Just a quick correction/clarification to my last post:
Where I said:
"ALL I am talking about is raw weight of firepower in terms of bullets or
energy pulses being sent downrange with a reasonable chance of killing
something when they arrive, with all other factors being equal for now. "
It really should have been:
"....with a reasonable chance of HITTING something when they arrive...."
Though even that's not strictly right, as it's more a case of "AFFECTING" the
target, whether that means physically hitting or just putting down enough near
misses to suppress them.
I'm not concerned with what happens after the bullets/pulses/whatever
arrive - that's the next step of the resolution.
> Ground Zero Games wrote:
Dunno if this will help much, Jon, but there is a "theorm" (that's what it's
called, but buggered if I can remember the name or where I saw it) which
states that a single soldier, otherwise identical to an enemy save
that he has twice the firepower, is not worth twice as much as his foe, but
only SQRT(2), or 1.414... times as much because he is equally
vulnerable to being hit/"affected" when under fire. That might be a
start for part of what you're trying to establish. Of course, you'd then
have to factor in improved defences as well according to the technology
involved and the PSB on which it operates, much as other posters have
said -- and, inevitably, training, which seems to be the most decisive
factor according to people like John, who presumably ought to know about
that sort of thing. I ain't gonna argue the point with them.
Phil
> Phillip Atcliffe wrote:
> Dunno if this will help much, Jon, but there is a "theorm" (that's what
Lanchester's Square Law; basically Combat power = square root of (lethality *
survivability).
Later,