Jonathan Ingram
10-21-1998, 05:28 AM
I've been considering what could be done to make fighter regents more
formidable and I think I've come up with at least two options that could be
part of the equation: forced marches and reduced movement costs.
***
Any army of up to five units under the control of a fighter regent can go
through a forced march at no extra cost. This forced march doubles the
number of provinces through which the unit can move, allowing the regent to
bring more forces to bear in a battle. Thus, an infantry unit has a base
overland movement of 2 instead of 1, a knight 4 instead of 2, and calvary 6
instead of 3.
Non-fighter regents can also use this technique, but it costs 1GB and 1RP
per unit moved in this fashion *even if the regent has one or more fighter
lieutenants*. Also, non-fighter regents are limited to moving four units in
this fashion.
Any unit moved in this manner must suffer a one point penalty to its
defence, melee, charge, OR missile rating during any battle in which it
participates before the next war move (i.e., it takes one week to recover
from the march).
Fighter regents may use a second forced march, but have to pay the 1GB and
1RP cost per unit when doing so. Non-fighter regents are limited to one
forced march per action round, regardless of whether or not they employ
fighter lieutenants.
The definition of a non-fighter regent includes paladins and rangers, who
*must* pay full cost for this action and are limited to four units in a
forced march.
No unit may participate in consecutive forced marches.
***
Another idea: Fighter regents can move twice as many unit-provinces (ten
instead of five) for the same price of 1GB. So, a fighter could move ten
units one province for 1GB or five units two provinces for 1GB, whereas a
non-fighter regent would pay twice the amount.
***
I can think of several times when being able to increase a unit's range by
even one square would have been extremely useful for me; these options
enhance the power of fighter regents without significantly impacting
non-fighter regents IMO.
I await your opinions.
Jonathan
formidable and I think I've come up with at least two options that could be
part of the equation: forced marches and reduced movement costs.
***
Any army of up to five units under the control of a fighter regent can go
through a forced march at no extra cost. This forced march doubles the
number of provinces through which the unit can move, allowing the regent to
bring more forces to bear in a battle. Thus, an infantry unit has a base
overland movement of 2 instead of 1, a knight 4 instead of 2, and calvary 6
instead of 3.
Non-fighter regents can also use this technique, but it costs 1GB and 1RP
per unit moved in this fashion *even if the regent has one or more fighter
lieutenants*. Also, non-fighter regents are limited to moving four units in
this fashion.
Any unit moved in this manner must suffer a one point penalty to its
defence, melee, charge, OR missile rating during any battle in which it
participates before the next war move (i.e., it takes one week to recover
from the march).
Fighter regents may use a second forced march, but have to pay the 1GB and
1RP cost per unit when doing so. Non-fighter regents are limited to one
forced march per action round, regardless of whether or not they employ
fighter lieutenants.
The definition of a non-fighter regent includes paladins and rangers, who
*must* pay full cost for this action and are limited to four units in a
forced march.
No unit may participate in consecutive forced marches.
***
Another idea: Fighter regents can move twice as many unit-provinces (ten
instead of five) for the same price of 1GB. So, a fighter could move ten
units one province for 1GB or five units two provinces for 1GB, whereas a
non-fighter regent would pay twice the amount.
***
I can think of several times when being able to increase a unit's range by
even one square would have been extremely useful for me; these options
enhance the power of fighter regents without significantly impacting
non-fighter regents IMO.
I await your opinions.
Jonathan