PG-HQ Forums

I played a scenario from Cassino finally.  I have to say, I like that style of map.  Maybe a bit clearer and it would have made a good standard for the series instead of the odd, side perspective of the current maps.

(01-05-2022, 01:29 PM)Blackcloud6 Wrote: [ -> ]I played a scenario from Cassino finally.  I have to say, I like that style of map.  Maybe a bit clearer and it would have made a good standard for the series instead of the odd, side perspective of the current maps.

 I always like the Cassino Art but the jumbo hexsize really just made it so you needed 2 or more paper maps for most scenarios so I never played much of the module due to size limitations. 

I always found the isometric maps to be a bit difficult to decipher terrain wise, and the obvious defect is that they can only truly be arranged in one way for the art to make sense. 

My favorite was always the Guadalcanal maps though, but I think I'm standing alone on that island 

The Cassino maps have rivers on the hexsides and that avoids some problems. I wish all rivers were placed thus but it is simply not possible with geomorphic maps unless one was willing to accept a river map can only be connected to another river map (at xx01 or xx17) if they both have the same orientation. 

I wish this is the direction they had gone because the placement of rivers within a hex sometimes gives rise to issues that are not so easily resolved with the RaW.

(01-13-2022, 12:53 AM)Hugmenot Wrote: [ -> ]I wish this is the direction they had gone because the placement of rivers within a hex sometimes gives rise to issues that are not so easily resolved with the RaW.

I agree. While placing rivers within a hex makes for a nice mud rule and makes for blocking bridges easier to note, the problems created by which side a unit might be on is more of an issue.