funnystory

“远距离交战的时候，任一方实力与本身数量成正比，即兰切斯特线性律。在近距离交战的时候，任一方实力与本身数量的平方成正比，即兰切斯特平方律。”
版主你搞错了吧...兰切斯特模型是说投射攻击中与数量成平方，面对面攻击中成线性比，换句话说远程交战适用兰切斯特平方律，近距离交战适用兰切斯特线性律。并且兰切斯特线性律在它所对应的肉搏战中尤其不准确。举例来说：包围。任何一只部队陷入包围（战术意义上的）都会处于极大的劣势。但按照理论来说则不存在这个问题，只要士兵转个方向继续投入消耗就 可以，这与实际情况完全不符合。造成如此结果的原因可以分析下：
A：心理因素，在模型中可以省略
B：阵型，这点很重要，a首先要确保外层士兵都转过来了
     即使外层士兵转向仍会面对下列问题
     b：由于处于包围圈内，士兵如果向外进攻，那么他与伙伴的距离会拉远以至于自己要面对几个敌人，所以包围圈内的军队是倾向于内缩的。空间的减少造成：
      1无法轮替作战，虽然兰切斯特模型是让每个人都战斗到死才被身后士兵替换，但实际作战中轮替疲劳或受伤士兵是很常见。
      2由于拥挤，士兵无法有效使用武器
      3内部调动军队的困难
    c：无法机动，一起向前走并且保持队形就不容易了，如果同时还要求有人侧着走或向后走这在大部队中无法实现。这一企图只能使自己被分割成更多小块。
     d：肉搏并非仅和第一排士兵有关，纵队有助于增加冲力，从而击碎对方战线，对方前列士兵很快就会发现自己要面对一群敌人。如果说包围圈中的前排士兵还有希望即时转向的话，那么对于后排士兵则不能指望他能够时刻面对正确的方向，站成正确的队列。
总之兰切斯特模型对于肉搏战是相当不完善的，所以它更多是用在投射战中。

[ 本帖最后由 funnystory 于 2008-7-17 11:22 编辑 ]

本帖最近评分记录

• wxdqq 金币 +30 不错的学术性探讨 2008-7-17 11:50

funnystory

“远距离交战的时候，任一方实力与本身数量成正比，即兰切斯特线性律。在近距离交战的时候，任一方实力与本身数量的平方成正比，即兰切斯特平方律。”那么这里的远距离，近距离是？
肉搏战只是我顺便说这个模型的不足的

[ 本帖最后由 funnystory 于 2008-7-17 12:28 编辑 ]

funnystory

引用:

原帖由 oskarlre 于 2008-10-29 22:56 发表


双方武器有效距离（不是最大距离）。 以及躲避率

如果funny兄拿一片刀，有效距离应该是2米，我拿把M16，我说我300米有效距离（最大800米）。

如果我们在300米距离交战，那么由于funny兄有效距离小于实际距 ...

“Lanchester's Linear Law
In ancient combat, between phalanxes of men with spears, say, one man could only ever fight exactly one other man at a time. If each man kills, and is killed by, exactly one other, then the number of men remaining at the end of the battle is simply the difference between the larger army and the smaller, as you might expect (assuming identical weapons).

The linear law also applies to unaimed fire into an enemy-occupied area. The rate of attrition depends on the density of the available targets in the target area as well as the number of weapons firing. If two forces, occupying the same land area and using the same weapons, fire randomly into the same target area, they will both suffer the same rate and number of casualties, until the smaller force is eventually eliminated: the greater probability of any one shot hitting the larger force is balanced by the greater number of shots directed at the smaller force.


Lanchester's Square Law
In modern combat, however, with firearms engaging each other directly with aimed fire from a distance, they can attack multiple targets and can receive fire from multiple directions. The rate of attrition now depends only on the number of weapons firing. Lanchester determined that the power of such a force is proportional not to the number of units it has, but to the square of the number of units. This is known as Lanchester's Square Law.

More precisely, the law specifies the casualties a firing force will inflict over a period of time, relative to those inflicted by the opposing force. In its basic form, the law is only useful to predict outcomes and casualties by attrition. It does not apply to whole armies, where tactical deployment means not all troops will be engaged all the time. It only works where each man (or ship, unit or whatever) can kill only one equivalent enemy at a time (so it does not apply to machine guns, artillery or, an extreme case, nuclear weapons). The law requires an assumption that casualties build up over time: it does not work in situations in which opposing troops kill each other instantly, either by firing simultaneously or by one side getting off the first shot and inflicting multiple casualties.

Note that Lanchester's Square Law does not apply to technological force, only numerical force; so it takes an N-squared-fold increase in quality to make up for an N-fold increase in quantity.”

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanchester's_laws#Lanchester.27s_Linear_Law[/url]

有瞄准的投射攻击下即是符合平方率的，无瞄准的覆盖式攻击或者双方阵型完整的肉搏是符合线性率的，完全的散兵肉搏则是平方率。