Slitherine

This is the map generated by the computer when selecting mountainous.
One would assume to have slopes and hills, not impassable mountains on the edge, leaving the battlefield totally plain, more than an agricultural map.
In my opinion there's something wrong in it.
Any ideas about that?

Some mountainous areas (e.g. in the former Yugoslavia and in parts of Switzerland) are exactly like that.

I understand this.
But when you make different maps between agricultural, hilly, wooded and mountainous one would assume that the last shouldn't be as the first ...
Otherwise where is the difference?

Agreed. The "mountainous" part does not even affect the game at all, the way it is.

It would be pretty cool to have some impassable mountainous terrain in the middle of the battlefield. It would definitely shake up some of the tactics and make for very interesting games.

Here's some mountains, the Brits are going skiing after the battle.

The mountainous areas could sometimes have foothills, couldn't they? Areas of hilly terrain adjacent to the mountainous parts.

stockwellpete wrote:The mountainous areas could sometimes have foothills, couldn't they? Areas of hilly terrain adjacent to the mountainous parts.

Aye

FroBodine wrote: It would be pretty cool to have some impassable mountainous terrain in the middle of the battlefield. It would definitely shake up some of the tactics and make for very interesting games.

I've had this a few times in solitaire games--all it does is give you a secure flank, so it can be decisively advantageous for the "heavier" army (harder to outflank with light/medium troops), which is exactly the opposite of what I'd expect from a "mountain" battle. I also wish there would be more foothills, rough terrain, etc.

I've commented on this before, but the most accurate mountainous map would be a narrow valley running down the center of the map, from top to bottom, and mountains on either side. A hilly map would be similar, but with a slightly wider valley and slightly lower hills. Preferably the valleys would have streams to one side. Both sides would have their flanks anchored by hills, although light infantry obviously could fight each other for the heights.

Realistic-looking maps imho should have a clear pattern of drainage. Pretty much everything is in some sort of watershed, even if it ultimately leads to a desert salt flat. Lines of communication in rough terrain tend to run along river valleys. Armies tend to meet along lines of communication.

Sometimes armies meet when they're trying to match over the high ground from one watershed to another (ie, Hittin, Cynoscephalae). Sometimes they meet when trying to cross a valley (though most of these would be in flatter agricultural terrain, I would think). But I think those are somewhat rarer than the battles along the watershed's axis.

I realize however that this would be a massive overhaul to an already-published game, probably requiring some changes to the AI. But if FoG ever wanted to overhaul the terrain generator, this would be my suggestion.

The real problem is that medium foot armies already are outclassed by heavier host.

If you also convert in open terrain with no rough going the only map where they could have some better chances, then nobody will end using these kind of armies!!

P&S and SJ had mountainous maps with many constricted valleys and mountain passes which can be hit or miss in the enjoyment factor. I guess this is why Richard changed the code.

jomni wrote:P&S and SJ had mountainous maps with many constricted valleys and mountain passes which can be hit or miss in the enjoyment factor. I guess this is why Richard changed the code.

Yes, but presumably you only got mountain terrain if you, uh, selected mountain terrain, which is fair enough. Now if you select mountain terrain (or hilly or wooded) you usually get a flat plain covering most of the map, pretty much the same as agricultural.

We will be testing adding more hills and rough going to mountainous maps.

Thank's!
It really seems fair.
This is an outstanding game wit no rivals on the market and having the will to make the little improvements still needed to make it exceptional is a testimony to the dedication of the developers!
Nevfer thought that Fog could be enhanced in such a relevant way.