[lordpidey]

--snipped for brevity--

I really understand where you're coming from about the artillery, it was Originally supposed to be placed on the hill north of fairview on the main meiaquar map.
It was Gm intervention that placed on the southern hill, for convenience of anyone at fairview wanting to interact/attack it during the course of the siege, to my own understanding that was a mechanics interpretation, not the actual location of the artillery. even though its pretty much a shorter distance from the main meiaquar map grid wise, it requires traversing two maps to get to.

I'm not blaming them for the retcon.

I understand WHY it was done, though I think a partial retcon would facilitate better RP.

My concern is that there was no announcement about the retcon, and I only knew about it from the word of a player.  And I am -extremely- hesitant to take the word of a player (Even if they are the leader of a nation) to say that something that a GM said is retconned.

---

I think my only personal chin rub is why there were no mechanical advantages for a roleplay-set ambush/siege.

Nor were there any mechanical advantages for laying down traps to slow down the march of Meiaquar.

Further, the traps at least had some sort of mechanical cost to lay down (Granted, it wasn't very high).  Is that true for the artillery?