Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
D&D Next Q&A
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5982769" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>If that really is what they are thinking then they are complete <em>morons</em>. One standard tactical measure is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defeat_in_detail" target="_blank">Defeat in Detail</a> - taking the enemy's force in small chunks.</p><p> </p><p>To outline why it's a stupid idea, imagine there are two forces of warriors. Team A has 4 warriors who move as a single squad. Team B has 10 warriors all spread out.</p><p> </p><p>All warriors are identical, attack simultaneously, do 1hp worth of damage, and then resolve attacks.</p><p> </p><p>4 warriors vs 10. Who wins?</p><p> </p><p>If the defending warriors control who takes the damage in a given fight. Team A's 4 warriors run up to the first enemy, do 4hp worth of damage to him, and take 1hp in reply. First warrior from Team B dead at the loss of 1hp on team A. If team A can spread the damage around equally, they can take 12 hp worth of damage (i.e. 12 enemy warriors) without losing a man. </p><p> </p><p>If the inflicting warriors get to chose who takes the damage but people don't have to engage, with the best tactics I can work out, the 4 warriors take down 9.5 enemy warriors before dying. (See below for the workingsv- a warrior in brackets isn't fighting that round.)</p><p> </p><p>[sblock]Enemy 1</p><p>4,4,4,<em>3 </em>vs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 2</p><p>4,4,4,2vs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 3</p><p>4,4,4,1vs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 4</p><p>4,4,4,Xvs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 5</p><p>4,4,3vs 2</p><p>4,4,2vs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 6</p><p>4,3,(2)vs 2</p><p>4,2,(2)vs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 7</p><p>3,(2),(2) vs 3</p><p>3,2,1 vs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 8</p><p>2,(2),(1) vs 3</p><p>2,2,X vs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 9</p><p>2,1 vs 2</p><p>2,X vs X</p><p> </p><p>Enemy 10 - obvious. The 10th ends up on 2 wounds.[/sblock]</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It's even worse if the four are allowed to withdraw, rest up, and fight another day - they don't fight the battle against enemy four, and can finesse enemy eight by the almost healthy 3 attacking, then being reinforced by the two, then withdrawing the damaged one to finish off. So it's a crushing 7:0 victory (with four guys surviving on one health vs three on full).</p><p> </p><p>Defeat in detail: one of the oldest and most effective tactics. And one that would be completely ignored by this method.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5982769, member: 87792"] If that really is what they are thinking then they are complete [I]morons[/I]. One standard tactical measure is the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defeat_in_detail"]Defeat in Detail[/URL] - taking the enemy's force in small chunks. To outline why it's a stupid idea, imagine there are two forces of warriors. Team A has 4 warriors who move as a single squad. Team B has 10 warriors all spread out. All warriors are identical, attack simultaneously, do 1hp worth of damage, and then resolve attacks. 4 warriors vs 10. Who wins? If the defending warriors control who takes the damage in a given fight. Team A's 4 warriors run up to the first enemy, do 4hp worth of damage to him, and take 1hp in reply. First warrior from Team B dead at the loss of 1hp on team A. If team A can spread the damage around equally, they can take 12 hp worth of damage (i.e. 12 enemy warriors) without losing a man. If the inflicting warriors get to chose who takes the damage but people don't have to engage, with the best tactics I can work out, the 4 warriors take down 9.5 enemy warriors before dying. (See below for the workingsv- a warrior in brackets isn't fighting that round.) [sblock]Enemy 1 4,4,4,[I]3 [/I]vs X Enemy 2 4,4,4,2vs X Enemy 3 4,4,4,1vs X Enemy 4 4,4,4,Xvs X Enemy 5 4,4,3vs 2 4,4,2vs X Enemy 6 4,3,(2)vs 2 4,2,(2)vs X Enemy 7 3,(2),(2) vs 3 3,2,1 vs X Enemy 8 2,(2),(1) vs 3 2,2,X vs X Enemy 9 2,1 vs 2 2,X vs X Enemy 10 - obvious. The 10th ends up on 2 wounds.[/sblock] It's even worse if the four are allowed to withdraw, rest up, and fight another day - they don't fight the battle against enemy four, and can finesse enemy eight by the almost healthy 3 attacking, then being reinforced by the two, then withdrawing the damaged one to finish off. So it's a crushing 7:0 victory (with four guys surviving on one health vs three on full). Defeat in detail: one of the oldest and most effective tactics. And one that would be completely ignored by this method. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
D&D Next Q&A
Top