Art De La Guerre

[KevinD]

When this is chosen as a single terrain feature, is it:

1. Rectangular and both features full occupy
2. Irregularly shaped
3. The hill remains irregularly shaped and the village rectangular and they are not coterminous, with the rectangular village sitting on top of a larger hill or a larger village sitting on top of a smaller hill. If the former the part of the hill extending beyond the village is either gentle or steep. If the latter only part of the village gives the defender a height bonus in melee.

I though I recalled it was 2 but can’t find this.

[SteveR]

The village occupies the entire hill.

Page 75.

"In this case the hill is entirely covered by the village"

And the shape of the hill is not affected just because a village is on it. It is still a hill and conforms to the specifications regarding hills on page 71.

[Dickstick]

I prefer the hill conforms to the village as the village is the terrain pick. There is not a hill already there.
Also it avoids three pages of debate over the parts of the hill not covered by the village when sizes differ. Let's not open that can of worms.
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo

[Neep]

You would be better off with a wooded hill, which preserves the extra terrain piece count (and hides your Elephants), in Forest or Mountain. I guess if you are desperate for an elevated Difficult feature in Plain, you could go for it.

[Andy Fyfe]

[SteveR]

[Neep]

Good points Andy.
I've finally figured out why p.75 says "If at any point one player's half of the table has 3 or more terrain pieces...more than the other half,..." A half could have 2 more pieces, and you could put down a village with a hill - 4 pieces now!-)