Suggested MEPBM Rule Change

Hi,
   It occurred to me the other day that a good possible rule change
for MEPBM would be to make character movement like army movement
(i.e. MovChar nw nw ne ... etc.). Characters could have 12-14 MPs
like armies & could move normally or evasively & would be more/less
subject to the same movement restrictions as armies. This could have
a number of useful effects -

1. No flying effortlessly into Mordor or over the Misty Mountains;
character movement becomes more tricky & therefore is closer in
concept to that of the books. Maybe allow characters to cross Major
Rivers taking a whole turn to do so or allow them to cross at any
major PopC (assumes boats will be available)?
2. The teleport spell becomes REALLY useful.
3. Those agent companies might actually have to sneak towards their
targets. Evasive movement could add to Stealth of course.
4. If the Ring was also made easier to find you might actually get a
proper Ring Quest with packs of Nazgul hunting middle earth for the
ring company! Could maybe start a game variant with the ring already
in FP hands somewhere in the NW?
5. When moving through enemy armies or pop centers there could be a
chance for characters to be spotted (rumour, e.g. - Fred was spotted
passing through Dol Guldur) or be captured by armies they move
through; or character movement could be halted by enemy characters
(perhaps based upon comparison between agent & stealth ranks or
something?).
6. Possibly add some new spells to cover character movement; e.g.
concealment spell; get across major river without bridge, etc.?

Just a suggestion which I haven't really thought through yet. What
does everyone else think?

Ian Harris

Nice enough idea but we cannot change the program I am afraid.

Clint

···

****************************************************************
      Harlequin Games Middle Earth Games
pbm@harlequingames.com me@middleearth.co.uk
www.harlequingames.com www.middleearth.co.uk

               340 North Road, Cardiff CF14 3BP
           Tel 029 2062 5665 12-6.30 Weekdays
                  Fax 029 2062 5532 24 hours
****************************************************************
        Middle Earth - Legends - Serim Ral
            CTF 2187 - Starquest - Crack of Doom
                   Battle of the Planets - Exile

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Harris" <ian.harris@eds.com>
To: <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 2:12 PM
Subject: [mepbmlist] Suggested MEPBM Rule Change

Hi,
   It occurred to me the other day that a good possible rule change
for MEPBM would be to make character movement like army movement
(i.e. MovChar nw nw ne ... etc.). Characters could have 12-14 MPs
like armies & could move normally or evasively & would be more/less
subject to the same movement restrictions as armies. This could have
a number of useful effects -

1. No flying effortlessly into Mordor or over the Misty Mountains;
character movement becomes more tricky & therefore is closer in
concept to that of the books. Maybe allow characters to cross Major
Rivers taking a whole turn to do so or allow them to cross at any
major PopC (assumes boats will be available)?
2. The teleport spell becomes REALLY useful.
3. Those agent companies might actually have to sneak towards their
targets. Evasive movement could add to Stealth of course.
4. If the Ring was also made easier to find you might actually get a
proper Ring Quest with packs of Nazgul hunting middle earth for the
ring company! Could maybe start a game variant with the ring already
in FP hands somewhere in the NW?
5. When moving through enemy armies or pop centers there could be a
chance for characters to be spotted (rumour, e.g. - Fred was spotted
passing through Dol Guldur) or be captured by armies they move
through; or character movement could be halted by enemy characters
(perhaps based upon comparison between agent & stealth ranks or
something?).
6. Possibly add some new spells to cover character movement; e.g.
concealment spell; get across major river without bridge, etc.?

Just a suggestion which I haven't really thought through yet. What
does everyone else think?

Ian Harris

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

Well as you have discovered for all your efforts Ian, suggested rule
changes get short shrift.

Harlequin are not allowed to change the game, neither it seems are Deft
the new licensees in America. GSI still hold the basic rights, and seem
to be content to rake in the money without putting any more work into
the game.

What galls me most is that over the years I have seen dozens of good
ideas for improvements to the game. Yet there is no single archive for
them. My hope is that one day, somebody will acquire the full rights to
the game and produce a "second edition". Unfortunately, by then, your
idea, argument, and dozens of others like it will have been lost in the
ether.

Does anyone know if there has ever been an attempt to set up a single
MEPBM "wish list"? Did the Mouth of Sauron guys ever compile one? Did
GSI?

Regards,

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

···

Ian Harris <ian.harris@eds.com> wrote

Just a suggestion which I haven't really thought through yet. What
does everyone else think?

I would like to see that. (List of ideas) You never know we might be able
to get something sorted.

Clint

Well as you have discovered for all your efforts Ian, suggested rule
changes get short shrift.

Like I said sorry we'd love to entertain these sort of ideas. We do the
best we can with the ideas that we can implement. (Thought of a couple of
new scenario ideas which might be fun shame is that most players don't like
the FA scenario but that is the one I can best modify). For example one
idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting with
different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars. FA this would be
easy enough to play out I think especially as some of the nice bits can be
modfied in the form of SAbilities for nations.

···

Harlequin are not allowed to change the game, neither it seems are Deft
the new licensees in America. GSI still hold the basic rights, and seem
to be content to rake in the money without putting any more work into
the game.

What galls me most is that over the years I have seen dozens of good
ideas for improvements to the game. Yet there is no single archive for
them. My hope is that one day, somebody will acquire the full rights to
the game and produce a "second edition". Unfortunately, by then, your
idea, argument, and dozens of others like it will have been lost in the
ether.

Does anyone know if there has ever been an attempt to set up a single
MEPBM "wish list"? Did the Mouth of Sauron guys ever compile one? Did
GSI?

Regards,

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

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

It would be interesting to have a handicapped Cloud Lord - one who
starts with no agents. He has to name one and train him up to 40 before
he can start naming his (effective) rank 60 assassins. A relatively
small tweak, but it would put the ClL development back by about 3 or 4
turns in relation to the other nations. I would like to see if it would
be enough to redress the (DS winning two thirds of the time) balance.

Regards,

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

···

Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote

For example one
idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting with
different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars.

Looking for something more drastic than this really but in a team game this
could happen. Would have to be agreed of course. New Chars from the books
that sort of thing.

Clint

···

Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote
>For example one
>idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting with
>different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars.

It would be interesting to have a handicapped Cloud Lord - one who
starts with no agents. He has to name one and train him up to 40 before
he can start naming his (effective) rank 60 assassins. A relatively
small tweak, but it would put the ClL development back by about 3 or 4
turns in relation to the other nations. I would like to see if it would
be enough to redress the (DS winning two thirds of the time) balance.

Regards,

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

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

Why not keep the starting characters the same, except no agent rank over
30, and take away the CL's SNA to name 40 rank agents, this would mean that
any new agents wouldn't be able to instantly assassinate, and he would have
to spend time developing each new agent for a few turns before they could be
effective. This would still keep the feel of the nation the same, but just
slow down it's development a little.

cheers

Al

···

----- Original Message -----

Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote
>For example one
>idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting with
>different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars.
It would be interesting to have a handicapped Cloud Lord - one who
starts with no agents. He has to name one and train him up to 40 before
he can start naming his (effective) rank 60 assassins. A relatively
small tweak, but it would put the ClL development back by about 3 or 4
turns in relation to the other nations. I would like to see if it would
be enough to redress the (DS winning two thirds of the time) balance.

Can the SNAs be removed in 1650?

Regards,

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

···

Alan Gourlay <alangourlay@theeternal.fsnet.co.uk> wrote

Why not keep the starting characters the same, except no agent rank over
30, and take away the CL's SNA to name 40 rank agents,

Would have to hand moded. FA games allow 20,000 points to spend on SNAs -so
you can get +20% to assassinate but not agents @40 as well (too many
points).

(Something I would like to see is a game where you could have more of less
points in your set-up for characters, starting locations that sort of
thing!)

Clint

> >For example one
> >idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting with
> >different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars.
> It would be interesting to have a handicapped Cloud Lord - one who
> starts with no agents. He has to name one and train him up to 40 before
> he can start naming his (effective) rank 60 assassins. A relatively
> small tweak, but it would put the ClL development back by about 3 or 4
> turns in relation to the other nations. I would like to see if it would
> be enough to redress the (DS winning two thirds of the time) balance.
>
Why not keep the starting characters the same, except no agent rank over
30, and take away the CL's SNA to name 40 rank agents, this would mean

that

any new agents wouldn't be able to instantly assassinate, and he would

have

to spend time developing each new agent for a few turns before they could

be

···

> Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote
effective. This would still keep the feel of the nation the same, but just
slow down it's development a little.

cheers

Al

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

Nope

···

>Why not keep the starting characters the same, except no agent rank over
>30, and take away the CL's SNA to name 40 rank agents,
Can the SNAs be removed in 1650?

have the point values for FA SNA's changed as according to my nation design
sheets you can have +20 to assass and also new agents at rank 40, with 2000
points to spare.

···

----- Original Message -----
From: "Harlequin Games" <pbm@harlequingames.com>
To: <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2000 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Suggested MEPBM Tweak

Would have to hand moded. FA games allow 20,000 points to spend on

SNAs -so

you can get +20% to assassinate but not agents @40 as well (too many
points).

(Something I would like to see is a game where you could have more of less
points in your set-up for characters, starting locations that sort of
thing!)

Clint
>
> > Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote
> > >For example one
> > >idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting with
> > >different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars.
> > It would be interesting to have a handicapped Cloud Lord - one who
> > starts with no agents. He has to name one and train him up to 40

before

> > he can start naming his (effective) rank 60 assassins. A relatively
> > small tweak, but it would put the ClL development back by about 3 or 4
> > turns in relation to the other nations. I would like to see if it

would

> > be enough to redress the (DS winning two thirds of the time) balance.
> >
> Why not keep the starting characters the same, except no agent rank

over

> 30, and take away the CL's SNA to name 40 rank agents, this would mean
that
> any new agents wouldn't be able to instantly assassinate, and he would
have
> to spend time developing each new agent for a few turns before they

could

be
> effective. This would still keep the feel of the nation the same, but

just

> slow down it's development a little.
>
> cheers
>
> Al
>
>
>
> Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
> To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
> http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm
>
>

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

Oops you're correct. My mistake. We can always have a game of FA with less
points (hand moded easily - but more points is not easily done).

Clint

have the point values for FA SNA's changed as according to my nation

design

sheets you can have +20 to assass and also new agents at rank 40, with

2000

points to spare.

From: "Harlequin Games" <pbm@harlequingames.com>
To: <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2000 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Suggested MEPBM Tweak

> Would have to hand moded. FA games allow 20,000 points to spend on
SNAs -so
> you can get +20% to assassinate but not agents @40 as well (too many
> points).
>
> (Something I would like to see is a game where you could have more of

less

> points in your set-up for characters, starting locations that sort of
> thing!)
>
> Clint
> >
> > > >For example one
> > > >idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting

with

> > > >different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars.
> > > It would be interesting to have a handicapped Cloud Lord - one who
> > > starts with no agents. He has to name one and train him up to 40
before
> > > he can start naming his (effective) rank 60 assassins. A relatively
> > > small tweak, but it would put the ClL development back by about 3 or

4

> > > turns in relation to the other nations. I would like to see if it
would
> > > be enough to redress the (DS winning two thirds of the time)

balance.

> > >
> > Why not keep the starting characters the same, except no agent rank
over
> > 30, and take away the CL's SNA to name 40 rank agents, this would

mean

···

----- Original Message -----
> > > Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote
> that
> > any new agents wouldn't be able to instantly assassinate, and he would
> have
> > to spend time developing each new agent for a few turns before they
could
> be
> > effective. This would still keep the feel of the nation the same, but
just
> > slow down it's development a little.
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Al
> >
> >
> >
> > Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
> > To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
> > http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
> To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
> http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm
>
>
>

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

I would like to see that. (List of ideas) You never know we might be

able

to get something sorted.

Clint

Like I said sorry we'd love to entertain these sort of ideas. We do the
best we can with the ideas that we can implement. (Thought of a couple of
new scenario ideas which might be fun shame is that most players don't

like

the FA scenario but that is the one I can best modify). For example one
idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting with
different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars. FA this would

be

easy enough to play out I think especially as some of the nice bits can be
modfied in the form of SAbilities for nations.
>

RD: I didn't realise you could change the QUANTITY of starting characters.
To take an extreme example, could you start a 4th Age game with 21
characters apiece? That would have the virtue of being different at least!
I

>
> What galls me most is that over the years I have seen dozens of good
> ideas for improvements to the game. Yet there is no single archive for
> them. My hope is that one day, somebody will acquire the full rights to
> the game and produce a "second edition". Unfortunately, by then, your
> idea, argument, and dozens of others like it will have been lost in the
> ether.
>
> Does anyone know if there has ever been an attempt to set up a single
> MEPBM "wish list"? Did the Mouth of Sauron guys ever compile one? Did
> GSI?
>
> Regards,
>
> Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/
>
>

RD: Not to my knowledge. It's never going to happen unless there's a REAL
prospect that some of the more constructive ideas actually get put on the
program.

If I win the lottery big-time I'll make GSI an offer! Then you would see
some changes. But basically more spells of the subtle, indirect kind
(temporary bridge over major river; Galadriel's mist of concealment which
hides army movement; Sauron's magical warding of pops to notify owner of
intruders; discover secret tunnel thru mountains, etc.). It IS important to
keep changes consistent with Tolkien's work.

I disagree with Ian wanting character movement to be subject to the same
limitations as armies. A resourceful individual or company can always move
faster than an army, and by-pass obstacles which would be impassable to an
army. An individual or company would need to find just a single boat to
cross a major river - an army would need dozens if not hundreds of boats.
An individual or small group has a much better chance of crossing a mountain
range than an army, etc. This is simple logistics.

If Harlequin want to build up a wish-list I'll be happy to contribute.
Nobody else this side of the pond has the clout to make it worthwhile.

Regards,

Richard.

Well we can hand mod it - not sure with this - probably could. The usual
equation - us more work, us more charge... :slight_smile: but it might be possible.

Clint

> I would like to see that. (List of ideas) You never know we might be
able
> to get something sorted.
>
> Clint
>
> Like I said sorry we'd love to entertain these sort of ideas. We do the
> best we can with the ideas that we can implement. (Thought of a couple

of

> new scenario ideas which might be fun shame is that most players don't
like
> the FA scenario but that is the one I can best modify). For example one
> idea that I haven't really seen explored is the idea of starting with
> different quantities of characters and/or stats on chars. FA this would
be
> easy enough to play out I think especially as some of the nice bits can

be

> modfied in the form of SAbilities for nations.
> >
RD: I didn't realise you could change the QUANTITY of starting characters.
To take an extreme example, could you start a 4th Age game with 21
characters apiece? That would have the virtue of being different at

least!

I
> >
> > What galls me most is that over the years I have seen dozens of good
> > ideas for improvements to the game. Yet there is no single archive

for

> > them. My hope is that one day, somebody will acquire the full rights

to

> > the game and produce a "second edition". Unfortunately, by then, your
> > idea, argument, and dozens of others like it will have been lost in

the

> > ether.
> >
> > Does anyone know if there has ever been an attempt to set up a single
> > MEPBM "wish list"? Did the Mouth of Sauron guys ever compile one?

Did

> > GSI?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/
> >
> >
RD: Not to my knowledge. It's never going to happen unless there's a REAL
prospect that some of the more constructive ideas actually get put on the
program.

If I win the lottery big-time I'll make GSI an offer! Then you would see
some changes. But basically more spells of the subtle, indirect kind
(temporary bridge over major river; Galadriel's mist of concealment which
hides army movement; Sauron's magical warding of pops to notify owner of
intruders; discover secret tunnel thru mountains, etc.). It IS important

to

keep changes consistent with Tolkien's work.

I disagree with Ian wanting character movement to be subject to the same
limitations as armies. A resourceful individual or company can always

move

faster than an army, and by-pass obstacles which would be impassable to an
army. An individual or company would need to find just a single boat to
cross a major river - an army would need dozens if not hundreds of boats.
An individual or small group has a much better chance of crossing a

mountain

···

range than an army, etc. This is simple logistics.

If Harlequin want to build up a wish-list I'll be happy to contribute.
Nobody else this side of the pond has the clout to make it worthwhile.

Regards,

Richard.

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

Subject to the same limitations as armies does not mean the same speed.
It is crazy that they can cross 12 hexes of mountains with the same ease
as 12 hexes of plains. It's crazy that they can cross open seas. They
should move the same as an all cavalry, fed troop. They should have to
modification of being able to move from a mountain to a mountain hex.
They should be allowed to turn themselves into a navy by leaving from a
port or harbour hex (with a gold cost).

More serious, is the movement of goods. At present, characters can move
12, hungry infantry grope 2 hexes through forest and rough, but 50K of
gold can teleport from the Noldo to the Khand Easterlings quicker than
Jack Flash. This is something I'd really like to see sorted.

Regards,

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

···

Richard John Devereux <devereux@lineone.net> wrote

I disagree with Ian wanting character movement to be subject to the same
limitations as armies. A resourceful individual or company can always move
faster than an army, and by-pass obstacles which would be impassable to an
army. An individual or company would need to find just a single boat to
cross a major river - an army would need dozens if not hundreds of boats.
An individual or small group has a much better chance of crossing a mountain
range than an army, etc. This is simple logistics.

Looks like there is a call for realism. :slight_smile: Not ME - I think you are
asking for a game that is more complex. Part of the beauty of the game is
that although simplistic in order format the skill behind using these is the
hard bit to get right (I see new players often get put off by such things as
the apparent simplicity - then getting killed 2 turns later). Just my
thoughts here.

Clint

>I disagree with Ian wanting character movement to be subject to the same
>limitations as armies. A resourceful individual or company can always

move

>faster than an army, and by-pass obstacles which would be impassable to

an

>army. An individual or company would need to find just a single boat to
>cross a major river - an army would need dozens if not hundreds of boats.
>An individual or small group has a much better chance of crossing a

mountain

···

>range than an army, etc. This is simple logistics.
Subject to the same limitations as armies does not mean the same speed.
It is crazy that they can cross 12 hexes of mountains with the same ease
as 12 hexes of plains. It's crazy that they can cross open seas. They
should move the same as an all cavalry, fed troop. They should have to
modification of being able to move from a mountain to a mountain hex.
They should be allowed to turn themselves into a navy by leaving from a
port or harbour hex (with a gold cost).

More serious, is the movement of goods. At present, characters can move
12, hungry infantry grope 2 hexes through forest and rough, but 50K of
gold can teleport from the Noldo to the Khand Easterlings quicker than
Jack Flash. This is something I'd really like to see sorted.

Regards,

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

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

Hi,

Two suggestions recently concerning character movement and gold movement.

Both suggestions make the game more realistic, however a golden rule of game
design (IMHO) is not to let reality get in the way of a good game!

I loved the idea of Nazgul chaing down the ring bearer as he moved towards
Mt Doom (just like the ICE 1970s board game), but I wonder that any slowing
down of character movement might result in less fun per turn?

The same might be true of gold transfers. ME encourages an appreciation of
economy, like few other games do. The game is set up so it is quite easy to
die from economic mismanagement or the enemy attacking your resources. One
reason that the game is like this is because it is easy for your allies to
bail you out of trouble. If it was harder to transfer gold, the game would
risk early losses from poor nations. Then to compensate you'd have to make
everyone's economies stronger, which I think would detriment the game.

So I think transfers should be easy and fast. Even though it is utterly
against any concept I have of fantasy economy! :slight_smile:

Cheers

Sam (Player)

Yes, but if character's moved like fed cavalry, the system would be
simpler to grab, not more complex. There'd only be one movement
concept.

Regards,

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

···

Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote

Looks like there is a call for realism. :slight_smile: Not ME - I think you are
asking for a game that is more complex. Part of the beauty of the game is
that although simplistic in order format the skill behind using these is the
hard bit to get right

Both suggestions make the game more realistic, however a golden rule of game
design (IMHO) is not to let reality get in the way of a good game!

Good fantasy worlds need to be pseudo-real. That means, that gold can
fly across the world, but there has to be a defined magical explanation.
Tolkien's world did not have that kind of thing going on.

So I think transfers should be easy and fast. Even though it is utterly
against any concept I have of fantasy economy! :slight_smile:

An event which contradicts the established pseudo-physical and magical
laws of a fantasy world, weakens it in the eyes of the reader/player.

Certainly, lots of checks and balances would need to be put in regarding
a change to the caravan systems. It's a MUCH more difficult aspect to
chance than is character movement. However in a (theoretical) complete
reprogramming of the game, it would be worth doing. Want to send 25K
gold across Tolkein's Middle Earth? You should have caravans, guards,
bandits, and plenty of opportunity for planning, counter-planning, and
adventure.

Regards,

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

···

Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote

>I disagree with Ian wanting character movement to be subject to the same
>limitations as armies. A resourceful individual or company can always

move

>faster than an army, and by-pass obstacles which would be impassable to

an

>army. An individual or company would need to find just a single boat to
>cross a major river - an army would need dozens if not hundreds of boats.
>An individual or small group has a much better chance of crossing a

mountain

>range than an army, etc. This is simple logistics.
Subject to the same limitations as armies does not mean the same speed.
It is crazy that they can cross 12 hexes of mountains with the same ease
as 12 hexes of plains. It's crazy that they can cross open seas. They
should move the same as an all cavalry, fed troop. They should have to
modification of being able to move from a mountain to a mountain hex.
They should be allowed to turn themselves into a navy by leaving from a
port or harbour hex (with a gold cost).

RD: There are NO 12 consecutive hexes of mountains on the map! I understand
your point, but the situation simply does not arise. Why is it crazy that a
company can cross open seas? They only need a boat, not a troopship or
warship, and therefore not a port or harbour. No self-respecting sea
monster or pirates would bother with such a craft. As for storms, heroes
and villains in every story brave the elements successfully (indeed, often
against overwhelming odds!) when the plot calls for it.

So please, no changes to character/company movement. I know that some of
the things they can do in theory, they should not be allowed to do, but in
practice, such things are rarely if ever attempted. There is no point going
to all the effort of altering movement rules if all you do is complicate
things without some real benefit at the end.

More serious, is the movement of goods. At present, characters can move
12, hungry infantry grope 2 hexes through forest and rough, but 50K of
gold can teleport from the Noldo to the Khand Easterlings quicker than
Jack Flash. This is something I'd really like to see sorted.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley

RD: Now here I agree with you. I would just love to see this teleporting
goods removed, and replaced by caravans travelling at army speeds, exposing
them to raids by hostiles. Relatively small quantities of gold could be
carried by an individual, at individual movement rates. It would be fun to
see a Noldo try to carry a sack of gold to Khand without getting mugged!

Regards,

Richard.

···

Richard John Devereux <devereux@lineone.net> wrote