Re: Pathological combat examples
Rich Skrenta (email@example.com)
Thu, 22 Sep 1994 16:06:48 -0400 (EDT)
> Running summary:
> * The "break" rule causes nonintuitive results (very minor).
> * The "stack leader" rule causes nonintuitive results (can be major).
> * The 4:1 rule causes nonintuitive results with missile troops
> Where nonintuitive results == add units, get less combat effectiveness.
So it's between 4-in-a-row and Smasher. Does Smasher fare better
in terms of helping out small, strong forces against larger, weaker
ones, but with fewer nonintuitive side-effects?
I prefer 4-in-a-row from an implementation/mechanics standpoint,
since it's slightly simpler than Smasher, and makes a little more
sense to me. But I would like to see as exhaustive an analysis
Rich Skrenta <firstname.lastname@example.org>