Re: Small squads/random losses

On 19-Apr-01 at 13:54, agoodall@canada.com (agoodall@canada.com) wrote:
> On Wed, 18 April 2001, 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. 
> > 
> > Am I correct in guessing most people elect not to apply these rules?
Or
> > do you feel the benefits of small squad sizes still outweigh the
> > disadvantages, even with these rules? 
> 
> So, with that in mind, fielding a small squad is doing just that:
fielding
> a small squad. As such, the under strength units rules apply. If you
want 
> to gain the benefits of all those extra activations by using small 
> squads, you run the risk of losing a lot of figures to the 
> understrength rules. 

You aren't going to lose any more figures with small squads or large
squads.  The rules say you roll once per figure, not once per squad.