Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: GreenDestiny

I have a question, what were they thinking when they decided to put the rivers through the hex instead of the hex sides? What are the benefits of this?

Because... I just don’t get it. This game has so much detail in it I find it hard to believe they would add something like this in it without some kind of a benefit. But it seems like now no one knows what going on when it comes to defending on a river hex, let alone attacking from it or around it. Almost every wargame that I have has rivers on the hex-sides, so what’s the deal with this one. [&:]

I believe the rationale had to do with riverine units - which must travel on rivers, and bridges - which require blowing, repair, and targeting. It would have been much more complicated to shift those functions from the hex to the hexside.

I expect there was also an aesthetic aspect as well. Note that the few hexside features (minor & major escarpments) don't actually fall on the hexside, but are just within the hex. Hexside rivers would require the same - creating the same confusion. Or they would have to look like the featureless "border" to be placed actually on the hexside. Having a river feature that both looked like a winding river and actually fit on the hexside would probably have been too technically complicated - impacting tiles on both sides of the hex.

And it's debatable which mode is the more accurate. Rivers certainly do have sides to them, but they are not microscopically thin and perfectly straight. Their widths actually do take up some space, they do wind around, and have local tributaries. The river might be all over that 10km hex, and an attack that looks parallel to the river on the TOAW map may actually afford the defenders the benefit of one of its curves or tributaries.

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: GreenDestiny

I have a question, what were they thinking when they decided to put the rivers through the hex instead of the hex sides? What are the benefits of this?

Because... I just don’t get it. This game has so much detail in it I find it hard to believe they would add something like this in it without some kind of a benefit. But it seems like now no one knows what going on when it comes to defending on a river hex, let alone attacking from it or around it. Almost every wargame that I have has rivers on the hex-sides, so what’s the deal with this one. [&:]

I believe the rationale had to do with riverine units - which must travel on rivers, and bridges - which require blowing, repair, and targeting. It would have been much more complicated to shift those functions from the hex to the hexside.

I expect there was also an aesthetic aspect as well. Note that the few hexside features (minor & major escarpments) don't actually fall on the hexside, but are just within the hex. Hexside rivers would require the same - creating the same confusion. Or they would have to look like the featureless "border" to be placed actually on the hexside. Having a river feature that both looked like a winding river and actually fit on the hexside would probably have been too technically complicated - impacting tiles on both sides of the hex.

And it's debatable which mode is the more accurate. Rivers certainly do have sides to them, but they are not microscopically thin and perfectly straight. Their widths actually do take up some space, they do wind around, and have local tributaries. The river might be all over that 10km hex, and an attack that looks parallel to the river on the TOAW map may actually afford the defenders the benefit of one of its curves or tributaries.

Riverine units are the first good reason I've heard against hex-side rivers, thanks. The rest of the items that I've heard about could be dealt with. If I do hex-side rivers, I'm probably going to have to not allow riverine units in those scenarios. That feels like a reasonable compromise. The thought of trying to deal with them in a reasonable way gives me a head-ache, I'm not sure how to do it without causing confusion.

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
If I do hex-side rivers, I'm probably going to have to not allow riverine units in those scenarios.

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

They are ugly.

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
If I do hex-side rivers, I'm probably going to have to not allow riverine units in those scenarios.

Riverine units work so badly in TOAW as it stands that this is hardly a sacrifice.

ORIGINAL: Vincenzo Beretta

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
If I do hex-side rivers, I'm probably going to have to not allow riverine units in those scenarios.

Riverine units work so badly in TOAW as it stands that this is hardly a sacrifice.

With hexsides one could portray riverine units as units forced to stay on hexes adiacent their "original" river (so no "river jumping" if an hex is bordered by two rivers). They could freely move from the "left" to the "right" bank hexes of the river, however, to simulate the flexibility to cover mainly one side intead of another (and with the opportunity to break up if you wish to cover both banks). And maybe with a ZOC partly extending across the river hexside.

ORIGINAL: Vincenzo Beretta

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
If I do hex-side rivers, I'm probably going to have to not allow riverine units in those scenarios.

Riverine units work so badly in TOAW as it stands that this is hardly a sacrifice.

With hexsides one could portray riverine units as units forced to stay on hexes adiacent their "original" river (so no "river jumping" if an hex is bordered by two rivers). They could freely move from the "left" to the "right" bank hexes of the river, however, to simulate the flexibility to cover mainly one side intead of another (and with the opportunity to break up if you wish to cover both banks). And maybe with a ZOC partly extending across the river hexside.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
How do you know which hexside the unit is in? There would have to be an arrow (on the unit, since there could be multiple units in multiple hexsides) showing which hexside the unit was in.

ORIGINAL: Vincenzo Beretta

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
How do you know which hexside the unit is in? There would have to be an arrow (on the unit, since there could be multiple units in multiple hexsides) showing which hexside the unit was in.

Yeah. Or the opportunity of "rotating" the counter to show on which river hexside it is positioned.

I gess that some rules are more easily implemented in tabletop wargames [:)]

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Think at some future date (assuming it is financially viable) we need two TOAWs. Each optimized for one of the two types of river. Would be nice to have a choice!

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Think at some future date (assuming it is financially viable) we need two TOAWs. Each optimized for one of the two types of river. Would be nice to have a choice!

ORIGINAL: GreenDestiny

Last question... I wonder what Norm Koger would think about rivers on the hex-sides. (come on Norm… I know you want this also.) Please turn a classic to a masterpiece.

ORIGINAL: Lava

Ya think?

If he had wanted them that way I would assume that's the way the game would have been designed.

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: GreenDestiny

Last question... I wonder what Norm Koger would think about rivers on the hex-sides. (come on Norm… I know you want this also.) Please turn a classic to a masterpiece.

Norm no longer has anything to do with the development of TOAW, so he says. But FWIW I don't think he's particularly averse to hexside rivers.

ORIGINAL: Lava
Seems to me if the riverine stuff doesn't work well, then fix the feature. Changing the map...

[:@]

Ray (alias Lava)