Newbie Questions

[Green]

Hmm, so I had never seen that part of the manual before, that I recall. I have always worked from this part of the manual:

Disruption - if the fire result affects the target unit, then the target unit performs a Morale Check based on the amount of the effect.

So this states there is a morale check, but I can see the other section is different. Either way, I would guess it means the amount of losses compared to size impact the chance of failing the morale check, either by suppressing some results directly, or simply not making the check - the effect would be the same. Ultimately, a lot of the under the hood math in the game is not fully disclosed, and I have just learned to play.

But ultimately, I am fairly confident the fire losses are calculated separately, not summed and the results calculated as a whole. As the non-map results show each unit's fire separately, I am reasonably sure from prior discussions over the years that each one is calculated separately and the total losses are added up, rather than one calculation being applied.

Rick

Sorry Rick, but we seem to be talking at cross purposes.

The manual states;

"Thus a battalion unit that takes a loss of 15 men has a 50% chance of requiring a morale check and a battalion unit that takes a loss of 60 men has about an 80% chance of requiring a morale check."

Are you saying the manual is in error? This cannot be interpreted as meaning that the amount of losses impacts the chance of failing the Morale Check. It is unambiguous that the losses impact the chance of requiring a Morale Check.

I understand that the manual says;

"Disruption - if the fire result affects the target unit, then the target unit performs a Morale Check based on the amount of the effect."

But I think this is just poorly worded and should be interpreted as;

"Disruption - if the fire result affects the target unit, then based on the amount of the effect, the target unit performs a Morale Check."

The manual would then be consistent.

Whether the losses are calculated separately or together is not the issue as the average losses would be the same either way. It is not surprising therefore that "prior discussions over the years" have found no fault with this.

What is at issue is how many Morale Checks are performed. My point is that there is never more than one Morale Check performed per attack. I have never seen an attack cause a non-Disrupted unit to go straight to being Broken. So I do not see how "the effect would be the same". Clearly, attacking as a group or attacking separately can yield very different results in terms of Morale Checks. Are you saying you do not agree with this?