Re: 1588 Spanish Armada [17.2.13] V37-L&S

[nolefan5311]

And perhaps I'm being dense here, but regions like Diana, Sun, Moon, Doncella, etc., aren't LB's or SS's, but have the Monarch's Commander's shields there...is there something special about these regions?

yes these are starting positions, refer map front page.

Thanks cairns. Can they also be assaulted by the Treasury positions like the Command Ships and SS's/LB's can?

Instructions- Treasury Movement:
Each player can move one-way outward to earn additional bonuses or can assault from any treasury position to same player's Command Ship (B & S), Supply Ship (SS), or Land Base (LB) only.
Does that modification answer that? In other words no they cannot be assaulted from the treasury.

And SS Amor (for D. Medina Sedona) is not the same color as all the other SS's.

that is now fixed in v30 above. SS and colour has been removed from Julia Zabra. and SS Amor is now same colour as other SS's.

Sure does. Thanks cairns!

[cairnswk]

Version 30....bumped

Click image to enlarge.

[cairnswk]

This question needs to be examined again.

The +11 bonus...is that ONLY for holding the Monarch and 4 Treasury territories? Or does that include the bow and stern of the command ships as well? The "Commander's" in the legend has me a little confused. I don't believe it includes any part of the command ships, but I just want to make sure.

This bonus should include the bow and stern of the command ship, plus all the treasury territories but not the Monarch position.

I think that now the wording has changed a little, this bonus can be brought down somewhat...what do others think?

Still wanting someone to address this issue please.

[nolefan5311]

I've been hesitant to comment on this since I'm involved with the project, but I do think it could be reduced, possibly even removed altogether, especially with the high amount of autodeploys in the treasury positions.

You know what you could do is institute a new XML feature, the multiplier. Maybe have the bonus as a +3, and multiplied for every Command Ship held, or something like that.

If you do keep it, I think the wording needs to be changed to, "Hold all Treasury positions and both Command ship regions for a Monarch, +11 (or whatever the bonus will be). Or something like that. As it's currently worded, it sounds like the Monarch's Commander is a required territory.

[cairnswk]

I've been hesitant to comment on this since I'm involved with the project, but I do think it could be reduced, possibly even removed altogether, especially with the high amount of autodeploys in the treasury positions.

please don't hesitate to comment simply because you're doing the xml.
i thought this was about getting the gameplay sorted and since there is very little activity in comments otherwise, why not put your ideas forward!

You know what you could do is institute a new XML feature, the multiplier. Maybe have the bonus as a +3, and multiplied for every Command Ship held, or something like that.
If you do keep it, I think the wording needs to be changed to, "Hold all Treasury positions and both Command ship regions for a Monarch, +11 (or whatever the bonus will be). Or something like that. As it's currently worded, it sounds like the Monarch's Commander is a required territory.

How about: "Hold a Monarch's Commander's Ship and corresponding Treasury +2"
i think +2 is enough to give out as incentive on top of the other:
+1 for holding the B & S
+13 for holding all the treasury.


While i am at it...i think it will change also the Losing condition wording to:
"Players failing to hold any non-Treasury and Commander's ship will be eliminated"

[nolefan5311]

How about: "Hold a Monarch's Commander's Ship and corresponding Treasury +2"
i think +2 is enough to give out as incentive on top of the other:
+1 for holding the B & S
+13 for holding all the treasury.


While i am at it...i think it will change also the Losing condition wording to:
"Players failing to hold any non-Treasury and Commander's ship will be eliminated"

So it will be +13 for holding all the Treasury then?

And I do think you need to leave "region" after "non-Treasury". And I like that you have to hold a Monarch's Commander to stay alive. It's not too easy to kill someone off because of the whole conditional borders thing, and because those are the most important regions on the map, honestly. That's where everything starts. You could word it to say, "Players holding only a Treasury territory will be eliminated". That would make it easier for me to code too

[cairnswk]

How about: "Hold a Monarch's Commander's Ship and corresponding Treasury +2"
i think +2 is enough to give out as incentive on top of the other:
+1 for holding the B & S
+13 for holding all the treasury.


While i am at it...i think it will change also the Losing condition wording to:
"Players failing to hold any non-Treasury and Commander's ship will be eliminated"

So it will be +13 for holding all the Treasury then?

well yes, that's what that adds up to, unless you think it can be dropped down to +1 +1 +2 +3 = +7 instead of +1 +3 +4 +5 = +13

And I do think you need to leave "region" after "non-Treasury".

i poo-pooed...done!

And I like that you have to hold a Monarch's Commander to stay alive. It's not too easy to kill someone off because of the whole conditional borders thing, and because those are the most important regions on the map, honestly. That's where everything starts. You could word it to say, "Players holding only a Treasury territory will be eliminated". That would make it easier for me to code too

I think i'd like to stick with the current wording and play.

[nolefan5311]

How about: "Hold a Monarch's Commander's Ship and corresponding Treasury +2"
i think +2 is enough to give out as incentive on top of the other:
+1 for holding the B & S
+13 for holding all the treasury.


While i am at it...i think it will change also the Losing condition wording to:
"Players failing to hold any non-Treasury and Commander's ship will be eliminated"

So it will be +13 for holding all the Treasury then?

well yes, that's what that adds up to, unless you think it can be dropped down to +1 +1 +2 +3 = +7 instead of +1 +3 +4 +5 = +13

And I do think you need to leave "region" after "non-Treasury".

i poo-pooed...done!

I like the autodeploy amounts at what they currently are, and think any "droppable" bonus should be reduced to something like a +2 or +3, since they can really only be attacked, conditionally, through the Commander's Command Ship.

[cairnswk]

...
I like the autodeploy amounts at what they currently are, and think any "droppable" bonus should be reduced to something like a +2 or +3, since they can really only be attacked, conditionally, through the Commander's Command Ship.

OK. +3 it is.

Version 31.
1. new beacons
2. bonus dropped from +11 to +3

Large

Click image to enlarge.

Small

[cairnswk]

Pls note the sizes have changed, as per front page.

[cairnswk]

This is the new 888s map for the new small size map

[cairnswk]

Small


Large

Click image to enlarge.

[nolefan5311]

Cairns, is the neutrals map on the first post up to date?

Do you want a max amount of starting positions? In a 1v1 game, each player will be dropped 6, which I think is a little overkill. If I max it at 3 it will only affect 2 and 3 player games.

The Supply Ships and Land Bases +1...are those autodeploy, or a droppable bonus?

[cairnswk]

Cairns, is the neutrals map on the first post up to date?

Yes.

Do you want a max amount of starting positions? In a 1v1 game, each player will be dropped 6, which I think is a little overkill. If I max it at 3 it will only affect 2 and 3 player games.

max at 3 please.

The Supply Ships and Land Bases +1...are those autodeploy, or a droppable bonus?

If they do not state autodeploy, then they are deploy on drop.

[iancanton]

perhaps select a couple of different ship names if possible? u currently have Girona and La Girona, also Asunción and La Asunción, which will cause unnecessary confusion. SS Paxat La Isabela ought to be SS Paxat la Isabela, with a lower case l.

in the losing condition legend, does commander's ship mean exactly the same as command ship in the bonus legend? make it clearer that it's unnecessary to hold both bow and stern to avoid elimination.

ian.