|
Post by mthrguth on Jun 15, 2016 4:14:37 GMT
Some armies prefer to fight in dense terrain. Armies with lower aggression are more likely to be the defenders and to place terrain. Terrain pieces can be fairly large, and have the restriction of one BW between terrain pieces and board edges.
What are the odds of getting a board covered in terrain? I have assumed that a second piece will not fit once a first piece is placed, and that the attacker discards all second terrain choices by choosing an already occupied area if he wins the choice of where to place an item.
With only 4 pieces of terrain available (and 5 is more the norm except for arable and Littoral armies.) four outcomes are possible; a board with terrain in one quarter, 2 quarters, 3 quarters or every quarter. The relevant odds for each outcome are 3% for one quarter, 27% for 2 quarters, 56% for three quarters and 11 percent for all quarters.
Adding a fifth choice would raise the odds of 4 quarters to 30 percent. lowers the odds of 3 quarters to 51% and lowers the odds of getting two quarters to about 15 percent.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Jun 15, 2016 6:41:11 GMT
Some armies prefer to fight in dense terrain. Armies with lower aggression are more likely to be the defenders and to place terrain. Terrain pieces can be fairly large, and have the restriction of one BW between terrain pieces and board edges. What are the odds of getting a board covered in terrain? I have assumed that a second piece will not fit once a first piece is placed, and that the attacker discards all second terrain choices by choosing an already occupied area if he wins the choice of where to place an item. With only 4 pieces of terrain available (and 5 is more the norm except for arable and Littoral armies.) four outcomes are possible; a board with terrain in one quarter, 2 quarters, 3 quarters or every quarter. The relevant odds for each outcome are 3% for one quarter, 27% for 2 quarters, 56% for three quarters and 11 percent for all quarters. Adding a fifth choice would raise the odds of 4 quarters to 30 percent. lowers the odds of 3 quarters to 51% and lowers the odds of getting two quarters to about 15 percent. Since DBA 3.0, we have not had a problem placing terrain pieces, but then our boards are 80 x 80 cm. Secondly, we have reduced terrain features to an intermediate 3 x 4BW or 2 x 3BW and even in rare instances three pieces can be placed in a quadrant.
|
|
|
Post by twrnz on Jun 15, 2016 7:50:57 GMT
As way of a reference we use 60cm x 60cm boards. I noticed that when people first started playing DBA 3.0 they often selected very large terrain pieces. This soon changed and players started using smaller pieces.
In a recent game I was defeated by Norse Irish who fluffed around in woods and marshy areas dodging my archers arrows and cannon fire. That was until my English army was split up sufficiently. At this point they rushed out of the marshes and defeated me.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Jun 15, 2016 8:09:09 GMT
As way of a reference we use 60cm x 60cm boards. I noticed that when people first started playing DBA 3.0 they often selected very large terrain pieces. This soon changed and players started using smaller pieces. In a recent game I was defeated by Norse Irish who fluffed around in woods and marshy areas dodging my archers arrows and cannon fire. That was until my English army was split up sufficiently. At this point they rushed out of the marshes and defeated me. That is a sound tactic for my Numidian when fighting Rome.
I learned the value of smaller terrain pieces as they served well as stepping stones for Ps.
|
|
|
Post by dvdrvbal on Jun 16, 2016 3:37:11 GMT
We tend not to get all the terrain pieces nominated. That's one reason I like scenarios.
|
|