4-3-2 becomes 3-2-1Posted: December 10, 2014
On these two occasions I used Units that had three Infantry, two Cavalry, or two Artillery figures, and each ‘hit’ was marked on a Unit using small, transparent Roman Blind rings. I soon realised that I did not need as many figures in a Unit as it had Strength Value (which is what I had previously done); what I needed was one less figure than the Unit’s Strength Value.
This can best be illustrated thus:
An Infantry Unit (Strength Value = 4).
An Infantry Unit after one ‘hit’ (Strength Value = 3).
An Infantry Unit after two ‘hits’ (Strength Value = 2).
An Infantry Unit after three ‘hits’ (Strength Value = 1).
The next hit will not need to be marked as the Unit’s Strength Value will be reduced to 0 and the Unit will be removed.
The upshot of this is the fact that I can reduce the number of figures I need to represent Units from the former 4-3-2 ratios I previously used to 3-2-1. (I must admit that for aesthetic reasons the sight of a single figure crewing a piece of artillery does jar somewhat … but I suppose that there is no reason why I could not increase the Strength Value of Artillery Units to 3, thus ensuring that Artillery Units will always have two figures.)
This is certainly something that I need to think about and – if possible – to play-test further.