Daniel Zacharias wrote on Wed, Oct 23 01:58 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
This (and the original Heroes) are some of my favorite variants. The hexagonal board allows, or even suggests, different kinds of pieces than square grids. Instead of relying on the orthogonal/diagonal distinction, we can have, coherently, pieces that all move on the same lines but have other differences.
There are some things that are questionable about this variant. There could have been two camels and two guards instead of one and three; and the camel could have some extra ability to differentiate it from the chariot. I also wonder if Heroes 1's hole in the center might make for more interesting gameplay than the full board found here.
It would be nice if all the diagrams used the proper board size. Was there some consideration of using a 127 hex board? I also found the pawn description hard to interpret regarding the ability of the pawns to move to the side without capturing. I had to look at the sample game to be sure that was intended.
This (and the original Heroes) are some of my favorite variants. The hexagonal board allows, or even suggests, different kinds of pieces than square grids. Instead of relying on the orthogonal/diagonal distinction, we can have, coherently, pieces that all move on the same lines but have other differences.
There are some things that are questionable about this variant. There could have been two camels and two guards instead of one and three; and the camel could have some extra ability to differentiate it from the chariot. I also wonder if Heroes 1's hole in the center might make for more interesting gameplay than the full board found here.
It would be nice if all the diagrams used the proper board size. Was there some consideration of using a 127 hex board? I also found the pawn description hard to interpret regarding the ability of the pawns to move to the side without capturing. I had to look at the sample game to be sure that was intended.
Still, this is a great idea!