PG-HQ Forums

Now viewable at http://www.avalanchepress.com/AxisMaps.php.  

Like the simplicity - the light/regular woods demarcation looks straightforward.  

Still find it an effort to evaluate the maps from the 4Ed spotting perspective - that is, at the elevated clear terrain hexes as "open" rather than LT.  Perhaps this is so because the 3Ed version was somewhat "counter-intuitive" visi-a-vis the artwork and so, once learned, is more difficult to drop?  Btw, I don't intend "counter-intuitive" here in a pejorative sense, though many didn't like the 3Ed scheme.  

I haven't used 4th edition much, but I thought the idea was that hills themselves are not limiting terrain so you judge by other things like woods or towns on the hills.

I always felt the older version of hills was a way to avoid having Rough terrain as an option, but the rules as written gave you no way to distinguish between hills that were rough and craggy offering cover and hills that were just clear terrain at a higher elevation.

I played a few scenarios from one of the earlier Romania books and they were great so I am really looking forward to this one.

(11-20-2015, 07:15 AM)joe_oppenheimer Wrote: [ -> ]I haven't used 4th edition much, but I thought the idea was that hills themselves are not limiting terrain so you judge by other things like woods or towns on the hills.

I always felt the older version of hills was a way to avoid having Rough terrain as an option, but the rules as written gave you no way to distinguish between hills that were rough and craggy offering cover and hills that were just clear terrain at a higher elevation.

That's pretty much it ... all I was conveying is that I have to think about it carefully when looking at a map to avoid the "default" thinking that any hill is LT (as in 3Ed) and speculating on why it seems difficult (to me) to let go of that default perspective.  

My complaint is the edges don't appear to match up, looks like the "cut" is off.