Re: 1588 Spanish Armada [16.01.14] V45 Fixes

[Industrial Helix]

I feel like this one belongs over here. Glad to see someone is tryingto translate naval warfare into a CC map. I'll give it a more thorough look tonight.

[cairnswk]

I feel like this one belongs over here. Glad to see someone is tryingto translate naval warfare into a CC map. I'll give it a more thorough look tonight.

iH, can you wait until i have the newest version done shortly.
Thanks for dropping in.

[cairnswk]

I feel like this one belongs over here. Glad to see someone is tryingto translate naval warfare into a CC map. I'll give it a more thorough look tonight.

IH, and others, knock your socks off.

New V4. with new gameplay (as noted in front notes)
Players will start in the Treasury for each side. You can move up in the treasury to top to earn maximum bonus, (this slows the assaults at the start, and thus gains you extra armies if you desire such) or you can assault out of the treasury (with your current bonuses) from any point in your column to the relevent side's supply ships/land base. From there, it's all up to you how you proceed with gaining bonuses and conqeuring the map.
Assault movement is in any direction one square.
Bombardments are 2 squares in any direction from water-based sqaures only.
Various bonuses are available for ships and battles and Fort Tilbury where Elizabeth had gathered an army.

Click image to enlarge.

[MrBenn]

Hi cairns, you've made a great start here - reminds me of how I first felt with your early Das Schloss drafts!

The treasury starts/bonuses.... I'm not too sure how the "need/earn" bit relates to a bonus? As for the supply ships/land bases - would it be easier to make each treasury correspnd to a command vessel - so P12 could link to Duque Medina Sedonia, and so on.

I would prefer the beacons bonus to be something like +1/2 per 3 consecutive beacons (which is incredibly easy to do in the xml, by the way). I understand the desire to have them starting at Lands End, but for gameplay purposes I think it would be better to make them 2-way attacks (ie if the fleet were first seen at Southampton they would have lit the beacon there - they would not have sent a runner to Lands End )

Please could you put a tiny lighthouse at Beachy Head (you have an empty space at F22 to do so) - just google Beach Head lighthouse to see what it looks like... that would make me very happy

It would be beneficial if there were some small numerals along the bottom edge of the map to correspond to the columns. I don;t think you need to do each one, but perhaps every 5 would be OK.. just to make it easier to find the corresponding grid reference.

[cairnswk]

Hi cairns, you've made a great start here - reminds me of how I first felt with your early Das Schloss drafts!
...
Please could you put a tiny lighthouse at Beachy Head (you have an empty space at F22 to do so) - just google Beach Head lighthouse to see what it looks like... that would make me very happy

It would be beneficial if there were some small numerals along the bottom edge of the map to correspond to the columns. I don;t think you need to do each one, but perhaps every 5 would be OK.. just to make it easier to find the corresponding grid reference.

thanks MrBenn.
Those above have already been done on the next version. the lighhouse looks quite good, i'm sure you'll be pleased.
To think of that also, is there any other little "obstructions" in the channel that could be used?
Thanks for you other thoughts, i'll see what the others have to add also.

[pamoa]

[quote="MrBenn"The treasury starts/bonuses.... I'm not too sure how the "need/earn" bit relates to a bonus? As for the supply ships/land bases - would it be easier to make each treasury correspnd to a command vessel - so P12 could link to Duque Medina Sedonia, and so on.[/quote]

yes I feel else it would be better pile up and wait for someone stupid enough to spend his armies attacking neutral territories and then wipe him out

second very important point you should be able to kill those starting territories else it is an unendable map like Das Schloss was initially

btw if you go that way of unique starting position also look at King's court they also had a hell of gameplay adjustment to do

go cairns go

[DiM]

i see you have supply ships even on land. so maybe rename those terits to supply centres?

also i have no idea where ft tilbury is. i mean if i look at the legend i see it is a 4square terit but when i look at the actual map i see the name but no terits are highlighted

[cairnswk]

The treasury starts/bonuses.... I'm not too sure how the "need/earn" bit relates to a bonus? As for the supply ships/land bases - would it be easier to make each treasury correspnd to a command vessel - so P12 could link to Duque Medina Sedonia, and so on.

yes I feel else it would be better pile up and wait for someone stupid enough to spend his armies attacking neutral territories and then wipe him out

second very important point you should be able to kill those starting territories else it is an unendable map like Das Schloss was initially

btw if you go that way of unique starting position also look at King's court they also had a hell of gameplay adjustment to do

go cairns go

Bugger, OK, i get the idea now with what MrBenn is saying about assualting to an individual vessel from the treasury. thanks pamoa for pointing that out to me.

as for killing the treasury....
1. perhaps opposing treasuries could be assaulted by any commander positions
2. t'would be better if those treasury positions were killer neutrals after a number of turns, although i don't know if that capability is in the current xml.

i see you have supply ships even on land. so maybe rename those terits to supply centres?

also i have no idea where ft tilbury is. i mean if i look at the legend i see it is a 4square terit but when i look at the actual map i see the name but no terits are highlighted

Supply centres...done next version
ft tilbury, mmmm seems the indicator has got lost among the layers, i'll fix it.
thanks Dim.

[Victor Sullivan]

Firstly, loving the new draft Secondly...

The treasury starts/bonuses.... I'm not too sure how the "need/earn" bit relates to a bonus? As for the supply ships/land bases - would it be easier to make each treasury correspnd to a command vessel - so P12 could link to Duque Medina Sedonia, and so on.

yes I feel else it would be better pile up and wait for someone stupid enough to spend his armies attacking neutral territories and then wipe him out

second very important point you should be able to kill those starting territories else it is an unendable map like Das Schloss was initially

btw if you go that way of unique starting position also look at King's court they also had a hell of gameplay adjustment to do

go cairns go

Bugger, OK, i get the idea now with what MrBenn is saying about assualting to an individual vessel from the treasury. thanks pamoa for pointing that out to me.

as for killing the treasury....
1. perhaps opposing treasuries could be assaulted by any commander positions
2. t'would be better if those treasury positions were killer neutrals after a number of turns, although i don't know if that capability is in the current xml.

Maybe losing conditions would work here? If you had players start out with more than just the treasury territories, you could set the non-treasury territories as losing conditions (meaning you must hold at least one non-treasury territory or you're eliminated). That way, you need not have something assault the treasury if you decide you don't want anything to. Sadly, point 2 as you described is not possible with the current XML Along with this, are players able to assault sideways/east-west in the treasuries? I would think not, but I figured I'd ask.

Thirdly, make sure your squares are at least 20 pixels high, as the 88s are around 10 pixels high, and I'll likely have to alternate the coordinates, as you have for the S's and whatnot.

Fourthly, I don't understand which squares are single ships.

-Sully

[cairnswk]

...
Maybe losing conditions would work here? If you had players start out with more than just the treasury territories, you could set the non-treasury territories as losing conditions (meaning you must hold at least one non-treasury territory or you're eliminated). That way, you need not have something assault the treasury if you decide you don't want anything to.

I knew i needed a good person on the job.
That's a great idea Sully, for not assaulting the treasury, but because at present i have everyone starting on the treasury, doesn't that mean the losing condition comes into play automatically right at the very start of the game when no-one has a non-treasury territory anyway.

Sadly, point 2 as you described is not possible with the current XML

Along with this, are players able to assault sideways/east-west in the treasuries? I would think not, but I figured I'd ask.

no -> i guess i need to put that into the script

Thirdly, make sure your squares are at least 20 pixels high, as the 88s are around 10 pixels high, and I'll likely have to alternate the coordinates, as you have for the S's and whatnot.

Squares are 24 pixels square.
i've just checked an existing game with the numbers and letters turned on...
Numbers appear to be 12 pixels high, add the letter y g p in front and you blow out to 15 pixels high.
That why i have them alternating upper and lower in the columns.

Fourthly, I don't understand which squares are single ships.

Top left of legend...although i do need to possibly change that script....perhaps Single Ships (on top to indicate a single square) with Hold 9 for + 2 (underneath)

Thanks.

[Victor Sullivan]

...
Maybe losing conditions would work here? If you had players start out with more than just the treasury territories, you could set the non-treasury territories as losing conditions (meaning you must hold at least one non-treasury territory or you're eliminated). That way, you need not have something assault the treasury if you decide you don't want anything to.

I knew i needed a good person on the job.
That's a great idea Sully, for not assaulting the treasury, but because at present i have everyone starting on the treasury, doesn't that mean the losing condition comes into play automatically right at the very start of the game when no-one has a non-treasury territory anyway.

I'm afraid you must have each person start out with at least one non-treasury territory if you want to go this route. Otherwise, players will be eliminated right off the bat!...or so I've understood the XML to work. Perhaps a carto could confirm this for me.

Fourthly, I don't understand which squares are single ships.

Top left of legend...although i do need to possibly change that script....perhaps Single Ships (on top to indicate a single square) with Hold 9 for + 2 (underneath)

Yes, that would be much better, thanks. Also, can I safely assume you need 9 of 1 kind of ship for the bonus?

In addition, I think the map needs to be much more clear as to which squares are sea territories, and which ones are land. As it stands, you only have the Spanish/English distinction (which, by the way, I'd suggest choosing less similar-looking colors for the white and cream - especially considering it seems you've mixed them up in the legend!).

Next, I'm having difficulty determining what/where Ft. Tilbury is. I see it in the legend as a 2 by 2 block, and I see the "Ft. Tilbury" label on the map, but I see no boundaries or 2 by 2 block that it might be referring to.

Plus, I think the battle bonus areas are going to be rather difficult to conquer and hold... I suggest you increase the bonus of each by +2 or +3.

Last, I'm still not sure what you mean by Earn/Need in the treasury sections.

-Sully

[cairnswk]

...
Maybe losing conditions would work here? If you had players start out with more than just the treasury territories, you could set the non-treasury territories as losing conditions (meaning you must hold at least one non-treasury territory or you're eliminated). That way, you need not have something assault the treasury if you decide you don't want anything to.

I knew i needed a good person on the job.
That's a great idea Sully, for not assaulting the treasury, but because at present i have everyone starting on the treasury, doesn't that mean the losing condition comes into play automatically right at the very start of the game when no-one has a non-treasury territory anyway.

I'm afraid you must have each person start out with at least one non-treasury territory if you want to go this route. Otherwise, players will be eliminated right off the bat!...or so I've understood the XML to work. Perhaps a carto could confirm this for me.

OK, i thought that might be what would happen...where do you think that territory should be?
Next to a supply ship or land base, or out in the middle of the mire?

Fourthly, I don't understand which squares are single ships.

Top left of legend...although i do need to possibly change that script....perhaps Single Ships (on top to indicate a single square) with Hold 9 for + 2 (underneath)

Yes, that would be much better, thanks. Also, can I safely assume you need 9 of 1 kind of ship for the bonus?

I'll add any to that, but will that be too many overrides to code?

In addition, I think the map needs to be much more clear as to which squares are sea territories, and which ones are land. As it stands, you only have the Spanish/English distinction (which, by the way, I'd suggest choosing less similar-looking colors for the white and cream - especially considering it seems you've mixed them up in the legend!).

Colour can be changed...perhaps i need to add that sea territories are those encompassing any part of the non-land region.

Next, I'm having difficulty determining what/where Ft. Tilbury is. I see it in the legend as a 2 by 2 block, and I see the "Ft. Tilbury" label on the map, but I see no boundaries or 2 by 2 block that it might be referring to.

That has been done on this new version i am working on now.

Plus, I think the battle bonus areas are going to be rather difficult to conquer and hold... I suggest you increase the bonus of each by +2 or +3.

OK, i'll increase them by +3...and see what everyone thinks.

Last, I'm still not sure what you mean by Earn/Need in the treasury sections.

Ah!...you need 25 armies on that corresponding row to get those 5 bonus points at the top row.
The bottom row you need 5 to earn +1
I guess that needs to go into the wording somehow.

[pamoa]

suggestion
what if you start with the first treasury square and the stern of the corresponding command ship
along with the you must have one man on the field or you're dead condition as sullivan suggested

[cairnswk]

... As for the supply ships/land bases - would it be easier to make each treasury correspnd to a command vessel - so P12 could link to Duque Medina Sedonia, and so on...

Actually MrBenn, i've been thinking on that after reading some other threads and recalling Das Schloß..
linking the starting positions to each commander would allow players to work out easily how the best way to win a map from that position is (after many games) and it could become a farming game ( i think that's what you call it)
Like Jamaica where the start positions are ranomly allocated, this is kind of the reverse where the starts are allocated but the assaults can be at the whim of the player. this may cause players to strategise more.

More discussion is needed on this point i beleive.

If we start with 36 positions (as per recent discussion 12 treasury, 24 on the actual map), this would allow that losing condition to be utilised without anyone being eliminated too soon)

Thoughts anyone

[cairnswk]

suggestion
what if you start with the first treasury square and the stern of the corresponding command ship
along with the you must have one man on the field or you're dead condition as sullivan suggested

that is possible pamoa.
others' thoughts please!

[Victor Sullivan]

OK, i thought that might be what would happen...where do you think that territory should be?
Next to a supply ship or land base, or out in the middle of the mire?

I'll have to think on it, but it may not be a bad idea to code the supply ships as starting positions, since they're pretty well spread out.

Yes, that would be much better, thanks. Also, can I safely assume you need 9 of 1 kind of ship for the bonus?

I'll add any to that, but will that be too many overrides to code?

Not at all

Last, I'm still not sure what you mean by Earn/Need in the treasury sections.

Ah!...you need 25 armies on that corresponding row to get those 5 bonus points at the top row.
The bottom row you need 5 to earn +1
I guess that needs to go into the wording somehow. [/quote]
Are you saying you need the designated number of troops on the specified square to get the bonus? Because I'm afraid that's not possible... You/I could adjust the neutral count on each to simulate that effect.

-Sully

[cairnswk]

OK, i thought that might be what would happen...where do you think that territory should be?
Next to a supply ship or land base, or out in the middle of the mire?

I'll have to think on it, but it may not be a bad idea to code the supply ships as starting positions, since they're pretty well spread out.

OK. I'll put some of those starters in the next map i upload so that you and others can see what it looks like.

Yes, that would be much better, thanks. Also, can I safely assume you need 9 of 1 kind of ship for the bonus?

I'll add any to that, but will that be too many overrides to code?

Not at all

Good.

Last, I'm still not sure what you mean by Earn/Need in the treasury sections.

Ah!...you need 25 armies on that corresponding row to get those 5 bonus points at the top row.
The bottom row you need 5 to earn +1
I guess that needs to go into the wording somehow.

Are you saying you need the designated number of troops on the specified square to get the bonus? Because I'm afraid that's not possible... You/I could adjust the neutral count on each to simulate that effect.
-Sully

OH, i would have thought the required tag would have done the job there, but after checking...no.
So yes to simulate that perhaps starting neutrals is required.
Thanks Sully.

[cairnswk]

Treasury Table.
...new thinking that treasury table should be autodeploy, so that the treasury earns its own interest for money.
In Elizabethan times, interest was limited to 10%, but to advance the treasury amount upwards incrementally to a higher amount you actually need something like 33% each time.
So thus, the armies to hold have been worked on this 10% (with/without rounding)

I've changed the Treasury table to a "higher adds to lower bonuses" setting as I beleive this will give incentive to advance upwards rather than overrides.

Higher adds to lower bonus
Rows:|Min. Hold|Bonus
Top Row| 4 | 5
4th Row| 4 | 4
3rd Row| 4 | 3
2nd Row|3 | 2
1st Row|3 | 1
(goodness i wish we had table code
Of course this is alterable with discussion.

And i must apologise for the fast pace i am trying here, but i only have a few weeks to end July this uni break before major development will probably go on vacation until end Nov.

PS. once the table is developed, then the Min. Hold column could probably be deleted.

[cairnswk]

Here is V5.

Click image to enlarge.

[Victor Sullivan]

Hm, but if you use auto-deploys instead of deployable bonuses, where can they be fortified to?

-Sully

[cairnswk]

Hm, but if you use auto-deploys instead of deployable bonuses, where can they be fortified to?

-Sully

They can be used to attack upwards...."Players can move one-way up only to earn bonuses"
or outwards...."they can assault to any side's Supply ships & Land Bases"
and since they can assault they must border so therefore they can be used to fort outwardly and upwards. Yes. But the fort happens at the end of the turn, not the beginning.
This brings in the concept that the navy must have a treasury in order to assist build it up.

[Victor Sullivan]

Hm, but if you use auto-deploys instead of deployable bonuses, where can they be fortified to?

-Sully

They can be used to attack upwards...."Players can move one-way up only to earn bonuses"
or outwards...."they can assault to any side's Supply ships & Land Bases"
and since they can assault they must border so therefore they can be used to fort outwardly and upwards. Yes. But the fort happens at the end of the turn, not the beginning.
This brings in the concept that the navy must have a treasury in order to assist build it up.

Ah! Yes, yes. I understand now.

-Sully

[pamoa]

can you put colour digits on all the starting territories only so we get a clearer picture of the gameplay

[cairnswk]

can you put colour digits on all the starting territories only so we get a clearer picture of the gameplay

Ah, that's what is on the map now. I have starting positions for 8 players laid out.

[pamoa]

then you have a problem with seymour and hawkins devoted supply ship
I also don't get why you have a third whatever ship as starting position

and sorry but I don't understand your Min. Hold legend
if it means you have to be in that row to get the Earn bonus just get rid of it

last minor graphic point
can you put the corresponding shield below each column instead of the P1-12 names