Re: Smashes (was: Another combat factor)

Carl Edman (cedman@cedman.remote.Princeton.EDU)
Wed, 21 Sep 94 18:33:01 -0400

> > Actually the original example isn't bad. If you do the math carefully,
> > you'll find that there are cases in which the 4:1 rule causes you to
> > have your loses _grow_ as your force grows. In other words there
> > would be situations in which you are either more likely to win or
> > likely to suffer smaller losses by giving away parts of your forces
> > first.
>
> But that's not unreasonable. That can happen in the current system. 10
> elite guard vs. 10 elite guard. Add a peasant to one side. The peasant
> dies. "Don't come along on this mission, Johnny, it's too dangerous for
> you."

Not really. The peasant is only slightly more likely to die than the elite
guard and in the process saves the life of (on average) 0.65 elite guards
which is a really good deal. The fact remains that adding one peasant to any
force makes the force likely to suffer less total losses than it otherwise
would. After the introduction of the 4:1 rule, adding men to a force may in
effect make it weaker. That is something new.

Carl Edman

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links