Numerical superiority

jorneto · Post by **jorneto** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 2:41 pm

Shouldn’t be any kind of bonus if one side has a marked numerical advantage in an impact/melee phase?

Considering for example the simple 2Dice vs 1Dice, a 2:1 situation and with equal POA, the larger side has only a 50% of winning – a bit short, when one side has twice the men fighting.

Why not a new POA, “2:1 or more Dice than the enemy”. In the example above the odds of winning would change to 58%.
That’s not a too radical increase so as to favour weight of numbers excessively, but still giving a small extra.

johno · Post by **johno** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 7:29 pm

Numbers do count

The side with 2 dice has a 50% chance of winning, which is made up of 25% of winning 1-0, 12.5% of winning 2-1, and 12.5% of winning 2-0, with consequences to the losing side's cohesion test

The side with one dice has 12.5 % of winning 1-0, so can never inflict the extra CT modifier for winning by two or more, and in all likelihood can never cause any CT modifiers

marco · Post by **marco** » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:43 am

not a bad idea
1 bg with good poa (++) can destroy many bg while outnumbered
for example 1bg/4 knight against 2 bg /16 bowmen protected without sword
knight will laugh will bieng outnumered 1/4
is it normal ?
in this case i regret dbm where the mass was useful, the flanks were exposed and deadly
nobody take army with low cost troop, no picts for example

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:58 am

marco wrote:knight will laugh will bieng outnumered 1/4

Surely they did

Bloody peasants!

VMadeira · Post by **VMadeira** » Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:54 pm

marco wrote:not a bad idea
1 bg with good poa (++) can destroy many bg while outnumbered
for example 1bg/4 knight against 2 bg /16 bowmen protected without sword
knight will laugh will bieng outnumered 1/4
is it normal ?
in this case i regret dbm where the mass was useful, the flanks were exposed and deadly
nobody take army with low cost troop, no picts for example

In this example the bowmen could still maneuver to flank charge the knights.

The question is, would the bowmen represented by 16 bases, beat the knights in open terrain ?
Think not....

marco · Post by **marco** » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:17 pm

no because the knight will try to touch 2 bg to be safe to immobilise them
that's strange : you try to go in fight with as much people as possible to be safe
and bases of the extreme won't move to the fight
12 dice-- against 8 dices ++
4 bases ignored
i just say that situation were troops are outnumbered are not well represented

Strategos69 · Post by **Strategos69** » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:20 pm

I think that being overlapped could be counted as threatened flank, thus a -1 to the CT. It could be thought some advantage to deploy very deep, as we know historically was done to absorb the impact of the charge of shock troops (count +1 to CT for a complete 4th rank of non fighting bases). Other than that, the side effect of changes could make mob too good for what they really were.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:33 pm

IMO depth should be a better advantage than width whan it comes to absorbing casualties. A shallow formation will be broken through. A deep one will not.

marco · Post by **marco** » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:44 pm

2 good ideas in my point of view

being overlapped could be counted as threatened flank

some advantage to deploy very deep

but it's maybe hard to change things
marco