Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
46 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Illusions of Glory» Forums » Rules

Subject: Taking loses rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Michal Senajko
Spain
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
16.6.3 b states:

"Units taking fire must apply enough Loss Factors to
cover the entire Loss Number inflicted by the enemy, even
if it destroys one or more of those units".

But if the loss number is smaller than the smallest loss factor among the units, so no loss is applied. So in effect the loss mechanics works exactly as in Paths of Glory however it's worded differently. Is that correct? If so, the wording in PoG was more precise and easier to digest:

"Each player must fulfill as much of their Loss Number as
possible without taking more losses than their Loss Number. The
player may not take fewer losses than required if it is possible
to take the exact Loss Number, but the player never takes more
losses than the Loss Number".
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
To clarify this, I am using the following Rule 12.6.2a in the upcoming Living Rules IoG booklet:

If the Loss Number is equal to or greater than the smallest
Loss Factor (LF) among the units taking fire, then the units taking fire
must try to absorb all the damage indicated by Loss Number. First, the
unit with the smallest LN must try to absorb the entire LN. If it is destroyed, the next unit with the smallest LN must try to absorb the entire LN. If two units have the same LN, and one of them is reduced strength, then the reduced strength unit must try to absorb the entire LN. Otherwise, the player whose units are taking fire decides which of those units will absorb the damage.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal Senajko
Spain
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ohiogrognard wrote:
To clarify this, I am using the following Rule 12.6.2a in the upcoming Living Rules IoG booklet:

If the Loss Number is equal to or greater than the smallest
Loss Factor (LF) among the units taking fire, then the units taking fire
must try to absorb all the damage indicated by Loss Number. First, the
unit with the smallest LN must try to absorb the entire LN. If it is destroyed, the next unit with the smallest LN must try to absorb the entire LN. If two units have the same LN, and one of them is reduced strength, then the reduced strength unit must try to absorb the entire LN. Otherwise, the player whose units are taking fire decides which of those units will absorb the damage.


So is the loss mechanics exactly the same as in PoG, with the exception that the units with smallest LN should take the loses first? I.e. if a corps is stacked with the army, the corps has to be reduced first?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
This is the best way to enforce absorbing the entire LN.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal Senajko
Spain
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
OK, thanks Perry.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Apan Arne
msg tools
ohiogrognard wrote:
This is the best way to enforce absorbing the entire LN.


Is it?
I mean the situation where you have a 2-1-3 SCU stacked with a 4-3-3 LCU and you take a '7' LN. If you must take the first hit on smallest LN (the SCU) you can't take the entire '7' LN. If you take it on the LCU first however, you can.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
The entire LN is still being absorbed. There'll often be a situation where part of an LN is absorbed without damage. I'm providing structure that's absent from PoG.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Douglas Bush
United States
Arlington
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Perry,

Played five turns FtF with a friend. Overall IOG package is very nice and the game is fun, but this one (very important) fuzzy rule is killing me. I recommend just going back to the PoG wording and call it good.

Doug
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Doug, isn't this clearer:

I am using the following Rule 12.6.2a in the upcoming Living Rules IoG booklet:

If the Loss Number is equal to or greater than the smallest
Loss Factor (LF) among the units taking fire, then the units taking fire
must try to absorb all the damage indicated by Loss Number. First, the
unit with the smallest LN must try to absorb the entire LN. If it is destroyed, the next unit with the smallest LN must try to absorb the entire LN. If two units have the same LN, and one of them is reduced strength, then the reduced strength unit must try to absorb the entire LN. Otherwise, the player whose units are taking fire decides which of those units will absorb the damage.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Doug, going back to Ted Raicer's rules for unit losses probably won't work for IoG because a player can use his PoG wording to avoid LCU eliminations and their downward effect on Troop Quality.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal K
Poland
Otwock
Mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
While it certainly allows for more LCUs being killed, overall loses will be most probably smaller (as many of them will be absorbed without damage).

As for the updated rule, I have one comment to that part:
"First, the unit with the smallest LN must try to absorb the entire LN."

Wouldn't you achieve better effect writting:

"First, the LCU unit with the smallest LN must try to absorb the entire LN."

Then you would have your LCU killed, divisions will not shield corps from full losses (as in example with SCU 2-1-3 and LCU 4-3-3).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Michal, your suggestion would allow LCUs with an LF of 4 to absorb LNs of 3 or less to absorb the entire LN without taking damage, shielding defending SCUs in the same space.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal K
Poland
Otwock
Mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In dded, that would be the effect. The question was what was intent of the rule - to kill as much LCUs as possible to affect the TQ, or to allow for highest losses. I see that current ruling would fall somewhere in the middle - on one hand not all losses will be converted in to damage under new rules, but on the other hand they will not go automatically to LCU but to unit with smallest LF,which is usually SCU.

I am curious to test this - let us see how it goes.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
As in PoG, the intent is to make the units fired on take as much actual damage as possible when absorbing the LN rolled by firing units.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal Senajko
Spain
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Now, when I've played a little, I can tell that the current rule doesn't serve the purpose of taking as much loses as possible. For that, the original PoG rule would be better. If the purpose was to destroy as many LCU's as possible, then the rule is fine. Personally. I'd prefer the PoG rule - forcing the players to destroy completely the weakest units is artificial and counterintuitive for the purposes of taking the loses.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Using the PoG approach to allocating combat losses proved inadequate in trying to match the scale and pace of historic casualties.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henry Bradley
Switzerland
Wabern
Bern
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I also am having difficulty with the rules on absorbing losses. In
POG - Rule 12.4.3 Each player must fulfill as much of their Loss Number as
possible without taking more losses than their Loss Number.

Is the intention in IoG that the Loss Number should be exceeded.
Example - 2LCUs LF factor 2 have to absorb 3LF - Options:

a) One LCU flipped for a loss of 2LF as per POG
b) 1 LCU ELIM for a loss of 4LF
c) both LCUs flipped for a loss of 4LF

I suspect it should be option b) but would appreciate guidance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Rule 12.6.2 in the Living Rules manual says on taking losses:

a. If the Loss Number is equal to or greater than the smallest Loss Factor(LF)among the units taking fire, then the units taking fire must try to absorb all the damage indicated by Loss Number (LN). To begin, the unit with the smallest LF must try to absorb the LN. If it loses a step (or is destroyed), the player taking fire must select a unit with the smallest LF to absorb the remaining LN. This includes1)the unit that just lost a step and(2)an SCU that just replaced a destroyed LCU. If that unit loses a step (or is destroyed),the player taking fire must select a unit with the smallest LF to absorb the remaining LN until it loses a step (or is destroyed. The player taking fire repeats this selection process until the entire Loss Number is absorbed by his units (or they are all destroyed. If two or more units have the same LF,the player taking fire decides which of those units will absorb the damage.

b. If the Loss Number is less than the smallest LF among the units taking fire, then those units absorb no damage.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Brinker
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
flag msg tools
Grognards
badge
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hal752 wrote:

a) One LCU flipped for a loss of 2LF as per POG


This one.

The way I understand it:

Step 1. Do you have any units with LN equal to or less than the LF? If no, ignore result. If yes, proceed to step 2.

Step 2. Apply one step's worth of LF to the unit with the smallest LN. (If two or more units have the same LN, you may choose which to apply the LF to.) Subtract that LN from the LF. If any LF remains, return to step 1.

So let's say that you have a LF of 3 to apply to a stack with a 3 LN LCU and a reduced 1 LN SCU. Step 1 says you must apply the result because we have units with LN equal to or less than the LF of 3. Step 2 says it must be applied to the reduced 1 LN SCU. So you eliminate the reduced SCU and subtract its 1 LN from the 3 LF. Now you have 2 LF. Now back to step 1. It's no longer true that you have a unit with a LN equal to or less than the new LF, 2, so you ignore the result.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, because it destroyed the SCU rather than just causing a step loss to the LCU. Also, the SCU screened for the LCU, which is tactically realistic. Using the PoG approach to allocating combat losses proved inadequate in trying to match the scale and pace of historic casualties.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Moreover, you don’t ignore the remaining LN of 2. It’s absorbed by the LCU without causing further damage.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Trifan

Charlotte
North Carolina
msg tools
So if we have say a 4-3-3 unit and a 1-2-2 unit, and we need to take 5LF, under POG rules, we could flip the LCU and the SCU to satisfy the LF,as the requirements were that losses had to satisfy the maximum LF.

In IoG, we have to pick one of the two units, which according to the rules would be the one with lowest LF (1-2-2 unit here). It would get flipped and then flipped again to be eliminated to satisfy 4LF and remaining one LF is ignored. If we picked the 4-3-3, it would get flipped once and then nothing would happen as the 2LF would not be enough to flip it again.

I guess my question is, would it make more sense that when dealing LF, we have to pick the unit that would be able to absorb the most LF (which is different than POG where you could spread it among units). So in above example, the 1-2-2 unit gets picked not because it has the lowest LF but because it could absorb 4LF compared to just 3LF for LCU. And continuing with example, if we had 6LF to absorb, then the 4-3-3 unit should be selected to absorb the damage and be flipped twice as it would absorb the 6LF compared to only 4LF by SCU?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
It would be anomalous to choose destruction of an LCU over an SCU.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Perry Silverman
United States
Powell
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
That’s why the SCU is the first to go under IoG’s loss mechanics.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Brinker
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
flag msg tools
Grognards
badge
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Buddy2337 wrote:
And continuing with example, if we had 6LF to absorb, then the 4-3-3 unit should be selected to absorb the damage and be flipped twice as it would absorb the 6LF compared to only 4LF by SCU?


Are you asking philosophically what should happen or what the IoG rules state? In the latter, you would end up eliminating the SCU, with the final 2 points of loss not enough to cause the LCU to flip.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.