I've still been rolling this around in the back of my head. I got to thinking over the weekend - what if the price of units was based upon campaign prices? And not just initial purchase costs, but also maintenance costs? Does this fix some of the play balance issues? i.e. Perhaps not the first battle, but following battles if you have to pay maintenance on some elephants...remember, I'm thinking between battles you have to pay to fix your damaged units.
Also regarding territory, I'm thinking simplify for now. Think abstract.
I've been playing RTR-VII lately. They introduced (at least to me) major and minor cities. What if for a tournament each faction starts out with something like three or four territories. Perhaps a major and a few minor. The difference being that a major is a heavily defended city, with serious walls, etc. i.e. It's the capital. The other two or three minor territories are still important, meaning they bring in money for troop retraining/acquisition, but they have poor defenses. No walls, etc. This forces battles in the open for the most territory grabs, but to take a capital (essentially a kill-shot) you gotta take a walled city. How about that?
Remember, I'm trying to keep the rules simple enough to follow and understand, but add enough strategic complexity it makes for an enjoyable tournament. And to give the battles an underlying purpose...
Bookmarks