Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Herremann the Wise" data-source="post: 4850121" data-attributes="member: 11300">Your list indicates to me that the 1-2-1 method is equal or best in all cases except one. The big psychological issue for me is the following.The issue I have with the 1-1-1 is if you organise the grid to move diagonally &quot;25ft.&quot;, it takes 5 squares of movement. If however, you align the grid at 45 degrees to that, it now will take you 7 squares of movement (see attached pdf). To me, this is a huge discrepancy that breaks down the robustness of the game. We play with minis and battlemap and judge cover and movement etc. fairly accurately. While 1-1-1 does make things easier to adjudicate mechanically, it is just one more thing that makes you scratch your head and wonder why all the streamlining and simplification.To me, 1-2-1 strikes the nice balance of ease of use while at least attempting to mirror some measure of mathematical realism. This pretty much defines how we like to play the game. However, I can understand how others who play a more beer-and-pretzels style game, or one that does not worry too much about simulation would find 1-1-1 good enough.Best RegardsHerremann the Wise</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Herremann the Wise, post: 4850121, member: 11300"] Your list indicates to me that the 1-2-1 method is equal or best in all cases except one. The big psychological issue for me is the following. The issue I have with the 1-1-1 is if you organise the grid to move diagonally "25ft.", it takes 5 squares of movement. If however, you align the grid at 45 degrees to that, it now will take you 7 squares of movement (see attached pdf). To me, this is a huge discrepancy that breaks down the robustness of the game. We play with minis and battlemap and judge cover and movement etc. fairly accurately. While 1-1-1 does make things easier to adjudicate mechanically, it is just one more thing that makes you scratch your head and wonder why all the streamlining and simplification. To me, 1-2-1 strikes the nice balance of ease of use while at least attempting to mirror some measure of mathematical realism. This pretty much defines how we like to play the game. However, I can understand how others who play a more beer-and-pretzels style game, or one that does not worry too much about simulation would find 1-1-1 good enough. Best Regards Herremann the Wise [/QUOTE]

Verification