ORIGINAL: WarHunter
ORIGINAL: brian brian
3:1 in the snow = 1:1 in the sun. Advantage, defender. You are lucky the Russians didn't have their special units with the white uniforms. You basically rolled a 3, with a +1 for flipped, or a 4 on a 1:1 attack in WiF5. Not likely to lead to a front-shattering breakthrough, though you did clear the hex, which can be very useful early in a turn.
Would it not be 3:2 instead of a 1:1? Not that it makes alot of difference. Just wondering.
yes, that combat in #828 I was referring to, at +5 on 2d10, is the same as a 2.5 : 1 attack. two of the pluses came from the disorganized defender, which is replicated on the 1d10 by a +1 to the die roll. So it would have been a 1.5:1, or a 3:2 attack, with a +1. I can't remember if there is a 3:2 column on the 1d10 or the older 1d6 charts though.
there was no fractional in the original odds calculation, a straight 3:1. so it is a little tough to match this 2d10 combat to the 1d10, depending on what columns are available. but then a lot of 2d10 combats are like that, as you can frequently get a single plus, or a minus, one for this or that, and 1 pip in 2d10 combat represents 1/2 an odds level.
2d10 adds a lot of tactical flavors to the combat system. most of them are present in 1d10 with Blitz Bonus, but not all of them. it helps to get some practice with it, for sure. each +2 is an odds level.... then look back at the 1d10 charts for what might happen, though it is not an exact match with a bell curve of results, rather than linear.
I find there is much less luck involved. you are more likely to roll less than 5 several times sequentially on the 1d10 and ruin an offensive than you would be using the 2d10. what is more memorable - a "2" on the 2d10, or two "1" results on the 1d10, separated by an end-of-turn sequence perhaps? Everyone remembers rolling a "2" on the 2d10, but rolling "1" twice in a row is far more devastating to an attacker.
