Re: [SG2] Alternate Quick Combat Resolution (Modified Impact Versus ArmourProcedure)

Well, I wonder if 'ready made shrapnel" from the wall bits breaking off
from the bullet/shell hits on the wall itself would increase the number
of hits thus increasing the number who die from shock/blood loss before
given sufficient medical care (ex-USAF medic guessing on this issue.)
Three shell fragments is bad, that plus 3 brick/rock/wood bits is more
then twice as deadly...

Gracias,
Glenn

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 12:20:54 +0100 KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de
(K.H.Ranitzsch) writes:
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <agoodall@att.net>
>
>> > Dudes standing behind walls must get killed all the time.
>>
>> Realistically, the chance of wounding behind a wall should go way 
>down,
>but
>> the chance of being killed should go up. That's a level of 
>complexity that
>I
>> don't think I want to get into!
>
>Could you explain this reasoning ?
>Why should the chance of getting killed be higher ?
>
>I suppose you do not mean that more people get killed ? E.g. you have 
>ten
>soldiers, without a wall, 2 might get killed in a typical firefight, 
>behind
>the cover 3 get killed  ?
>
>I assume you mean the ratio of Killed to Wounded is higher. 
>E.g.instead of 1
>killed per 10 wounded you have 1 Killed per 3 wounded, but, due to 
>cover
>fewer get wounded  Still a bit hard to understand, but I can think of
>possible reasons:
>- To fight back, soldiers have to expose their heads. Head wounds are 
>more
>likely to kill than wounds elsewhere
>- Any weapon that goes through a wall is likely to kill rather than 
>wound
>somebody behind it.
>
>Puzzled
>Karl Heinz
>
>
>

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!