When I first started playing NT one of the problems I (and the people I taught it to) had was understanding "the defender is blocking a narrow approach and has shown a 2-Infantry. What do I need to attack with from my corps to ensure I win and don't end up with a shattered corps?"
NT's attack resolution is "procedural", rather than table driven, and after a game or so I think most people get an understanding for how the attack procedure plays out in practice. That still means the first play through can be a bit rough and have some "gotcha" moments where you use a 2-Infantry in an attack, which leads to your corps being shattered, even though you had a 3-Infantry available.
These tables were an attempt to provide the "end result" of the Attack procedure so that you can quickly understand what an attack would look like without having to go through all the steps in your head.
You read them as so:
I am the attacker. I want to attack across a Wide approach. The defender has troops in the approach. There are no penalties for any troop types to worry about. I need to look at Table 5. We get to the step where he shows his lead defenders. It is a 3-Infantry and a 1-Infantry. I look in the Defense column for the value "4". There are a couple of entries for "4". Say, I wanted to attack with Cavalry. The lowest Strength for any Cav listed is 5. That means if I only have 4 strength worth of cavalry (e.g. a 2 and a 2) then I cannot win no matter what. If I have 6 strength worth of cavalry (e.g. a 3 and a 3) then I will win. The Counter column has a value of 2. That means if he counter attacks me with a strength of 2 (which would require 3-value unit or 2 2-value units, since they take an immediate step loss when counter-attacking) the outcome of the battle will change.
You can even flip it around and read it from the defender's point of view. "My troops are in a narrow approach. What should I lead with to have my best chance of winning? Ah, I see in table 2 that if I use a 2-Infantry the only things that can beat me are a 3-Cavalry or a Guard unit. That feels like a high probability defense. I'll keep my 3-Cavalry uncommitted for the moment."
These tables don't cover all possibilities -- I wanted desperately for it to fit on a single piece of paper -- though I think they cover 95% of the "I want to know what it would take for me to win this attack" scenarios that players are likely to find themselves in.
