Okay, it seems that casualties will occur on a percentage liklihood according to firepower and range and increasing guns may achieve a level that guarentees fatigues and increases liklihood of gun loss.
That is as it alway has been.
The argument seems to be that when probability is 80% of fatigue increase and 5% that a gun will be lost, one should keep firing individual units with the equal expected results in fatigues and gun losses as had you fired the entire stack in one blast.
That does not seem to match my experience. [?][?][?]
General Whitehead has given us the most useful information, but what needs to be addressed are questions such as if I have 16 equivalent guns at a range for double power(2X):
1. Will I be more likely to inflict gun losses on my opponent by firing the guns singly or in combinations of their units? How about one gun units?
<font color="orange">My experience is that firing single units will result in many "no effect" outcomes. It seems logical that that means that those are lost effects, while had they been fired in mass, their effect would add to the liklihood of inflicting casualties or fatigues without possibility of their lost power.</font id="orange">
2. Accordingly, will fatigue accumulation be increased by firing with unit combinations so that the firepower increases or guarentees damage results?
I have played naval warfare games as well as land warfare, and they both seem to agree that with increasing firepower (starting with about 3 guns)that results are increased better than an arithmatical increase, (1+1=2FP, but 1+2=4FP) but then there are no further firepower effectiveness accelerated increases.
<u>This is not an important issue for me</u>, but as the games programming evolves toward more accuracy in realism, I expect it to show up.
BG Ross McDaniel
2nd Bde, 3rd Div, III Corps, AoG, CSA
From Abraham Lincoln
"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything."
"When I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally."
"I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects---certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man. "
|