Re: CA question

On 30-Mar-01 at 15:05, Barclay, Tom (tomb@bitheads.com) wrote:
> Roger said:
> By the shift method the d6 versus d10 gets 8 shifts becoming d12 vs
d4.
> The vet goes down about 79%.
> 
> By the roll against every one the vet goes down 99.98% of the time.
> 
> Roger
> 
> Tomb says:
> Note that my proposed die shifts limited to two. Odds worse than 3:1
were
> treated as 3:1 (at some point, attacker density just doesn't get any
> better... I decided two shifts was enough). So the 8 Greens vs the vet
> would be 8d6 vs. d6. He'd have a *chance* to kick their arses....  but
he
> probably would not. In actual fact, assuming he rolled well, he'd die,
but
> he'd probably take a bunch of them with him. _that_ is the risk of
mass
> attack... ;) 

Sorry, my mistake in methodology.  My assumption was the greens each 
rolled a d6 and the vet rolled against each.  That would be 8d6 vs 8d10.

He would have little better than 17% chance of living with your method.