Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4851081" data-attributes="member: 710">And do it diagonally, you'll be faster that way! ---Jeff, is the grid is the biggest problem, you should eventually &quot;fix&quot; it. But if that's the only big issue with the game, I would not worry too much about, certainly not 3 pages long. (Off course, that's not your doing. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> )For me, the major gain of the rule was speeding up determining how far movement and range is resolved. I seldomly need to know if something should be closer or farther, I need to know whether if something is in range or an attack or movement. And that goes a lot easier if I just determine the longer range along one axis instead of counting every 2nd diagonal square double. That's even - or especially ? - true if I have to move around corners and switch direction, since I don't have to keep the number of diagonal squares moved so far in my mind.The change is not for verisimiltude or simulation or anything. It's to speed up gameplay. If it confuses your long-learned instincts in counting 1-2-1 diagonals, it's obviously failing in that regard. But it's certainly working for me. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4851081, member: 710"] And do it diagonally, you'll be faster that way! --- Jeff, is the grid is the biggest problem, you should eventually "fix" it. But if that's the only big issue with the game, I would not worry too much about, certainly not 3 pages long. (Off course, that's not your doing. ;) ) For me, the major gain of the rule was speeding up determining how far movement and range is resolved. I seldomly need to know if something should be closer or farther, I need to know whether if something is in range or an attack or movement. And that goes a lot easier if I just determine the longer range along one axis instead of counting every 2nd diagonal square double. That's even - or especially ? - true if I have to move around corners and switch direction, since I don't have to keep the number of diagonal squares moved so far in my mind. The change is not for verisimiltude or simulation or anything. It's to speed up gameplay. If it confuses your long-learned instincts in counting 1-2-1 diagonals, it's obviously failing in that regard. But it's certainly working for me. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification