESS | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Success | Failure | Success | Failure | |
Green | 33% | 67% | 17% | 83% |
Regular | 50% | 50% | 33% | 67% |
Veteran | 67% | 33% | 50% | 50% |
Anti-tank
Anti-tank direct fire uses two dice rolls. The first 1d6 is for Accuracy (ACC) and determines whether or not the attacker hit. The second 1d6 is a contest between the Penetration (PEN) of the shooter and the Armour (ARM) of the target; penetrating the armour destroys the target. 1 is always a failure; 6 is always a success.
The first table shows shows the individual percentages for ACC and for PEN. In the case of PEN there are values for each possible value of ARM. As it happens the percentages for ACC are identical to those for PEN versus ARM=4. Notice that at the extremes the percentages become static when they get to 0% or 100%. Note: This table ignores the rule that snake-eyes (double 1) is a failure and double 6 is a success.
Rating | ACC | PEN versus | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ARM=1 | ARM=2 | ARM=3 | ARM=4 | ARM=5 | ARM=6 | ||
-3 | 0% | 50% | 33% | 17% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
-2 | 17% | 67% | 50% | 33% | 17% | 0% | 0% |
-1 | 33% | 83% | 67% | 50% | 33% | 17% | 0% |
0 | 50% | 100% | 83% | 67% | 50% | 33% | 17% |
+1 | 67% | 100% | 100% | 83% | 67% | 50% | 33% |
+2 | 83% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 83% | 67% | 50% |
+3 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 83% | 67% |
The second set of tables show the chance to destroy the target, calculated as the percentage to hit multiplied by the percentage to penetrate. Because these tables factor in the combination of ACC and PEN they acknowledge the rule that snake-eyes (double 1) is a failure and double 6 is a success. I’ve shown the values for the ARM=1 to ARM=6.
Accuracy | Penetration | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-3 | -2 | -1 | 0 | +1 | +2 | +3 | |
-3 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% |
-2 | 8% | 11% | 14% | 17% | 17% | 17% | 17% |
-1 | 17% | 22% | 28% | 33% | 33% | 33% | 33% |
0 | 25% | 33% | 42% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 50% |
+1 | 33% | 44% | 56% | 67% | 67% | 67% | 67% |
+2 | 42% | 56% | 69% | 83% | 83% | 83% | 83% |
+3 | 50% | 67% | 83% | 97% | 97% | 97% | 97% |
Accuracy | Penetration | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-3 | -2 | -1 | 0 | +1 | +2 | +3 | |
-3 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% |
-2 | 6% | 8% | 11% | 14% | 17% | 17% | 17% |
-1 | 11% | 17% | 22% | 28% | 33% | 33% | 33% |
0 | 17% | 25% | 33% | 42% | 50% | 50% | 50% |
+1 | 22% | 33% | 44% | 56% | 67% | 67% | 67% |
+2 | 28% | 42% | 56% | 69% | 83% | 83% | 83% |
+3 | 33% | 50% | 67% | 83% | 97% | 97% | 97% |
Accuracy | Penetration | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-3 | -2 | -1 | 0 | +1 | +2 | +3 | |
-3 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% |
-2 | 3% | 6% | 8% | 11% | 14% | 17% | 17% |
-1 | 6% | 11% | 17% | 22% | 28% | 33% | 33% |
0 | 8% | 17% | 25% | 33% | 42% | 50% | 50% |
+1 | 11% | 22% | 33% | 44% | 56% | 67% | 67% |
+2 | 14% | 28% | 42% | 56% | 69% | 83% | 83% |
+3 | 17% | 33% | 50% | 67% | 83% | 97% | 97% |
Accuracy | Penetration | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-3 | -2 | -1 | 0 | +1 | +2 | +3 | |
-3 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% |
-2 | 3% | 3% | 6% | 8% | 11% | 14% | 17% |
-1 | 3% | 6% | 11% | 17% | 22% | 28% | 33% |
0 | 3% | 8% | 17% | 25% | 33% | 42% | 50% |
+1 | 3% | 11% | 22% | 33% | 44% | 56% | 67% |
+2 | 3% | 14% | 28% | 42% | 56% | 69% | 83% |
+3 | 3% | 17% | 33% | 50% | 67% | 83% | 97% |
Accuracy | Penetration | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-3 | -2 | -1 | 0 | +1 | +2 | +3 | |
-3 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% |
-2 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 6% | 8% | 11% | 14% |
-1 | 3% | 3% | 6% | 11% | 17% | 22% | 28% |
0 | 3% | 3% | 8% | 17% | 25% | 33% | 42% |
+1 | 3% | 3% | 11% | 22% | 33% | 44% | 56% |
+2 | 3% | 3% | 14% | 28% | 42% | 56% | 69% |
+3 | 3% | 3% | 17% | 33% | 50% | 67% | 83% |
Accuracy | Penetration | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-3 | -2 | -1 | 0 | +1 | +2 | +3 | |
-3 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% |
-2 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | 6% | 8% | 11% |
-1 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 6% | 11% | 17% | 22% |
0 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 8% | 17% | 25% | 33% |
+1 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 11% | 22% | 33% | 44% |
+2 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 14% | 28% | 42% | 56% |
+3 | 3% | 3% | 3% | 17% | 33% | 50% | 67% |
Other resources
Nikolas Lloyd has a page on Crossfire probabilities as well. Although his interest is more about exploring alternatives e.g. 2.5d6, 3d6+1P, and 3d6+2P. See Lloydian Aspects: Crossfire Probabilities
Thank you for posting this. It is very helpful.
Hello! Where do you get the Anti-Tank rule that 1 is failure and 6 is succes? All I could dig up was that double 1s are always a fail and double 6s always a success in anti-tank/vehicle fire. Your calculations effectively doubles 6-pounders success rate vs a Panther through the front armor.
Sampo, you are quite right. Snake eyes are a failure. Double six a success. I relied on faulty memory. I’ll fix now.