Re: Time beats phases-and-points

John Morrow (
Mon, 26 Sep 94 14:47:49 EDT

>I agree. I play plenty of wargames with hex grids and have no problem
>with them, but I I definately agree that the plain old rectangular
>grid is simpler, esp. for those who don't play such games.

Grid is also easier to make text maps from and easier to represent
in "X-Y" location coordinates.

>HOWEVER, I do wish you;d allow diagonal movement, and make it cost
>say 1.5 times as much as an orthogonal move. It's a decent approximation,
>and makes moving faster so you can do more stuff in a month, and
>is more realistic to boot. Is there some reason why this is not done?

Yes. By avoiding diagnal movement, the map is "bigger" and the
corners are "father away". I consider this a feature, not a bug. If
by doing "more stuff in a month" you mean "moving more locations", I
would argue that units (especially sea units) are perhaps already
moving too fast. Yes, there is a certain desire to "get there" early
on when you start, the world is empty, and no armies are out to get
you but there will be a time when the game is more "full" that this
will cause you more problems than it solves. I'd much rather a
journey be a journey, not a jaunt.

It is also much easier to calculate distances by sticking to the grid.

[Stuff about a combat simulator deleted]

Oly I had a player written combat simulator and there is no reason why
an enterprising player couldn't write one and make it available. I'd
suspect that one or two might already exist for private use, much as
private turn analyzers and combat simulators exist for private use.
You could also bounce your orders off allies or other people (my
low-tech solution).

John Morrow

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links