They're all very nice, especially the ravine/level -1 terrain ones.
On this one, I would indeed have one single connected hill-mass rather than two separate ones. You can create this situation with separated hill-masses in a horseshoe configuration by using two regular geo boards. But for a single horseshoe hill with some room around it, you need the Fort board.
DON'T FALL FOR IT, DON!On this one, I would indeed have one single connected hill-mass rather than two separate ones. You can create this situation with separated hill-masses in a horseshoe configuration by using two regular geo boards. But for a single horseshoe hill with some room around it, you need the Fort board.
Hey there - I am German! ? So who should ask for niggling details if not I?DON'T FALL FOR IT, DON!
Don: Here, I've got this cool board
vM: It needs stuff on it
Don: Here, I added some stuff
vM: It needs the hills connected
Don: Here, I connected the hills
vM: It needs <insert niggling detail here>
This is why we don't do Art By Committee.
Another good idea - the BFP-style Double-Wide boards. These would lend even more space to some revolutionary terrain ideas.OK, so I found a (partially) horseshoe shaped hill among the sketches. Can be used anywhere. Provides horseshoe on one side - large hill on the opposite side.
View attachment 7280
Von M & I have similar thoughts about what he calls a horseshoe effect and what I deem is a draw (in military terminology: maneuver room at the lower elevation end and diminishing maneuver room at higher elevation end usually depicted on maps with contour lines forming a wide U or V pattern. The center of the U or V may normally carry a water course.)OK, so I found a (partially) horseshoe shaped hill among the sketches. Can be used anywhere. Provides horseshoe on one side - large hill on the opposite side.
View attachment 7280
Just a cliff. I expect you would need to point out "Climbing is NA."Still waiting for a waterfall. Why? I don't know but I think it would be neat (not to mention let 'em figure out how to handle it 2-level drop?).
Add a cave and you've got something there! (auto Mist at the lower level for a really big one?).On further thought, that would be a good exercise in how one rule can affect all the others. Drifting boats and swimmers would be eliminated, so you'd have to cross-reference those sections also. How about a boat-mounted multi-hex FG on both levels (above the waterfall and below)? Ah, no matter, E5.4 already prohibits FG.... What about a frozen waterfall? Would climbing still be NA? Or would you need permit an SSR permitting any Climbing unit designated as having ice axes the ability to climb? And you've have to alter B21.121 to ensure that current always flows toward the waterfall at the upper elevation and away from it at the lower.
Most useful would be roads or railways in the form of transparent overlays. Had this idea years back.Another thought. Was any consideration ever given to making transparancy based overlays? i.e., buildings, shellholes, hedges, walls, brush, (pretty much anything really) that could be placed over open ground on any level?