RE: Merc Guild

--- B Lin <lin@rxkinetix.com> wrote:

> In real life terms, losses of 2-3% are acceptable,
> 5-7% high and 15% can be sustained for one or two
> missions.  Games would play much differently if the

Sure.  Out of a DIVISION.  If a division take 15%
casualties the infantrymen are _ALL_ dead.  In a
platoon, you can't take less than 3% casualties (30
guys, 1 death) and can be wiped out in less than 10
seconds in the right circumstances.  

As a side note, during a deliberate breach, casualties
of 50% among your engineers is excellent, 80% is
acceptable.  100% is not improbable.

> commanders are required to keep their losses
> "reasonable".  In real life, I suspect much of the
> maneuvering is simply to get to the most
> advantageous range (i.e. you can fire, the enemy can
> not) inflict as many casualties you can before
> receiving any, then getting away.  Of course Assault
> will be different and be much higher in cost.

I "suspect" that historical analysis does not bear
this out except in special circumstances.  If you have
the firepower advantage you might take these
casualties.  Loosing battles is a lot more costly.
 
> Would players out there play differently if they had
> a loss restriction placed on them (perhaps some sort
> of exponential victory point cost? Maybe like the
> first vehicle x 1, the second x2, the third x4 the
> fourth x8 etc.?)

This is a bit unrealistic based on the levels of
command involved.

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com