> Wouldn't it be fairer if the first round started in strict agility order? This is, as far as I can see, the only part of the game where randomness plays a significant part.

Suppose one character has three times the agility (and therefore three times the hits) as another. By your rules, the guy with the larger agility goes first, but does he get one of his three hits in before the other guy gets a turn, or does he get two, or all three? It's not a trivial problem.

Here's how it works. Each match consists of repetitions of 30 game turns. Your agility determines which of those game turns you get to play on.

So let's say you've got a guy with agility 4 and a guy with agility 3. The agility 4 guy hits on game turns 0, 8, 15, and 23. The agility 3 guy hits on turns 0, 10, and 20.

To keep the games from being overly predictable, the match number determines where in the 30-turn game cycle fights begin. In the long run, high agility characters will therefore attack first; on occasion, they won't. Over the course of the battle, the inequality won't *usually* make the difference between a win or a loss, and the extra medical expenses you experienced from this battle will, in the long run, be made back when the starting turn begins such that you get *two* hits initially instead of just one.