$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 68.27

4,763 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
30% of Goal | 28 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

Desert Fox Deluxe» Forums » Rules

Subject: Combat doesn't make sense. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Brown
United Kingdom
Stockport
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Under the latest guidance from the designer I understand that when taking step loses you do it my morale groups in the stack.

However this means that a stack can avoid losses by being in two different morale groups (as I have just experienced)

Two, 2 step units, one morale 3 the other 4.

Both are subject to a Qw result (quarter step loss). As you do it by morale group, the one with moral of 3 doesn't take a hit as you only round up fractions of 1/2 or more. The same applies to the one of morale 4. However if they had both been of morale 3, there would have been one step loss.

Either I am misunderstanding the rules, or they are flawed
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph Youst
United States
Emeryville
California
flag msg tools
designer
easy fix = always inflict a minimum of one step loss if there is any kind of loss requirement. Another thing we did: We allowed each player to choose a "lead" unit for combat morale of the stack. The player with the higher morale got the difference as column modifiers. Makes unit quality more important. If morale is the same, no mods. Any losses however, must be inflicted first on the lead unit.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Haggett
United States
Riverside
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
1/4 loss on a 2-step unit, gives a 1/2 step loss. As you note, this is rounded up.

In your combat, both units would lose one step. If both had been morale three, there would have been one loss. If the units had one-step each, then there would be no losses to either unit, just a retreat.

So I'm unclear on why you did this wrong, or what you think is broken. You correctly cite the rounding rule, but then don't use it. Unless they are one-step units instead?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Brown
United Kingdom
Stockport
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Quote:
1/4 loss on a 2-step unit, gives a 1/2 step loss. As you note, this is rounded up.


Sorry, being thick, but what about 1 step units in the situation I described?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Brown
United Kingdom
Stockport
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Quote:
easy fix = always inflict a minimum of one step loss if there is any kind of loss requirement. Another thing we did: We allowed each player to choose a "lead" unit for combat morale of the stack. The player with the higher morale got the difference as column modifiers. Makes unit quality more important. If morale is the same, no mods. Any losses however, must be inflicted first on the lead unit.


I appreciate your comments but I'm not keen on using house rules.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Haggett
United States
Riverside
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
You're not thick, one-step units do create the situation you described--Q results are rounded down on single steps. There does tend to be a mix of results on the CRT, so there is only one column where there are three Q's; most seem to have one or two.

Note that H results will always cause at least one loss.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.