Re: [mepbmlist] Army question

[DrakaraGM@...]

Not positive, but I believe the multiple armies grab a percentage of the
single army's attention based on some offensive strength calculation, rather
than just numbers of troops or constitution or whatever. It seems like armies
with better weapons, archers (so strength is higher proportionately than
constitution) fight a larger percentage of the enemy, while armies with better
armor fight a smaller percentage. Not sure just how artifacts, war machines and
spells enter into the calculation, but I think they come into play after the
division is determined, so an army that has such things does better in its
battle than one without, i.e. it fights fewer enemy troops than it would have
if such things were added in the initial calculations.

In a message dated 2/14/2007 6:58:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
RFmehl@... writes:




what is the rule when a single army fights 2 or three enemy armies? how is
the single army's offense/defense divided up vs the three opposing armies?

Richard









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Benjamin Shushan]

Not positive about this, but I think it's "pro-rata" unless you do something
like AttNat instead of AttEnmy.

Hth.

b

PS Nope, not dead. Just barely ... :)

-----Original Message-----
From: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com [mailto:mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com] On Behalf
Of DrakaraGM@...
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 7:46 PM
To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Army question

Not positive, but I believe the multiple armies grab a percentage of the
single army's attention based on some offensive strength calculation, rather

than just numbers of troops or constitution or whatever. It seems like
armies
with better weapons, archers (so strength is higher proportionately than
constitution) fight a larger percentage of the enemy, while armies with
better
armor fight a smaller percentage. Not sure just how artifacts, war
machines and
spells enter into the calculation, but I think they come into play after
the
division is determined, so an army that has such things does better in its
battle than one without, i.e. it fights fewer enemy troops than it would
have
if such things were added in the initial calculations.

In a message dated 2/14/2007 6:58:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
RFmehl@... writes:




what is the rule when a single army fights 2 or three enemy armies? how is
the single army's offense/defense divided up vs the three opposing armies?

Richard









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Adrian Sheridan]

that is my understanding too. The one army gets divided proportionally between the other three, depending on their size compare to each other
So to be easy 1000 Vs 1000, 2000 and 1000 would be 250, 500 and 250 allocated. I need to look at a few turns where my armies have done this and see what happened numerically.

Adrian

--- bshushan@... wrote:

From: "Benjamin Shushan" <bshushan@...>
To: <mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com>
Subject: RE: [mepbmlist] Army question
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:13:28 -0500

Not positive about this, but I think it's "pro-rata" unless you do something
like AttNat instead of AttEnmy.

Hth.

b

PS Nope, not dead. Just barely ... :)

-----Original Message-----
From: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com [mailto:mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com] On Behalf
Of DrakaraGM@...
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 7:46 PM
To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Army question

Not positive, but I believe the multiple armies grab a percentage of the
single army's attention based on some offensive strength calculation, rather

than just numbers of troops or constitution or whatever. It seems like
armies
with better weapons, archers (so strength is higher proportionately than
constitution) fight a larger percentage of the enemy, while armies with
better
armor fight a smaller percentage. Not sure just how artifacts, war
machines and
spells enter into the calculation, but I think they come into play after
the
division is determined, so an army that has such things does better in its
battle than one without, i.e. it fights fewer enemy troops than it would
have
if such things were added in the initial calculations.

In a message dated 2/14/2007 6:58:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
RFmehl@... writes:




what is the rule when a single army fights 2 or three enemy armies? how is
the single army's offense/defense divided up vs the three opposing armies?

Richard









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Yahoo! Groups Links

[DrakaraGM@...]

It isn't just troop quantities -- it has to do with strength I am pretty
sure. I have seen battles where one army of HC and one army of HI, of equal
size, took about equal percentage losses, because the 1000 HC fought a larger
percentage of the enemy due to being stronger offensively. Now, if all the
troops were the same type of troop, with the same training, weapons and morale,
then yeah, split the other army by troop numbers and you'll probably be
right. And a lot of nations do tend to field a lot of HI armies with wooden
weapons, no armor, and whatever morale they hire or split them off at -- but those
who end up with different types of troops in their armies will see results
that vary a little more widely.

-- Ernie III -- playing since game 3 of 1650 by the original GSI...

In a message dated 2/14/2007 10:16:47 PM Eastern Standard Time,
morgoth@... writes:

that is my understanding too. The one army gets divided proportionally
between the other three, depending on their size compare to each other
So to be easy 1000 Vs 1000, 2000 and 1000 would be 250, 500 and 250
allocated. I need to look at a few turns where my armies have done this and see what
happened numerically.

Adrian






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]