>I know I shouldn't really get involved on this, but this emaail peaked my
>interest as it touches on one of the areas where I feel that the SM/TL is
>really rather weak. Basically, SM/TL relies almost completely on attrition
>as a method of deciding who wins a close combat (i.e. it's pretty much
>'last
>mand standing'). This can make them drag on for a bit. On the other hand if
>you read books on modern warfare, one of the things that they emphasise is
>that assaults tend to be bloody but brief, and that one side or the other
>will either run off or surrender very quickly. Both E40K and now E:A try to
>address this problem by ensuring that after a round of combat has been
>fought there will always be a result, and this result will force one side
>to
>fall back away from the combat. In E:A this is done by having _each_ side
>roll 2D6. Then each player takes the higher of their two dice rolls and
>adds
>modifiers from the following chart. Why two dice? It makes the result less
>random than using a straaigh D6 while still allowing for some extreme
>results.
The problem with modifying a roll on 2D6 is that a 2D6 roll isnt completely
random like.. say.. a D10 roll. The middle results (6-8) will be much more
likely. So modifiers can sometimes give odd results.
But apart from that, I do agree here. I would love for close combat to have
a more definate impact in NetEpic. Particularly since morale is a fairly
light area usually.
Im not quite sure how it could be done without leaving too many loopholes
and exploits though
Weasel
- who have been lurking for a looong time -
_________________________________________________________________
F� Hotmail p� mobilen
http://www.msn.dk/mobile
Received on Fri May 16 2003 - 16:20:04 UTC