side-effects modding AP & mountain movement costs

[gwgardner]

When doing a mod with weekly turns, I found that Action Points had to be reduced. For instance I took armies from 3 to 2 APs. One side-effect was to make it impossible to move armies in China, given all the mountains.

So in addition I reduced mountain movement costs from +2 to +1. That's pretty much untested so far. What do you think the side-effects of that will be? Will it be bad for some other critical aspect of the game?

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

When doing a mod with weekly turns, I found that Action Points had to be reduced. For instance I took armies from 3 to 2 APs. One side-effect was to make it impossible to move armies in China, given all the mountains.

So in addition I reduced mountain movement costs from +2 to +1. That's pretty much untested so far. What do you think the side-effects of that will be? Will it be bad for some other critical aspect of the game?

I did the same actually but kept the default terrain movement costs. Corps stayed at AP 3. I find I kind of like it as it makes sense to have to use smaller units (such as on the Kokada Trail) to cross such places. Kind of silly to see Armies crossing the Alps. And it gives the player a reason to use and produce Corps over Armies. Did the same with field artillery vs heavy artillery etc. I find it makes smaller units much more useful. Reducing movement also made units such as Recon and spotting units much more important. And research that improves movement more important. Because eventually research will allow it. Gonna post my mod at some point. Really enjoying it!

[gwgardner]

When you get to the point that you think your mod is settled, I'd be interested in a PBEM.

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

When you get to the point that you think your mod is settled, I'd be interested in a PBEM.

Sounds good!