2nd ed. Home ground advantage

Very good point and I agree. Tweaking these tables, and the general
"Troop Terrain Combat Performance" table to add an "excellent" category are
good options for helping certain nations and troop types to be be more
useful. Once again, have the data showing what nations need the tweaks
before ya make the changes.

Mark Ferris

Message: 1
Subject:

4) Home ground advantage

Nations fighting in territory that is on their map should get a bonus as

they

would presumably know the best places to start battles.

I don't really like that, since the maps are often situated
inconsistently, they're a long equally sized rectangle irrespective of
the "shape" or "density" of the nation just for starters.

The different nations already have terrain and climate modifiers. You
get these on the nation info sheet on turn 0. That's the first part of
the problem, as they're not in the rule book, people tend to forget
about them. I'm not even sure if Harlequin routinely send them out, as
I've had to ask for mine in the past.

But more significantly the modifiers are simply too small. For Woodmen
they are:

            > > T E R R A I N |
            >climate>sho pla rou for des swa mou |
            >-------|----------------------------|
            >polar | 90 90 90 95 87 85 85|
            >severe | 92 92 92 97 90 87 87|
            >cold | 95 95 95 100 92 90 90|
            >cool | 97 97 97 102 95 92 92|
            >mild | 100 100 100 105 97 95 95|
            >warm | 97 97 97 102 95 92 92|
            >hot | 95 95 95 100 92 90 90|

So the Woodies, who live their lives, and take their very name from the
forests, get a 5% advantage from fighting there. So what? These
figures need to be cranked up and down significantly, so that, for
example, the Woo and Sinda more often knew that they could beat DrL if
the catch him in the trees, but really wanted to plan to avoid meeting
him in the valley.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 08:14:54 +0000
   From: "Laurence G. Tilley" <laurence@lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk>
Richard Farrer <richard@rfarrer.freeserve.co.uk> wrote