CLEAN GROUND: the second EXPOSURE table, and four ratios that moved with it

Another session re-pinned the main exposure table at 8f3e1ff after the harness
correction, and left the surrounding prose to me, which was the right split. Two
things were still outstanding.

The four-player cut carries its OWN table, nested inside a numbered list well below
the main one, and it was still on pre-correction figures: 3.24 / 2.09 / 40.2% / 0.85
and 4.00 / 3.98 / 99.1% / 1.45. Re-measured to 3.25 / 2.31 / 45.0% / 0.98 and
4.00 / 3.99 / 99.8% / 1.46. Easy table to miss and worth naming in the provenance so
the next reader does not have to work out which tables were in scope.

Four prose claims quoted ratios that no longer held. Six of the column wipe one party
in seven rather than one in twelve; ten wipe nine in ten rather than five in six; at
four players three wipe nearly half rather than two in five; and six hollow men take
a median thirteen rounds, not twelve. "Three of them is survivable" now also says
somebody dies in about one run in six, because deaths per run went 0.11 to 0.16.

Independently confirmed rather than taken on trust: my own run of the section's
published command, at its own declared cast of six and seed 11, matched the other
session's figures exactly on every comparable row — understudy 0.55 / 0.01 / 0.0% /
2 rounds, six of the column 4.79 / 3.03 / 14.8% / 1.55 / 14 rounds, ten 5.97 / 5.87 /
90.8% / 2.75, six hollow men 3.48 / 0.42 / 13 rounds. Two sessions measuring
separately and agreeing is better evidence than one measuring twice.

The argument the section exists to make is unchanged and slightly stronger. The
understudy still cannot hurt six agents; the column is deadlier; the steep stretch is
still between six and ten bodies. The cause is nothing about the column — a torso
vest no longer protects a head, so every unhelmeted agent is easier to hurt.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

docs/scenarios/CLEAN_GROUND.md

@@ -459,8 +459,8 @@ wants somebody official to look at the place.
   about them. `[CUS: Spot — the same six at the back, and the same six yesterday]`
 - Somewhere out on the flank, something is keeping pace at a distance and on all fours.
 - **If violence against the column is even possible at your table, read EXPOSURE in Act
-  Four first.** Six of them wipe one party in twelve; at four players three of them wipe
-  two in five. This is the dangerous encounter in the scenario and it is in this act.
+  Four first.** Six of them wipe one party in seven; at four players three of them wipe
+  nearly half. This is the dangerous encounter in the scenario and it is in this act.
 
 **Failure case:** if the party refuses contact, the column camps within sight and one
 of the children is sent over with bread. That works on almost everybody.
@@ -585,7 +585,9 @@ encounter in the case that is incapable of being dangerous.
 Ashcroft, Bhattacharya, Renshaw, Braithwaite, Pollard, Okonkwo. Taken at commit 6f33525
 with a clean tree.
 
-> **Re-measured at 6f33525**, after the harness was corrected: hit location by body
+> **Re-measured at 6f33525** (harness unchanged since ad5fd57, so the figures are
+> identical at 8f3e1ff), **including the four-player cut rows further down**, after the
+> harness was corrected: hit location by body
 > plan rather than species, armour per location rather than one scalar, and flyers
 > grounded by a lost wing (R-264). The finding is unchanged and the shape of the
 > curve is unchanged — but the column got dearer to fight, because a torso vest no
@@ -621,23 +623,24 @@ losing. Both of the first two are live in this scenario.
    has replaced a scenario about classification with a scenario about a monster, and the
    case stops meaning anything.
 2. **Adding hollow men buys rounds, not danger.** Six of them still wipe nobody — and
-   take a **median twelve rounds** to resolve. In a 45-minute act that is the whole act,
+   take a **median thirteen rounds** to resolve. In a 45-minute act that is the whole act,
    and the Close is what pays for it. If Act Four feels thin, the answer is more doubt,
    not more bodies.
 3. **The column is the lethal encounter in this scenario, and it is not in Act Four.**
-   Three of them is survivable. **Six wipes one party in twelve. Ten wipes five parties in
-   six.** The curve between six and ten is almost vertical and a GM improvising bodies
+   Three of them is survivable, though somebody dies in about one run in six. **Six wipes
+   one party in seven. Ten wipes nine parties in ten.** The curve between six and ten is
+   almost vertical and a GM improvising bodies
    will cross it without noticing. This is why Act Two says the column must never become a
    threat: not only because shooting refugees is the moral catastrophe of the case, but
    because the table will lose.
 4. **The four-player cut is a different game.** Without Okonkwo's rifle and breach suit
-   and without Pollard's shield, **three of the column wipe two parties in five** and six
-   wipe virtually all of them:
+   and without Pollard's shield, **three of the column wipe nearly half of all parties** and
+   six wipe virtually every one:
 
    | Four-player cut fights | Hurt | Down | Wiped | Deaths/run |
    |---|---|---|---|---|
-   | Three of the column | 3.24 of 4 | 2.09 | **40.2%** | 0.85 |
-   | Six of the column | 4.00 of 4 | 3.98 | **99.1%** | 1.45 |
+   | Three of the column | 3.25 of 4 | 2.31 | **45.0%** | 0.98 |
+   | Six of the column | 4.00 of 4 | 3.99 | **99.8%** | 1.46 |
 
    At four players, **any** violence against the column is a party-ending decision. Say
    the row out loud before they commit, exactly as THROUGH TRAIN does.