Losing Dice

[grahambriggs]

I still stand by the argument that if it was intended that close combat dice lost due to dissorder or disruption was intened to be based on all the dice in a combat rather than BG by BG that there would be a rule explaining how you work out the POA and quality that should be used for such 'split' dice. There is exactly that for shooting (i.e. missile fire in the shooting phase) but there is nothing relating to this in any other type of combat.

The shooting rule is needed because you are combining bases to get shooting dice, and you might have to combine bases of different morale classes.

The disruption effect works differently. You start off with one die per base, then remove one die in every three. So there is no combining of morale categories going on. So, if you had a BG of 2 that was superior and one that was average they would each start with two dice. Then you would remove either a 'superior' die or an 'average' die.

Like I said, I don't mind which way it is but it would be nice if the authors had a look and told us what they meant. Because 'everybody' may play it one way but if that isn't obvious by reading the rules it should be tidied up.

[petedalby]

Check this thread Graham.

viewtopic.php?t=9988

I think Si is pretty clear that it is by BG.

Pete

[deadtorius]

Looking at it another way if only one of your 2 base battle groups was disrupted, then should they be penalized for joining a disrupted BG in melee combat? Obviously they would not lose any dice themselves, getting their 2 dice and the disrupted unit would still get 2 dice since they don't have 3 dice to lose 1, so I am with the by battle group not combined dice.
Thats how we have always played it anyway.

[grahambriggs]

Check this thread Graham.

viewtopic.php?t=9988

I think Si is pretty clear that it is by BG.

Pete

Would be nice if the FAQ covered it.

[marioslaz]

Looking at it another way if only one of your 2 base battle groups was disrupted, then should they be penalized for joining a disrupted BG in melee combat? Obviously they would not lose any dice themselves, getting their 2 dice and the disrupted unit would still get 2 dice since they don't have 3 dice to lose 1, so I am with the by battle group not combined dice.
Thats how we have always played it anyway.

Combined dice IMO is impossible, because if you have two BGs of different types fighting against one enemy, if your BG need to lose dice you cannot combine because you would can lose, for example, one third of a dice with +POA and two thirds of a dice with -POA. My doubt is about splitted combats. The rules state you first calculate reduction, due to disorder or cohesion, then allocate dice. It seems to me, but I admit I didn't think a lot about, would be more balanced if first allocate dice, then calculate reduction. In this way, a big BG fighting smaller ones wouldn't be penalized by rounding as now it is under some circumstances. But likely there are others drawback of such system I cannot see due my limited game experience.

[shall]

I have already answered this one elsewhere

Shooting is by target - so amalgamte and reduce

CLose combat is per BG. It say at the beginning it the dice are accumulated by BG.

It has to hppen this way or you cannot tell who won or lost. You get floating dice that are 50% A and 50% B. Cose combat Bgs either have full dice or not, never share dice with others.

Si

[grahambriggs]

Can you show me where it says that in the rules Si?

[shall]

Page 93 bottom section specifies you can split up a BGs combat dice. Then goes on to say you combine for shooting. It specifically does not say you can combine dice in combat. It says what to do if diffent POAs when shooting for 2 1/2 dice but not for combat.

unless I am missing something everyone must play it this way or we would have had lots of questions about how do you tell who has won or lost when combining 2 1/2 dice across 2 bgs,

Or am i missing the issue perhaps?

Si