Quick Questions Thread on Rules

[rbodleyscott]

Do Elephants cause any Elephant-unique damage to nearby units (whether enemy or friendly) when they break and subsequently rout? Or is that reflected by the cohesion tests two squares wide upon the Elephants breaking?

The latter.

[kronenblatt]

Do Elephants cause any Elephant-unique damage to nearby units (whether enemy or friendly) when they break and subsequently rout? Or is that reflected by the cohesion tests two squares wide upon the Elephants breaking?

The latter.

Great, thanks.

[kronenblatt]

Do fragmented units exercise ZoC?

[rbodleyscott]

Do fragmented units exercise ZoC?

Yes, because the enemy do not know (for certain) that they are Fragmented.

[kronenblatt]

Is the number of casualties inflicted by shooting (javelins or arrows) dependent on the number of men shooting as well as the number of men shot at, all else equal?

For example, would 240 men shooting at 960 men incur twice as many casualties than when shooting at 480 men, again all else equal (die roll, modifiers, etc.)? And only half the casualties when 120 men are shooting, compared to 240 men shooting?

[rbodleyscott]

Is the number of casualties inflicted by shooting (javelins or arrows) dependent on the number of men shooting as well as the number of men shot at, all else equal?

For example, would 240 men shooting at 960 men incur twice as many casualties than when shooting at 480 men, again all else equal (die roll, modifiers, etc.)?

No

And only half the casualties when 120 men are shooting, compared to 240 men shooting?

Yes

[kronenblatt]

Is the number of casualties inflicted by shooting (javelins or arrows) dependent on the number of men shooting as well as the number of men shot at, all else equal?

For example, would 240 men shooting at 960 men incur twice as many casualties than when shooting at 480 men, again all else equal (die roll, modifiers, etc.)?

No

Ok, thanks Richard. So 240 men shooting at 960 men incur exactly as many casualties than when shooting at 480 men, again all else equal (die roll, modifiers, etc.)? Or which target size modifier for casualties is there?

[rbodleyscott]

Is the number of casualties inflicted by shooting (javelins or arrows) dependent on the number of men shooting as well as the number of men shot at, all else equal?

For example, would 240 men shooting at 960 men incur twice as many casualties than when shooting at 480 men, again all else equal (die roll, modifiers, etc.)?

No

Ok, thanks Richard. So 240 men shooting at 960 men incur exactly as many casualties than when shooting at 480 men, again all else equal (die roll, modifiers, etc.)? Or which target size modifier for casualties is there?

Artillery cause more casualties on larger targets.

[kronenblatt]

No

Ok, thanks Richard. So 240 men shooting at 960 men incur exactly as many casualties than when shooting at 480 men, again all else equal (die roll, modifiers, etc.)? Or which target size modifier for casualties is there?

Artillery cause more casualties on larger targets.

But for non-artillery, target size is irrelevant, casualty infliction wise?

[kronenblatt]

15.2 of the manual says ” ... the random cohesion test score for each of shooting and close combat is retained for the whole turn [for a unit]...”

So for a cohesion test from shooting, two six-sided dice are rolled, and if the same unit in the same turn takes a cohesion test from close combat two six-sided dice are again rolled?

But for all cohesion tests from shooting for the same unit in the same turn, the same two six-sided dice are used?

And new units get new rolls of two six-sided dice?

[rbodleyscott]

Ok, thanks Richard. So 240 men shooting at 960 men incur exactly as many casualties than when shooting at 480 men, again all else equal (die roll, modifiers, etc.)? Or which target size modifier for casualties is there?

Artillery cause more casualties on larger targets.

But for non-artillery, target size is irrelevant, casualty infliction wise?

Yes.

[rbodleyscott]

15.2 of the manual says ” ... the random cohesion test score for each of shooting and close combat is retained for the whole turn [for a unit]...”

So for a cohesion test from shooting, two six-sided dice are rolled, and if the same unit in the same turn takes a cohesion test from close combat two six-sided dice are again rolled?

But for all cohesion tests from shooting for the same unit in the same turn, the same two six-sided dice are used?

And new units get new rolls of two six-sided dice?

Yes.

But for all cohesion tests from close combat for the same unit in the same turn, the same two six-sided dice are used? (But different from the roll for shooting).

This allows the CT to use the same system as the tabletop game, in which (for example) all shooting is resolved before any cohesion test is taken.

If a new roll was performed each time, the whole system would need to be rebalanced to reduce the chances of a cohesion drop for each individual test.

[kronenblatt]

15.2 of the manual says ” ... the random cohesion test score for each of shooting and close combat is retained for the whole turn [for a unit]...”

So for a cohesion test from shooting, two six-sided dice are rolled, and if the same unit in the same turn takes a cohesion test from close combat two six-sided dice are again rolled?

But for all cohesion tests from shooting for the same unit in the same turn, the same two six-sided dice are used?

And new units get new rolls of two six-sided dice?

Yes.

But for all cohesion tests from close combat for the same unit in the same turn, the same two six-sided dice are used? (But different from the roll for shooting).

This allows the CT to use the same system as the tabletop game, in which (for example) all shooting is resolved before any cohesion test is taken.

If a new roll was performed each time, the whole system would need to be rebalanced to reduce the chances of a cohesion drop for each individual test.

Thanks Richard! Now I'm getting a grasp of the rules; what remains is to understand and apply the dynamics of the game. Will just take practice: MP game after MP game after MP game... And SP games too of course

[kronenblatt]

What's the distribution of the losses incurred for Light Artillery and Heavy Artillery? From what I've seen, the incurred losses tend to fall in the far lower end of the indicated range, or is that just a coincidence? For example, 0-50 indicated for Light Artillery resulted in 0 and 4, and not rarely in single-digit losses in cases where upper limit of indicated range is far higher.

[rbodleyscott]

What's the distribution of the losses incurred for Light Artillery and Heavy Artillery? From what I've seen, the incurred losses tend to fall in the far lower end of the indicated range, or is that just a coincidence? For example, 0-50 indicated for Light Artillery resulted in 0 and 4, and not rarely in single-digit losses in cases where upper limit of indicated range is far higher.

The results are skewed towards the lower end for artillery.

Code: Select all

// Returns skewed randomly generated number.
FUNCTION SkewedRandom(min, max, skew_type)
{
int result;
int randomizer;
int difference;

	if (skew_type == 0) // Uniform distribution
		{
			result = Rand(min,max);
		}

	if (skew_type == 1) // Bell-shaped distribution
		{
			result = Rand(min,max) + Rand(min,max);
			result /= 2;
		}

	if (skew_type == 2) // Left skew (low values predominant)
		{
			// This version is equivalent to (Rand(0, max - min) ^ 2) / ((max - min) ^ 1) + min.
			// It gives an average value of approximately 2/3 of the average of a non-skewed range.

			difference = max - min;
			result = Rand(0, difference);
			result *= result;
			result /= difference;
			result += min;
		}

	if (skew_type == 3) // Right skew (high values predominant)
		{
			// Not yet implemented.
			Log ("Skew Type 3 not yet implemented");
			result = Rand(min,max); // To avoid crashing if it is attempted to be used.
		}

	return result;
}

Artillery use skew_type 2

[kronenblatt]

What's the distribution of the losses incurred for Light Artillery and Heavy Artillery? From what I've seen, the incurred losses tend to fall in the far lower end of the indicated range, or is that just a coincidence? For example, 0-50 indicated for Light Artillery resulted in 0 and 4, and not rarely in single-digit losses in cases where upper limit of indicated range is far higher.

The results are skewed towards the lower end for artillery.

Code: Select all

// Returns skewed randomly generated number.
FUNCTION SkewedRandom(min, max, skew_type)
{
int result;
int randomizer;
int difference;

	if (skew_type == 0) // Uniform distribution
		{
			result = Rand(min,max);
		}

	if (skew_type == 1) // Bell-shaped distribution
		{
			result = Rand(min,max) + Rand(min,max);
			result /= 2;
		}

	if (skew_type == 2) // Left skew (low values predominant)
		{
			// This version is equivalent to (Rand(0, max - min) ^ 2) / ((max - min) ^ 1) + min.
			// It gives an average value of approximately 2/3 of the average of a non-skewed range.

			difference = max - min;
			result = Rand(0, difference);
			result *= result;
			result /= difference;
			result += min;
		}

	if (skew_type == 3) // Right skew (high values predominant)
		{
			// Not yet implemented.
			Log ("Skew Type 3 not yet implemented");
			result = Rand(min,max); // To avoid crashing if it is attempted to be used.
		}

	return result;
}

Artillery use skew_type 2

Thanks, Richard! And the other missile types (Bow, Slinger, Javelin, etc.): which distribution types do they have?

[rbodleyscott]

What's the distribution of the losses incurred for Light Artillery and Heavy Artillery? From what I've seen, the incurred losses tend to fall in the far lower end of the indicated range, or is that just a coincidence? For example, 0-50 indicated for Light Artillery resulted in 0 and 4, and not rarely in single-digit losses in cases where upper limit of indicated range is far higher.

The results are skewed towards the lower end for artillery.

Code: Select all

// Returns skewed randomly generated number.
FUNCTION SkewedRandom(min, max, skew_type)
{
int result;
int randomizer;
int difference;

	if (skew_type == 0) // Uniform distribution
		{
			result = Rand(min,max);
		}

	if (skew_type == 1) // Bell-shaped distribution
		{
			result = Rand(min,max) + Rand(min,max);
			result /= 2;
		}

	if (skew_type == 2) // Left skew (low values predominant)
		{
			// This version is equivalent to (Rand(0, max - min) ^ 2) / ((max - min) ^ 1) + min.
			// It gives an average value of approximately 2/3 of the average of a non-skewed range.

			difference = max - min;
			result = Rand(0, difference);
			result *= result;
			result /= difference;
			result += min;
		}

	if (skew_type == 3) // Right skew (high values predominant)
		{
			// Not yet implemented.
			Log ("Skew Type 3 not yet implemented");
			result = Rand(min,max); // To avoid crashing if it is attempted to be used.
		}

	return result;
}

Artillery use skew_type 2

Thanks, Richard! And the other missile types (Bow, Slinger, Javelin, etc.): which distribution types do they have?

skew_type 1 (bell-shaped)

[SnuggleBunnies]

What's the distribution of the losses incurred for Light Artillery and Heavy Artillery? From what I've seen, the incurred losses tend to fall in the far lower end of the indicated range, or is that just a coincidence? For example, 0-50 indicated for Light Artillery resulted in 0 and 4, and not rarely in single-digit losses in cases where upper limit of indicated range is far higher.

Keep in mind though that other than with cavalry and elephants, the main use of artillery isn't inflicting casualties but instead adding -1 to cohesion rolls for the unit it fires at.

[kronenblatt]

What's the distribution of the losses incurred for Light Artillery and Heavy Artillery? From what I've seen, the incurred losses tend to fall in the far lower end of the indicated range, or is that just a coincidence? For example, 0-50 indicated for Light Artillery resulted in 0 and 4, and not rarely in single-digit losses in cases where upper limit of indicated range is far higher.

Keep in mind though that other than with cavalry and elephants, the main use of artillery isn't inflicting casualties but instead adding -1 to cohesion rolls for the unit it fires at.

Good point SnuggleBunnies, thanks: hadn't thought about it that way. And with "other than with cavalry and elephants" you mean that inflicting casualties with artillery is still useful against cavalry and elephants?

[rbodleyscott]

What's the distribution of the losses incurred for Light Artillery and Heavy Artillery? From what I've seen, the incurred losses tend to fall in the far lower end of the indicated range, or is that just a coincidence? For example, 0-50 indicated for Light Artillery resulted in 0 and 4, and not rarely in single-digit losses in cases where upper limit of indicated range is far higher.

Keep in mind though that other than with cavalry and elephants, the main use of artillery isn't inflicting casualties but instead adding -1 to cohesion rolls for the unit it fires at.

Good point SnuggleBunnies, thanks: hadn't thought about it that way. And with "other than with cavalry and elephants" you mean that inflicting casualties with artillery is still useful against cavalry and elephants?

Not to put words in Snuggle's mouth, but essentially you have a reasonable chance to disrupt cavalry or elephants with a lucky shot from artillery alone, but they are extremely unlikely to disrupt infantry without another unit or two shooting at them too, because they usually won't cause enough casualties to trigger a cohesion test.

One useful tactic is to shoot with all your other shooting troops, and after doing so, make a judgement which unit to shoot the artillery at to have to most chance of causing a cohesion drop. (Obviously not one that has already dropped cohesion from shooting this turn). If the artillery shoot at a unit that took a test from other shooting, but passed it, surprisingly often the extra -1 modifier will tip the unit into failing.

If the artillery are able to shoot at such a unit, don't worry about them shooting at half effect because the target is in their outer shooting arc, the -1 CT modifier will still apply.