Re: [eia] errata rules

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thus spake "Kyle H":
[snip]
> 
>     The second new rule is called "Overwhelming Numbers" and it reads as
> follows:
> 
> 12.3.10 [A]: OVERWHELMING NUMBERS: Field or limited field combats where one
> side has a 5:1 or better ratio in strength factors _must_ be resolved using
> trivial combat.  EXCEPTION: An outnumbered _defender_ may attempt to
> withdraw
> before the trivial combat by rolling the commander's strategic rating or
> less.
> 
> Again, I'm not sure whether we should go with either of these rules.  All
> the rest of the errata rules, I'm happy to treat as official.  However, I
> think Forcible Access and Overwhelming Numbers should be debated prior to
> being accepted as official.  (If it makes any difference, the writers of
> these errata place Overwhelming Numbers in chapter 12, making it an optional
> rule.  But they place Forcible Access in chapter 10, making it a core
> miscellaneous rule.)
> 
> Go Buckeyes, beat Michigan!
> 
> kdh

One effect that Overwhelming Numbers would have is to increase casualties 
for the larger side. Trivial combats are resolved on the 5-2 table, which 
is better than the tables that most rounds of normal battles are resolved 
on. I haven't been able to think of a reason why being dramatically 
outnumbered should make your men that much more effective.

On the other hand, it does make sense to me that a very small force would 
be able to slip away prior to combat. However, this would be moot in most 
circumstances, as a force outnumbered 5:1 would be likely to be wiped out 
in pursuit. And the defender has a chance to withdraw in a normal battle 
anyway.

So I'm voting against Overwhelming Numbers.

I'm not sure what I think about Forcible Access yet.

-- 
J.


_______________________________________________
eia mailing list
eia@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia