I think it would be easier to follow, if you had less details build into the actual flow chart as their own boxes / decisions.
For example take all the special conditions regarding artillery attacks in the beginning. Perhaps a note saying that artillery cannot lead attacks for two consequtive rounds could reduce the complexity of the chart.
I understand the desire to represent the process completely as a flow chart, but I'm not sure it makes for a more useful player aid.
Anyway thanks for the effort. It must have taken a while..
OMG! Thank you for this. You must have read my mind when you made this chart.
I just played my first game 2 days ago, and there were a number of rules that we weren't sure about. This chart just cleared up ALL the questions that we had concerning combat.
In particular, the situation where artillery is declared as a DLU was confusing us and we botched it up. Quickly looking over this chart, I can see exactly where we made our mistakes.
As a learning aid, I think this chart is excellent. As a player aid (ie. to be used in-game), the chart is probably a little unwieldy and need to be simplified, as suggest by ozimek. My only other recommendation to enhance this chart as a learning aid would be to reference the rule# for each decision path, but that would be ALOT of extra work.
As a learning aid, I think this chart is excellent. As a player aid (ie. to be used in-game), the chart is probably a little unwieldy and need to be simplified, as suggest by ozimek.
You are absolutely right. It depends on what you want to use it for. This might call for two versions...
The purpose was to remove doubt as to what the rule actually is in any scenario so I'm glad it works. If I get round to a second edition I'll include morale loss. But showing the rules numbers would make it even more unwieldy than it already is. I don't like rolling dice, so a wargame that doesn't rely on dice is worth even if the rules are rather complex.
Where you're goin' with that gun in your hand?
Iäh! Iäh! Fthagn!
