Erfworld battlefield layout?

[Unguided]

I was wondering what the maps for Erfworld will be like, squares or a hex grid? My first guess would be hex, like the map that Parson had been planning to use for his game, but it could still be the standard squares. It will probably be revealed when the battle starts and they unveil the complete design of what that big map in the battle room actually looks like.

[Glome]

I would say hexes. It would be a little too akward if everyone had to conform to squares when moving around.

[mirrorshades]

My first guess would be hex, like the map that Parson had been planning to use for his game, but it could still be the standard squares.

I think that hexes are more or less the "standard" for wargames, I can only recall playing one that used squares instead. (And it was kind of a bummer, since the diagonal move and attack got thrown off.)

I've been taking a look at the "overhead" shots of the countryside when shown, to see if there are any gridlines superimposed. So far there haven't been any, but maybe that's an "option" that Parson can enable with one of the -mancy thingamabobs.

[factotum]

I would agree that if there's one thing that ISN'T standard in a wargame, it's using squares on the map. Hexes are much fairer because a move in any direction covers the same distance, whereas a move from corner to corner on a square grid is 1.4 times further than a move side to side--this is why this style of mapping is almost universally used in this type of game.

[Scientivore]

I'm having trouble picturing: are there any shapes with more sides than hexes that would work as well for wargaming, or are they uniquely suited to it?

[SteveMB]

I'm having trouble picturing: are there any shapes with more sides than hexes that would work as well for wargaming, or are they uniquely suited to it?

It's mathematically impossible to tile the plane with any regular polygon other than equilateral triangles, squares, and hexagons. Various other shapes could work (e.g. non-regular polygons, from non-square rectangles up to the tiles in some M. C. Escher works), and tessalations of multiple types of polygon could work (e.g. a combination of large octagons and small squares), but these create asymmetries that complicate the measurements that the grid is supposed to facilitate.

[fangthane]

It's mathematically impossible to tile the plane with any regular polygon other than equilateral triangles, squares, and hexagons. Various other shapes could work (e.g. non-regular polygons, from non-square rectangles up to the tiles in some M. C. Escher works), and tessalations of multiple types of polygon could work (e.g. a combination of large octagons and small squares), but these create asymmetries that complicate the measurements that the grid is supposed to facilitate.

Simple answer, no.

Hexes are about the best for this kind of purpose. They're arguably better for RPGs as well, especially for easing radial effects, but square rooms are a bit of a pain. My gaming group generally prefers to use hexes but there's a necessary fudge factor for long, narrow corridors and square rooms as well as some line-of-sight issues.

[Scientivore]

It's mathematically impossible to tile the plane with any regular polygon other than equilateral triangles, squares, and hexagons. Various other shapes could work (e.g. non-regular polygons, from non-square rectangles up to the tiles in some M. C. Escher works), and tessalations of multiple types of polygon could work (e.g. a combination of large octagons and small squares), but these create asymmetries that complicate the measurements that the grid is supposed to facilitate.

Thanks, SteveMB! (Is it alright if I just call you Steve?) I knew that somebody here would know.

Hexes are about the best for this kind of purpose. They're arguably better for RPGs as well, especially for easing radial effects, but square rooms are a bit of a pain. My gaming group generally prefers to use hexes but there's a necessary fudge factor for long, narrow corridors and square rooms as well as some line-of-sight issues.

Have you tried switching between using hexes for any space large enough to be considered "open" and using squares in narrow spaces? I'm curious how well that would work. The downside that I can imagine is that switching back and forth would make it harder to develop automaticity for either kind of spatial reasoning.

[Ultimatum479]

Actually, the diagonal movement advantage of squares would be _more_ exaggerated, not less, in a smaller area, if I'm not mistaken.

[Scientivore]

My understanding of the problem with indoor spaces is that hex grids don't line up with rectangular floorplans. There'd be lots of wasted space around the edges of a room and you wouldn't be able to simply march forward down a corridor.

Has anyone tried giving diagonal movement a point cost multiple when using square graphs, and if so what? It seems like a simple solution in theory; for all I know it could be the standard convention. However, 1.4 is awkward and 1.5 is inaccurate. Does one of them work well in practice or would it bog down the flow of the game?

[Maerad of Pellinor]

I've always thought of Erfworld as more of a card game, so I don't think that movement will be an issue....

[Ultimatum479]

Has anyone tried giving diagonal movement a point cost multiple when using square graphs, and if so what? It seems like a simple solution in theory; for all I know it could be the standard convention. However, 1.4 is awkward and 1.5 is inaccurate. Does one of them work well in practice or would it bog down the flow of the game?

I believe D&D counts every second square in diagonal travel as two squares. (So the trick is to move only one diagonal square each turn. :P)

[SteveMB]

Has anyone tried giving diagonal movement a point cost multiple when using square graphs, and if so what? It seems like a simple solution in theory; for all I know it could be the standard convention. However, 1.4 is awkward and 1.5 is inaccurate. Does one of them work well in practice or would it bog down the flow of the game?

The usual solution is to consider 1.5 close enough -- generally, it is (particularly given that the inaccuracy is only 6%, and affects everybody equally).

One of the books in the library at Roy's fighter college, as seen in Origin Of PCs, was Moving On The Diagonal, by Wun and Ahalf.

[mirrorshades]

I've always thought of Erfworld as more of a card game, so I don't think that movement will be an issue....

Well, there have been a number of strips that reference the amount of "move" that a particular unit has, so it does come into play at some point.

The card game idea is interesting, though; hadn't considered that angle.

[Rocheforte]

They could be using a gridless map, like Warhammer. Battletech also apparently changed over to straight scale (although that was after I stopped playing, so I may be wrong about that). Jillian's gwiffon has a move of 52, which would be represented on a tabletop as 52 inches of straight-line movement, adjusted for terrain and maneuvering.

I think a straight miniatures conversion is more likely than a hex grid, although the idea of a birds-eye view of the battlefield with every unit mustered in distinctive hex-based formations is amusing....

[Legendary]

No, because when Jillian killed the 3 Infantry and the other thing, she supplied a set of coordinates. If you don't have a grid, you can't determine coordinates.

[SteveMB]

No, because when Jillian killed the 3 Infantry and the other thing, she supplied a set of coordinates. If you don't have a grid, you can't determine coordinates.

The grid can be implicit (measurement of distance along two axes from a given origin) rather than explicit (the map is laid out with squares or hexes that are used to define movement).

The fact that Jillian's message had X and Y coordinates in the high-three and low-four digit numbers (X=-1214, Y=+455) implies to me that the grid is implicit -- a map big enough to accomodate over a thousand squares or hexes along one direction would be even more unwieldy than the Europa-series wargames (WWII at the division level in two-week turns).

[Maerad of Pellinor]

Well, there have been a number of strips that reference the amount of "move" that a particular unit has, so it does come into play at some point.

The card game idea is interesting, though; hadn't considered that angle.

A "move" could be the number of things that you're allowed to do per turn, not how far you can go. Going towards the enemy for a certain amount of time could be one of your choices for a move, though....

[Scientivore]

The grid can be implicit (measurement of distance along two axes from a given origin) rather than explicit (the map is laid out with squares or hexes that are used to define movement).

The fact that Jillian's message had X and Y coordinates in the high-three and low-four digit numbers (X=-1214, Y=+455) implies to me that the grid is implicit -- a map big enough to accomodate over a thousand squares or hexes along one direction would be even more unwieldy than the Europa-series wargames (WWII at the division level in two-week turns).

Even if the grid is implicit, the most natural calibration would be for one movement point to equal one unit of measurement...oh, I get it. You're saying that with such a large grid, the unit of measurement is probably smaller the minimum unit footprint diameter, in which case it must be an implicit grid. So, one move could be a millimeter or pixel (in tabletop or computer terms).

[SteveMB]

Even if the grid is implicit, the most natural calibration would be for one movement point to equal one unit of measurement...oh, I get it. You're saying that with such a large grid, the unit of measurement is probably smaller the minimum unit footprint diameter, in which case it must be an implicit grid. So, one move could be a millimeter or pixel (in tabletop or computer terms).

Yes; that's it. (Emphasis added to clarify.)

[mirrorshades]

Ta map big enough to accomodate over a thousand squares or hexes along one direction would be even more unwieldy than the Europa-series wargames (WWII at the division level in two-week turns).

It's been known to happen... :)

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/124745

(Probably not a thousand hexes in a given direction, but still pretty big. That map in the situation room is pretty big itself.)

[K2]

Page 16 of the comic, there are 2 over head views of gobwin knob. It uses hexes.

[jindra34]

Page 16 of the comic, there are 2 over head views of gobwin knob. It uses hexes.

We cannot be a one hundred percent sure that the war game Parson created was ERfworld... likely similar but not nesecarily the same..

[Maerad of Pellinor]

We cannot be a one hundred percent sure that the war game Parson created was ERfworld... likely similar but not nesecarily the same..

It can't be exactly the same--Parson never had anything about "dwagons"....

[Erk]

The size of what the map would be if it were made into a real-life tabletop game is kind of irrelevant to whether or not it would exist, too. Even if a grid square is quite large, and there are 10,000 grid squares in either direction, Erfworld is the size of a world, not a tabletop strat game. There are no constraints to how big it can be.

[Ave]

They must be hexes.

[Scientivore]

That's just a sepia-tone closeup of the Magic Kingdom.

[SteveMB]

They must be hexes.

I don't see how anything on that page establishes it one way or the other; could you clarify?

Also, thinking a bit more, I realize that my earlier argument implicitly assumed that the origin point of the coordinate system used in Jillian's message was somewhere close enough to be part of the "tactical map" of the Gobwin Knob battlefield. That isn't necessarily so; there might be a "global" (not that Erfworld is necessarily round; being that it's based on game-world mechanics it might be more convenient for the Titans to have made it flat) coordinate system for the whole world, thousands of squares/hexes in total extent but only a few hundred in each direction needed to map any given battle. (I figure that a few hundred in each direction is a minimum useful battle-scale map, assuming that "52 move" means 52 hexes/squares, barring obstructions or other modifying factors).

Edit: If the Titans made Erfworld flat, they might have put another scenario map on the other side....

[Ultimatum479]

Steve, the reference was to the picture of the circle surrounded on six sides by land of alternating colors, but Scientivore's response appears correct.

A few hundred in each direction seems fair enough, and in fact maybe a bit big. 52 move, flying = unaffected by terrain, that means a few days to get from Ansom's camp to Gobwin Knob -- which is probably accurate or a bit much judging by Ansom's earlier plan, in which he stated something to the effect that the slower siege weapons would take several turns to reach Gobwin Knob.

[SteveMB]

A few hundred in each direction seems fair enough, and in fact maybe a bit big. 52 move, flying = unaffected by terrain, that means a few days to get from Ansom's camp to Gobwin Knob -- which is probably accurate or a bit much judging by Ansom's earlier plan, in which he stated something to the effect that the slower siege weapons would take several turns to reach Gobwin Knob.

Given that it apparently only took one turn for the dwagons to bring Jillian back to Stanley's HQ (I'm guessing that dwagons are faster* than gwiffons, but not outrageously so), I infer that the capture was a few dozen spaces (hexes, squares, measuring units, whatever) out from Stanley's HQ and Ansom's marshalling point was a few dozen spaces further out from that. I'll revise my estimate of a useful battle map downwards to somewhere in the neighborhood of 100-150 spaces in each dimension.

*Depending on how Erfworld mechanics handles a led unit's options when attacked, the dwagons may actually be slower, but the fact that it was the dwagons' turn and not Jillian's gave them initiative and prevented immediate retreat (even if Jillian had wanted to). Perhaps winning an initial round of combat (soloing the blue) would open a break-off opportunity, again assuming that she wasn't too reckless (or already somewhat brainwashed) to take advantage of it.