Re: Small squads/random losses

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Henrix wrote:

> Derk Groeneveld wrote:
> >Recalling the recent discussion about squad sizes, and a good many
people
> >favouring relatively small squads, it struck me that these would be
rather
> >severely affected by any reductions in size due to the 'under
strength
> >units' rules on page 3.
> 
> Uhm, page 3? You mean p.10? Rolling a d10 (if fresh) for each figure,
on a 
> one they're absent?

Apparantly my brain rolled a 1; I could have sworn I checked the page
no.

> We use them, although we often make the die rolls in advance, as we 
> generally play refereed scenarios (where the referee decides scenario
and 
> forces) where SNAFU is the order of the day.
> On the other hand, we do not use very small squads. Generally 6 or 8
man in 
> a squad.

That's the squad size I'm aiming for. And I agree, those SNAFU's do make
for a more interesting day, as they supply problems to solve :)

Cheers,

  Derk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine

iD8DBQE63o5+JXH58oo6ncURAumzAJ9ayj6VkjbdxNe/hrGdC+4kwMsZcQCgzZ4V
j0GU69yKwTvh2+BcnvkBPyY=
=DpP+