Types of Terrain

[kenjib]

I think that there are two fundamental variables which yield four basic terrain types. The first variable is whether or not it inhibits movement. At a practical level terrain that damages units that stand on it basically counts as terrain that inhibits movement as it causes units to considering taking an alternate route. The second variable is whether or not it blocks line of sight.

This generates four types of terrain:

Type I: Does not block line of sight, does not inhibit movement: Flat areas of grass, rock, sand, non-slippery ice, and non-heavy snow as well as roads that are either flat or have some amount of elevation change.

Type II: Does not block line of sight, does inhibit movement: Water, slippery ice, heavy snow, lava, molten lava, RTFF walls (in most cases), gradual elevation changes (in most cases).

Type III: Does block line of sight, does not inhibit movement: We have yet to see terrain of this type.

Type IV: Does block line of sight, does inhibit movement: Trees, glaciers, castle walls, drastic cliff-like elevation changes.

When designing a map, the effect that the balance of terrain used has on which types of units are more or less effective should be considered. If you use a map which features a lot of Type II terrain then the mobility key to melee units is hampered while ranged attackers are not heavily effected. This type of map strongly favors ranged units. The dominance of maps of this type - because they are often more visually appealing, the pieces are usually more accessible quantity-wise, and it is an easy way to add strategic focus to a map - probably has a fair amount to do with the perception that ranged units dominate the game. In my experience, a typical heroscape map is likely to feature a lot of terrain in a configuration that strongly benefits ranged units. Maps with a more strategically placed I and IV terrain will give melee units a much better fighting chance, and possibly even an advantage depending on the layout of the map.

Similarly, type II and IV terrain will make flying units more valuable while the other terrain types make flying less useful by reducing the mobility benefit that flying confers. Type IV terrain also makes smaller units more useful in comparison to larger ones, as larger units will have a harder time hiding behind line-of-sight blocking terrain features.

This brings up the missing type - type III terrain. Something like smoke, fog, or the like would achieve this effect but could provide a very useful addition to the terrain types. A new strategic area would be opened up - strategic regions of the map where melee units have a clear advantage. This could be done with new terrain types or even a unit ability, such as smoke grenades (or a magically summoned fog cloud) that can drop rune-type smoke markers in an effected area, blocking line of sight through the square.

[Will T]

A good analysis Kenjib. The only thing I would add is the ability of "road" terrain to enhance movement.

[RichardD]

Originally Posted by kenjib

Type III: Does block line of sight, does not inhibit movement: We have yet to see terrain of this type.

Something that you can move through, but can't see through? Well, I suppose there are weather effects like this, but I can't think of any terrain (gigantic curtains, perhaps?).

If they were interested in adding to the complexity of Heroscape, then there is scope for the terrain to be used as mopre than just a measure of movement and elevation. As well as movement effects, terrain could have combat effects - perhaps it should be more difficult to fight on sand-based terrain, say, or that another type of terrain interfers with ranged combat other than simply by blocking line of sight.

[markwars]

Originally Posted by RichardD

Something that you can move through, but can't see through? Well, I suppose there are weather effects like this, but I can't think of any terrain (gigantic curtains, perhaps?).

Like RichardD the first thing that came to my mind was weather - specifically fog. And while I don't expect that we will ever see plastic bits that would represent that, I do think that in theory this type of terrain exists. But it exists as a formation rather than a type. The map Migol's Tomb comes to mind. The formation of the "cave" does block line of sight in and on it and it does not completely inhibit movement.

[HokshilaTo]

For Type III, what about glacier camouflage? I know it's a special, but it's directly tied to terrain.

[Eclipse]

Originally Posted by kenjib

At a practical level terrain that damages units that stand on it basically counts as terrain that inhibits movement as it causes units to considering taking an alternate route.

I think that's a bit of an oversimplification to be honest. People are amazingingly deterred by terrain that damages units, but at the same time, its more of a mentail block than anything that truly inhibits movement. When used properly, lava should actually encourage movement and stop ranged units from taking a position and letting melee units come to them. Few people actually do this because bridges over lava are SO tempting, but its utterly stupid from a gameplay perspective. I still think the "no glyphs on lava" rule is the worst rule in the entire game, as it needlessly cuts out an obvious, and extremely beneficial use for damaging terrain.

While I like your overall conclusion, I think the above touches on my biggest problem with it. There are other terrain variables besides the two you listed, and certainly room for even more. Things like damaging terrain are far more complicated mechanically than terrain that simply changes the number of spaces you can count (either for movement or range). One of my longstanding gripes with the opinion of the lava set is that people don't look to fully utilize the complex mechanics it creates to make more dynamic maps. Another great type of terrain in this regard is the castle door, which I also feel people don't take proper advantage of. Here we have a type of terrain that can dynamically inhibit movement and range, creating concepts such as one way passages.

In any case, I think you're correct for the most part. I'd also consider how height plays into your assumptions. Height is a bit of a way one way movement inhibitor, while simultaniously creating some interesting contradictions in the way we measure a units "threat range". Height also makes things like water more difficult to classify than you think. While you say it inhibits movement, it can at the same time, encourage one way movement by creating safe spots to drop characters from high places.

I think your analysis is spot on for quite a few games I've played, but Heroscape's terrain system has the potential for a far more complicated set of variables (many of which the developers have failed to touch on so far as well). And now that I look over my post again, I think its less a criticism of your post as my thoughts on the current use of terrain in general. People often say Heroscape is a little too basic, but I really think what we're lacking is that truly brilliant map that takes the more complicated mechanics and turns them into something really special. Anyway, congrats to anyone who's actually finished this rant, I appreciate it.

[snikt-bamf]

An additional Type II: Does not block line of sight; does inhibit movement would be the occasional voids created by empty space on the edge of the board when you run out of pieces to fill gaps. We usually let you shoot across the gaps but obviously you can't walk through them since there are no tiles there. (need...more...master....sets...)


I just thought of an example of type III: does block line of sight, does not inhibit movement, although it was kind of scenario specific. We once didn't have alot of time to play so we quickly made a smallish map but allowed you to run off one edge and show up on the other edge like Combat in ATARI 2600 or Pac-Man. It was fun chasing each other across the board(s) [vipers v knights]. No one had range, but if we did, we probably would not have allowed any shooting across the "interdimensional space".

[oni]

Great ideas Kenjib. I've seen these Heroclix Fire Effects and thought they were cool and wanted to add them to Heroscape. Here's a link to the War Store and you can scroll down to the Smoke/Fog effect.

http://www.thewarstore.com/galeforce...ates.html#9374

[oni]

Another thought. Rather than paying $10 for Smoke/Fog effects, like here, http://www.gf9.com/store/product_inf...roducts_id=242

why not use cotton balls?

Oh, they might blow away, sorry, bad idea.

[kenjib]

Originally Posted by Will T

A good analysis Kenjib. The only thing I would add is the ability of "road" terrain to enhance movement.

Yeah, I did include the idea that with a road some elevation changes can effectively be countered in terms of inhibiting movement but there is a bit of a difference there when the road is totally flat. I guess my goal wasn't to cover every terrain detail but to provide some very broad brushstroke-type categories just to get started thinking and to help create a very simple way to start looking at how the way we design maps effects the tactical structure of the game.

So my initial post was just intended to spark some discussion and I think it's really cool to fill in the details or just change the model completely if it doesn't work. Roads specifically create an interesting puzzle for melee units. While they help them close, they actually make it harder for them to attack by creating natural bottlenecks for movement on the map. This means that it's . This isn't just theoretical either as I've definitely noticed it in play when I and my opponents try to take advantage of roads only to see our melee squads attacking one or two units at a time and having trouble surrounding ranged opponents. The roads that actually help melee units most are really long ones where the benefit in movement is conferred in the turns prior to actually closing to attack.

Often when you get to your opponent you have a problem. The first unit can close with an opponent and often stay on the road. Subsequent units can either close behind the first unit (and not attack) and stay on the road, or go off the road, lose the road bonus, and not have enough move to close. The end result of this is that when melee units follow a shorter road they often only get a net bonus of a single extra figure's attack against ranged opponents compared to if there had not been a road, which really isn't so great.

Of course that's for squads. Melee heros do great with roads without this problem.

Originally Posted by RichardD

If they were interested in adding to the complexity of Heroscape, then there is scope for the terrain to be used as mopre than just a measure of movement and elevation. As well as movement effects, terrain could have combat effects - perhaps it should be more difficult to fight on sand-based terrain, say, or that another type of terrain interfers with ranged combat other than simply by blocking line of sight.

I agree. There's still a huge range of untapped potential for tactical terrain.

Originally Posted by markwars

Like RichardD the first thing that came to my mind was weather - specifically fog. And while I don't expect that we will ever see plastic bits that would represent that, I do think that in theory this type of terrain exists. But it exists as a formation rather than a type. The map Migol's Tomb comes to mind. The formation of the "cave" does block line of sight in and on it and it does not completely inhibit movement.

Overhangs - that's a good one. There are also watchtower/lookout points that present different problems and opportunities. I also forgot the castle battlements which often only block line of sight in one direction. The RTFF walls can also do this if placed high enough.

Originally Posted by HokshilaTo

For Type III, what about glacier camouflage? I know it's a special, but it's directly tied to terrain.

That's a whole other interesting area to explore - how do specific unit abilities other than flying and range interact with different types of terrain? I like how some custom units people have made have a tree camoflage similar to the glacier one. It's a great ability that adds a lot to the game.

Originally Posted by Eclipse

I think your analysis is spot on for quite a few games I've played, but Heroscape's terrain system has the potential for a far more complicated set of variables (many of which the developers have failed to touch on so far as well). And now that I look over my post again, I think its less a criticism of your post as my thoughts on the current use of terrain in general. People often say Heroscape is a little too basic, but I really think what we're lacking is that truly brilliant map that takes the more complicated mechanics and turns them into something really special. Anyway, congrats to anyone who's actually finished this rant, I appreciate it.

Great post. I totally agree with everything you wrote. Let's keep discussing this so that maybe we can start to create more conceptual tools to help build explicit strategies into our maps.

Originally Posted by snikt-bamf

An additional Type II: Does not block line of sight; does inhibit movement would be the occasional voids created by empty space on the edge of the board when you run out of pieces to fill gaps. We usually let you shoot across the gaps but obviously you can't walk through them since there are no tiles there. (need...more...master....sets...)


I just thought of an example of type III: does block line of sight, does not inhibit movement, although it was kind of scenario specific. We once didn't have alot of time to play so we quickly made a smallish map but allowed you to run off one edge and show up on the other edge like Combat in ATARI 2600 or Pac-Man. It was fun chasing each other across the board(s) [vipers v knights]. No one had range, but if we did, we probably would not have allowed any shooting across the "interdimensional space".

Cool stuff! I love maps that use interesting new features to fundamentally redefine the strategy of the game like your second map does.

[kenjib]

Originally Posted by oni

Another thought. Rather than paying $10 for Smoke/Fog effects, like here, http://www.gf9.com/store/product_inf...roducts_id=242

why not use cotton balls?

Oh, they might blow away, sorry, bad idea.

That's cool stuff! The only problem I see is how you could have a unit standing inside the fog/smoke. I was thinking of using a glyph to represent fog. I love the idea of fire too.

[InfinityMax]

Kenjib, while the analytical part of your post has my eyes glazing over, I love the discussion of Type III terrain. I think fog glyphs are great, but they present a rule vis-a-vis the rules of the game. They would require a house rule to overwrite the actual LOS rules as they are written. No longer can you eyeball down from the head of the shooter to the pinky claw of the target. Now you have to also trace a path, to make sure the path does not pass through the fog hex. And you also have to check to see if you might have a line of sight that doesn't pass through that hex, but still finds the target.

Which is not to say Type III is not feasible. You might designate a certain type of terrain as smoky, and say units on those hexes have range 1. You can shoot into the hexes, effectively seeing through the haze, and for the sake of simplification, you can target through them. But units standing on those hexes can't fire at range, so if you put a fair number of these hexes in a strategic position (say, at an ideal spot to park a sniper), you then have terrain that blocks LOS but not movement.

You could also have fog curtains. These would simply be lines, probably requiring some custom pieces, that follow the edges of hexes for a ways. Those on one side can't shoot at those on the other, period. This blocks LOS without blocking movement as well, and since it is a long stretch of fog curtain, you can dodge the 'can you shoot around it' problem. Of course, you could also make such a curtain out of several glyphs in a row.

Or you could just have foggy terrain. You could say 'clear sight spaces' while on this terrain max out at 3, which negates both incoming and outgoing targeting. Eat that, Deadeye. Like say the lower area of the board is a fog-covered valley, and any figure one the lowest level has an effective max range of 3, and cannot be targeted by any figure more than 3 hexes away.

Finally, I personally want Type V terrain - terrain that does stuff. I hate that we got ice and all it does is slow you down. The lava does stuff. The door does stuff. But the snow and ice are the same thing, and all they do is affect movement. Like ice could give you a -1 attack if you're on it, because you're slipping around. Or terrain that could make you check every space to see if you have to stop moving completely, or poison swamp that gives you poison markers, that don't kill right away but just make you roll at the end of every round.