Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Baduin" data-source="post: 3792596" data-attributes="member: 45562">The problem is that Lanchester model cannot be applied to the real combat, especially ground combat. It also cannot be applied to D&amp;D combat. It simply disregards the question of frontage. In hand to hand combat there is a limited number of opponents which can engage you, especially if you are a part of formation. In Peru, 200 Spanish soldiers could defeat an Inka army of any size - unless they grew to tired. Elite armies of 30 thousand Indians were simply destroyed by them.<a href="http://www.angelfire.com/ga4/guilmartin.com/Edge.html" target="_blank">http://www.angelfire.com/ga4/guilmartin.com/Edge.html</a>As for D&amp;D - the difference is that Lanchester model assumes that if you are 2 times as good as your opponent, in the same unit of time you can kill 2 of them, and they can kill 1 of you. It is as if all fighters were exactly equal and the only difference were the hit points.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Baduin, post: 3792596, member: 45562"] The problem is that Lanchester model cannot be applied to the real combat, especially ground combat. It also cannot be applied to D&D combat. It simply disregards the question of frontage. In hand to hand combat there is a limited number of opponents which can engage you, especially if you are a part of formation. In Peru, 200 Spanish soldiers could defeat an Inka army of any size - unless they grew to tired. Elite armies of 30 thousand Indians were simply destroyed by them. [url]http://www.angelfire.com/ga4/guilmartin.com/Edge.html[/url] As for D&D - the difference is that Lanchester model assumes that if you are 2 times as good as your opponent, in the same unit of time you can kill 2 of them, and they can kill 1 of you. It is as if all fighters were exactly equal and the only difference were the hit points. [/QUOTE]

Verification