This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
designer_workshop:proposed:unitrangelimits [2013/08/10 20:25] M57 [Visibility] |
designer_workshop:proposed:unitrangelimits [2014/07/11 07:09] M57 [A Post Comparing M57s Version of the Feature to one proposed by Korrun:] |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Unit Range Limits ====== | ====== Unit Range Limits ====== | ||
+ | (proposed by M57) | ||
==== Terminology ==== | ==== Terminology ==== | ||
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
-Pop-up Attack and Fortify windows reveal the same information as above for the attacking/ | -Pop-up Attack and Fortify windows reveal the same information as above for the attacking/ | ||
-An approximation of a territory' | -An approximation of a territory' | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====A Post Comparing M57s Version of the Feature to one proposed by Korrun:==== | ||
+ | Korrun wrote: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Just to resubmit my idea on this (which I think is simpler and easier to represent visually), for terrain/ | ||
+ | |||
+ | M57 wrote: | ||
+ | |||
+ | I think yours is an excellent solution, and though I'm not convinced, I wouldn' | ||
+ | |||
+ | I'm not sure about one being better than the other visually. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Mine involves the target territory while yours involves each individual border. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Yours keeps a global count of how many ' | ||
+ | |||
+ | With yours a player could use all of his movement count to run a single stack quite far, whereas with mine a player can move every stack on the board with no restrictions on the number of stacks that can be moved, but each stack' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Mine simulates time. If you have "Back to Attack ON and enable MovementCount in the Fortify phase, you have a sophisticated mechanism that requires players to consider both ' | ||
+ | Yours uses a per/attack count (right?), while mine uses a per/ | ||
+ | |||
+ | Yours better represents time and unit autonomy related elements in the sense that it counts each roll as an ' | ||
+ | Summarizing: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Because yours works on a border basis, it offers a more sophisticated and higher degree of control over terrain related costs. Because it uses a per/attack count, yours offers a better sense of time and unit autonomy than mine at the micro-battle level. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Because mine works on a territory basis with a per/ | ||
+ | |||
+ | Oh, and I love your idea of the option of a 0 cost border/ |