Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freyr Oakenshield

I beg you, make it possible to save during PBEM. It will greatly facilitate the playing of monster scenarios such as FitE.

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab
In-hex rivers has always been a game breaker for me. Never could take it seriously as a result. Put rivers on hex sides and I'll be a buyer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab
In-hex rivers has always been a game breaker for me. Never could take it seriously as a result. Put rivers on hex sides and I'll be a buyer.

I wouldn't call it a game-breaker, but I much much prefer hex-side rivers. Having read the arguments for in-hex rivers, I am completely unconvinced. I noticed this in the linked thread (from 2007):
*************
Sorry if this has been raised elsewhere hereabouts, but I vaguely remember Norm on a forum somewhere many years ago saying that but for problems with the game company who originally owned this, a patch allowing hex river sides was already built and on his machine for release.
*************

I really hope that hex-side rivers will be introduced along with in-hex rivers.

quote:

If you look at the leading hex-based computer wargames, none save TOAW use in-hex rivers. It's just difficult to believe hexside rivers can't be added to a new version here, at least as a scenario designer's option.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freyr Oakenshield

quote:

If you look at the leading hex-based computer wargames, none save TOAW use in-hex rivers. It's just difficult to believe hexside rivers can't be added to a new version here, at least as a scenario designer's option.

I second that. No boardgames known to me put rivers in the middle of a hex... IMO, there should at least be an option like that for designers of future scenarios.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crossroads
Avalon Hill's Panzerblitz, Panzer Leader, for starters? Advanced Squad Leader too as I recall.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crossroads

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freyr Oakenshield

quote:

If you look at the leading hex-based computer wargames, none save TOAW use in-hex rivers. It's just difficult to believe hexside rivers can't be added to a new version here, at least as a scenario designer's option.

I second that. No boardgames known to me put rivers in the middle of a hex... IMO, there should at least be an option like that for designers of future scenarios.

Avalon Hill's Panzerblitz, Panzer Leader, for starters? Advanced Squad Leader too as I recall. You said boardgames right

edit2:
or should I have said: computerised board games

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falcon1

The in-hex rivers could be made to work if the effects were reversed. If you ask me, the unit that is actually in the river hex should be able to determine how the river will affect the battle. Right now it seems like the unit in the dry land gets to decide.

So, river hexes should provide a defensive bonus, because the unit in the river hex would obviously position themselves behind the river when preparing to defend. There should NOT be a penalty for attacking out of a river hex, because the attacker would never position themselves behind the river. It wouldn't even be possible to attack a unit in a different hex with direct fire, since you would have to be firing at a range of at least half the scale of a hex.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falcon1

The in-hex rivers could be made to work if the effects were reversed. If you ask me, the unit that is actually in the river hex should be able to determine how the river will affect the battle. Right now it seems like the unit in the dry land gets to decide.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
River hexes could be made better for a little effort. River hexsides seem too expensive for a dubious benefit. I just don't see the case for them. For that amount of effort we could get better stuff.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
So don't defend the bridge - destroy it an make the other guy pay extra movement to attack you!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falcon1
The current method has the advantage of many scenarios designed with this method in mind, and also seems to fit in well with the idea of using engineers' ferry ability, bridge repair, etc.

quote:

circling through the entrained units is only possible if you actually disembark them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freyr Oakenshield

I beg you, make it possible to save during PBEM. It will greatly facilitate the playing of monster scenarios such as FitE.

?? You can do that now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

circling through the entrained units is only possible if you actually disembark them.

Not true, The Dot/Period button on the keyboard will bring you to an embarked unit, you move it, hit the dot again to advance to the next embarked unit. Or don't move it and it disembarks. Easy peasy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I'm starting to feel rather dense...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crossroads

quote:

ORIGINAL: Freyr Oakenshield

quote:

If you look at the leading hex-based computer wargames, none save TOAW use in-hex rivers. It's just difficult to believe hexside rivers can't be added to a new version here, at least as a scenario designer's option.

I second that. No boardgames known to me put rivers in the middle of a hex... IMO, there should at least be an option like that for designers of future scenarios.

Avalon Hill's Panzerblitz, Panzer Leader, for starters? Advanced Squad Leader too as I recall. You said boardgames right

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellfish6

More than two sides per scenario. I like what Command does and you add pretty much as many sides as you need (Red, Blue, Green, neutral, whatever) and set their 'attitude' to each other (enemy, unfriendly, neutral, allied, etc.). Bonus for events allowing side-specific attitude changes.

quote:

Those are all tactical games where being "in" a stream/gully hex actually has significance to LOS and defense. Operational or strategic games do not use in-hex watercourses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
River hexes could be made better for a little effort. River hexsides seem too expensive for a dubious benefit. I just don't see the case for them. For that amount of effort we could get better stuff.

I think the linked thread from 2007 lays out the case for them, I won't repeat it here.

quote:

And the amount of effort? It sounds like a patch was coded years ago...

quote:

Any "fix" does not account for the basic fact that a unit is generally on one side of the river or the other, while this is not true of a unit in a (potentially 50 km wide) river hex.

quote:

It might be helpful if you could explain how to properly defend a bridge with in-hex rivers, because right now I don't get it; to defend a bridge I'm supposed to occupy the river hex (with no defensive bonus for the river), which makes the unit stick out of the defending line, without any benefits from the river, rendering the defender very vulnerable. If the defender doesn't occupy the bridge hex, the attacker can just waltz in and take it. Doesn't make any sense to me…

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
River hexes could be made better for a little effort. River hexsides seem too expensive for a dubious benefit. I just don't see the case for them. For that amount of effort we could get better stuff.

I think the linked thread from 2007 lays out the case for them, I won't repeat it here.

It also laid out the case against them. I gather I will have to repeat it here.

quote:

And the amount of effort? It sounds like a patch was coded years ago...

What that consisted of and what became of it, no one knows.

For sure, this will be an expensive change. It requires unique graphics that no other tile has (hexside display). It requires that bridge blowing, bridge attacks, bridge repair, ferry support, and riverine movement will all have to be devised for hexside implementation. Each of those implementations will have to have UI mechanisms devised for them.

And what do we get for that? For all existing scenarios, nothing. Even for that small fraction of existing scenarios that can expect future designer revision, the answer is still probably nothing. What designers will rip out the river hexes from their maps to replace them with hexside rivers? Few if any. Only a fraction of brand new scenarios will even employ hexside rivers. What benefits will they enjoy from them? A x0.7 attack multiplier will be applied in a slightly different place. Whether that is an improvement or not is dubious.

What do we lose for switching to hexside rivers? The transverse benefits of rivers. Rivers meander and have oxbow lakes (see attached). That gives them a transverse benefit just like an entrenchment does by zig-zagging. River hexes have those benefits. Hexside rivers don’t. Rivers really can be thought of as occupying an area. An enemy unit can be on the same side of the river as its friendly target and yet still have a wide meander between them.

quote:

Any "fix" does not account for the basic fact that a unit is generally on one side of the river or the other, while this is not true of a unit in a (potentially 50 km wide) river hex.

That isn’t a “basic fact” but a basic fallacy. Contested front lines do not, in general, follow river boundaries . Bridgeheads do not start out 2.5 km long, much less 50km. In the real world, operational sized units will be on one side of the river in some places while being on the other side in others.

quote:

It might be helpful if you could explain how to properly defend a bridge with in-hex rivers, because right now I don't get it; to defend a bridge I'm supposed to occupy the river hex (with no defensive bonus for the river), which makes the unit stick out of the defending line, without any benefits from the river, rendering the defender very vulnerable. If the defender doesn't occupy the bridge hex, the attacker can just waltz in and take it. Doesn't make any sense to me…

Most scenarios expect the player to defend every hex tooth-and-nail. The front line will gradually advance to the river, onto the river, and beyond the river. In that process, the 0.7 multiplier will be received at some point (exactly the same for river hexes as for hexside rivers). Generally, even if there is the margin to abandon a defense line (suffering disengagement in the process) to fall back to anything, other terrain will be superior to any river line and will trump such considerations.

Nevertheless, if the changes in the Wishlist item 3.2 are made, then defenders could receive the river benefit while ON the river hex, not behind it. That change would impact all existing scenarios, by the way.

Coding time is precious. Graphic Designer time is expensive. We have to be judicious in our employment of them. Changes must make cost/benefit sense.