Re: [eia] Paris results

[Michael Gorman <mpgorman@xxxxxxxx>]

At 10:45 PM 11/30/2006, you wrote:

>For escalated assualt vs. Outflank, aren't you on 3-3 in round 1, a French
>roll of 5+1 = 6 on 3-3 means Davout inflicts -2.8 morale and 15% of 28 = 4
>factors (3 British I - all there was in the pinning force, and 1 Russian I).
>Wellington rolls 4+1 = 5 on 3-1 and inflicts 10% of  9 = -1 M and -1.1
>morale on the French.
>
>In round 2, the Coalition rolls 2+1 = 3 on 5-4 and inflicts 15% of
>(5 pinning + 11 * 2 = 27), which comes to 4 casualties, one of which must be
>the Cav factor since the -2.4 morale loss is just _barely_ enough to break
>Davout in round 2.  However, the French roll 2+1 = 3 on 4-1 and inflict 10%
>of 27 = 3 casualties on the Coalition army and -0.7 morale.
>
>Pursuit is unsuccessful.  Total French losses are -1 M, -3 I, -1 C, and
>total Coalition losses are -5 British I (removing the British IV corps)
>and -2 Russian I.  Davout retreats to Soissons.  -1 PP for France, +1 PP
>each for Britain and Russia.
>
>This distribution of losses is slightly different from Mike's tally.  6/20
>of 7 Coalition losses comes to 2 Russian casualties.

Double checked the escrow and all first round losses were from the British 
1st corps as it was the only force on the battlefield.  So all four factor 
had to be British infantry and could not be from the 4th corps.  As the 
second round losses caused only 2 British losses, the 4th corps must still 
be on the board as the most it could have lost was two of its three factors 
and Russia would only lose one factor as it was only eligible for losses 
when three factors were inflicted and it represented only 6 of 16 factors 
at the time.


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