Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Phil Gardocki]

On the topic of good looking terrain

Now that I have had time to ponder this, I can offer a bit more than stream
of consciousness thought.

Right now you have a stated objective. Improve terrain. At this
time it is a one dimension problem. If you mix this with a new terrain
placement system, then you have a two dimension problem, which is much
harder to solve.

You have two solutions, you can reward good behavior, (Republican),
punish bad behavior, (also Republican), as opposed to the current rule set
that rewards bad behavior (Democrat).

First, we must define good terrain. Are three trees on a piece of felt a
good woods? Are a couple of stones swept from the floor on a piece of tar
paper a good rocky piece? Is a shoe lace a
valid "string?" Some acceptable consensus will have to be reached as to
what is good terrain and what is not.
Should there be exceptional rewards for over the top terrain like the Aztec
model, complete with bloody footprints on the stairs? Or camps that are
more than printouts of a tent and cheesy signs pointing out the Beaux
tapestry.

Rewards must be "balanced." They must matter, of course, because if the
reward is inconsequential, then the effect is minimal, but they should not
be so over the top that someone who spends $1000 on terrain at the Warhammer
store should not be resented.
Rewards should not influence the innate behavior of an army. A Gaul army
will want lots of woods. A Cavalry army should not face a penalty for not
placing 4 pieces of terrain.
Rewards should be irrespective of your opponents decision. A reward should
not be based on a system where I have 4 good pieces, and you have 3 so I
claim
the reward.

Possible rewards and Penalties:
Rewards and penalties can work within the existing framework, or invent new
mechanisms. Existing framework like victory points are easy to implement.
New mechanisms may be misunderstood, but offer more flavor to the game.
Some Penalties and Rewards could be:

Players loose VP's for each place of substandard terrain they place.
This is Easy to implement. Quick to understand. And does not penalize
Open terrain armies. Neither player partcipating in 800 – 200 isn’t going
to begruge a 20 point terrain penalty, a 5-1 is still a 5-1 A player that
has a 410 – 400 win reversed will feel the loss, but it was a narrow battle
anyway.

Players gain VP's for each place of good terrain they place.
This is easy to implement. Quick to understand. Penalizes Open
terrain armies.

Offer more points for the army to play with.
Time consuming to implement. Penalizes Open terrain armies. I do not
take this seriously, but it was going to be mentioned.

More scouting points for each good piece<<my runner up choice>>
Easy to implement. This also gives barbarian trash armies a
chance of not being out scouted in a heavily forested area, where cavalry
wouldn't be much use scouting anyway. Encourages Open terrain armies to
place terrain to get more scouting points. But at what cost?

Free force marches. <<My current favorite>> A player may get a free force
march for each
piece of good terrain he places.
The Unit is not subject to the 2 fatigue point penalty.
Units may be in ambush even if outscouted.
All units may be in one piece or spread to all.
This does not disadvantage the other player as a points system
alteration scheme
might have. It rewards aggressive players.
It is easy to implement.
The reward is beneficial to the behavior. As an example, if you place
nice woods, you get a free force march into it.
It probably would not cause undo animosity.

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 3/25/2005 19:34:14 Central Standard Time,
hrisikos@... writes:

> You have two solutions, you can reward good behavior, (Republican),
> punish bad behavior, (also Republican), as opposed to the current rule
> set
> that rewards bad behavior (Democrat).


Hey Jon,

Do we really want contemporary politics intruding into our discussions
here? What's next?


Greek>>


I assumed it was a joke. And no, I don't want politics here.

J








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Bill Chriss]

> You have two solutions, you can reward good behavior, (Republican),
> punish bad behavior, (also Republican), as opposed to the current rule
> set
> that rewards bad behavior (Democrat).


Hey Jon,

Do we really want contemporary politics intruding into our discussions
here? What's next?


Greek

[Phil Gardocki]

Yes it was a joke. You could reverse the parties mentioned and it would
still be funny.
But not to the same people.


-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@... <JonCleaves@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, March 26, 2005 1:05 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] On the topic of good looking terrain


>
>
>In a message dated 3/25/2005 19:34:14 Central Standard Time,
>hrisikos@... writes:
>
>> You have two solutions, you can reward good behavior, (CENSORED),
>> punish bad behavior, (also CENSORED), as opposed to the current rule
>> set
>> that rewards bad behavior (CENSORED).
>
>
>Hey Jon,
>
>Do we really want contemporary politics intruding into our discussions
>here? What's next?
>
>
>Greek>>
>
>
>I assumed it was a joke. And no, I don't want politics here.
>
>J
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>