Recruit

Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 156
|
Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 2:30 pm Post subject: Re: terrain constraints (specifically roads) |
 |
|
Mark Stone wrote:
> When road is most commonly seen in Warrior it runs across the
width of the
> table, from flank to flank, rather than from rear zone to rear
zone. In my
> opinion, this really does run counter to history. Armies marched
along roads,
> and hence the most likely way -- I would go so far as to say only
way -- that a
> road crossed a battlefield was with the two armies straddling it,
rather than
> the two armies fighting across it.
I just reviewed Burne's Battlefields of England, which I happened to
have handy, and would have to say that as often as not when a road
is involved he seems to think that it was as likely to lay across
the axis of engagement as along it.
As often or not these are not actually the roads that the army
marched down, but side roads moving off a main road...
> Finally, someone (Todd maybe?) once suggested that roads are the
corollary of
> minor water features, and hence should be required to be diced for
_last_,
> after all other terrain features. That makes a ton of sense to me.
An interesting idea... Certainly it would reduce the potential for
abuse of roads :)
Have fun!
Cole
|
|