Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
3 Posts

Growling Tigers: The Battle for Changde, 1943» Forums » Rules

Subject: A Few questions on combat results related rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Shaun Osborne
United Kingdom
New Mills
Derbyshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi there, just to say I love the magazine (Battles) and had a great time with Into the Bastards!

However, I'm struggling with GT.

1. the combat results table seems a bit weird. For instance if you have a combat strength/defence strength ratio of 2:1 and roll for damage in that column a high die roll (11-12) nets a damage of 1/2. Shouldn't this be 0/2?? This is penalising the attacker for getting a high number, whereas a roll of 9-10 gives 0/1. This pattern is repeated in other columns. I would expect a high die roll to simulate a total victory based upon the results lower down the scale of die rolls? The whole table seems odd in places, like the numbers are in the wrong order?

2. I have an infantry unit that has been stepped down, it was then disorganised by barrage. I want to attack it. The attacking unit has combat strength of 2, the defending unit 1. Because it is disorganised should i not half its defence (rounding down)? This would bring it to zero, but there are no rules specifying whether I can assign a zero to anything (i suspect not, because the CRT doesn't have 1/0, 2/0 factors?

3. Rules state that being in a village/town results in doubling defence AND COMBAT strength. Is that a mistake? There is nothing on the Terrain table to note doubling strength when in a village/town?


Many Thanks.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
olivier revenu
France
urt
Pyrennees atlantiques
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mb
Whoover wrote:

1. the combat results table seems a bit weird. For instance if you have a combat strength/defence strength ratio of 2:1 and roll for damage in that column a high die roll (11-12) nets a damage of 1/2. Shouldn't this be 0/2?? This is penalising the attacker for getting a high number, whereas a roll of 9-10 gives 0/1. This pattern is repeated in other columns. I would expect a high die roll to simulate a total victory based upon the results lower down the scale of die rolls? The whole table seems odd in places, like the numbers are in the wrong order?


This battle was a bloodbath. If you kill many ennemies, there are a lot of probabilities that you will also lost a lot of men. The CRT is the translation of that and is coherent with this sort of battle.


Whoover wrote:
2. I have an infantry unit that has been stepped down, it was then disorganised by barrage. I want to attack it. The attacking unit has combat strength of 2, the defending unit 1. Because it is disorganised should i not half its defence (rounding down)? This would bring it to zero, but there are no rules specifying whether I can assign a zero to anything (i suspect not, because the CRT doesn't have 1/0, 2/0 factors?


Yes, minimum is 1 . We should have precised it.

Whoover wrote:
3. Rules state that being in a village/town results in doubling defence AND COMBAT strength. Is that a mistake? There is nothing on the Terrain table to note doubling strength when in a village/town?


You're right. The sentence in the rules should not say "Combat strength". The CRT is correct. We'll add that to the FAQ/Errata.

Thanks!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shaun Osborne
United Kingdom
New Mills
Derbyshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for clarifying.
 
 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.