Matrix Games Forums

I don't believe the manual includes this detail though someone may have asked the question here before. If so, my apologies.

In Naval Combat resolutions are casualty percentages always rounded down to the last whole integer? The examples in the manual had small remainders rounded down, but I'm not sure how the program would treat a combat result such as 7.9

Also, is my reading of the rule correct that blockading fleets intercepting must inflict higher losses than their opponents or lose the naval combat? That is to say, if both lose the same, fleets that were blockaded win the combat and can escape to sea?

Thanks!

I'm pretty sure in the board game 0.5 rounded up, lesser fractions down.

The original game chart 7.42 1983 edition

ex:

15% of 10 =2

less than .5 round down.

fleets attempting to break the blockade must inflict higher casualties to win[assuming one side isn't totally eliminated]

9.3.1

Thanks for the responses, guys. The rounding makes sense (and I'll assume the old EiA rule quoted is applicable in EiANW unless Marshall or Richard says differently).

The question of "who wins the tie" in running blockades is less clear to me because of the seeming contradiction with this language in the EiANW manual:

Fleets of a major power that are at war with blockading leets may attempt to leave that port (run the blockade) but will be automatically intercepted by the blockading enemy major power’s stack

Sec 8.8 (my emphasis)

followed by this language in Sec 9.3.1 (Naval Combat/Determining Victory)

In naval combat by interception: if both sides have surviving ships and losses were equal, the side that attacked (phasing side) wins the naval combat.

Would one of the developers be so kind as to clarify?

Thanks!
Ron

ORIGINAL: exp101

Thanks for the responses, guys. The rounding makes sense (and I'll assume the old EiA rule quoted is applicable in EiANW unless Marshall or Richard says differently).

The question of "who wins the tie" in running blockades is less clear to me because of the seeming contradiction with this language in the EiANW manual:

Fleets of a major power that are at war with blockading leets may attempt to leave that port (run the blockade) but will be automatically intercepted by the blockading enemy major power’s stack

Sec 8.8 (my emphasis)

followed by this language in Sec 9.3.1 (Naval Combat/Determining Victory)

In naval combat by interception: if both sides have surviving ships and losses were equal, the side that attacked (phasing side) wins the naval combat.

Would one of the developers be so kind as to clarify?

Thanks!
Ron

Ron,

Round up from .5 and down from .49.

Also, unlike in EiA where the non-phasing intercepting side was deemed to be the attacker, in EiANW, the phasing side is always considered the attacker (section 9.1). Therefore, because of this change, it was necessary to switch the wording in EiANW section 9.3.1 so that the attacker would end up as the winner when there was a tie (which would have been the defender according to EiA 6.3.4.1).

Hope that clarifies it.

Richard

I think it does. Thanks. In other words, a fleet in port may successfully run a blockade if it can manage to match losses with the blockading fleet.