Re: 1588 Spanish Armada [16.01.14] V45 Fixes

[iancanton]

instead of hold a monarch & their treasury +11, hold a monarch & entire treasury +11 removes any doubt about the meaning, as well as sounding less awkward.

beacons can be lit only from open-top borders is more precise than beacons can only be lit from open-top borders: the latter might mean that they can be lit but not be bombarded.

some changes to the treasury wording to reserve the word territory to mean non-treasury region, as mentioned before: monarch (+1M - starting region) can conquer own +1T treasury square to earn +1 autodeploy bonus.

ian.

[cairnswk]

instead of hold a monarch & their treasury +11, hold a monarch & entire treasury +11 removes any doubt about the meaning, as well as sounding less awkward.

Done

beacons can be lit only from open-top borders is more precise than beacons can only be lit from open-top borders: the latter might mean that they can be lit but not be bombarded.

he he. you're correct there, but i wasn't intending them to be bombarded, thanks for opening up that aspect...
I have changed this to:
"beacons can be lit only from open-top borders or from one-way arrows; they cannot be bombarded"

some changes to the treasury wording to reserve the word territory to mean non-treasury region, as mentioned before: monarch (+1M - starting region) can conquer own +1T treasury square to earn +1 autodeploy bonus.
ian.

the word territory has been removed from all wording so that it doesn't become confused with T for Treasury.
thanks again ian.
please refresh v18 for update.

[cairnswk]

Version 18

Click image to enlarge.

[nolefan5311]

Are you comfortable with getting this one ready for the GP stamp cairns?

[cairnswk]

Are you comfortable with getting this one ready for the GP stamp cairns?

yes nelofan5311, as long as ian is happy with these bonuses etc.
and i'd still like to know from the "boss" or whoever if this is going to create "issues" with the game engine.

[nolefan5311]

Are you comfortable with getting this one ready for the GP stamp cairns?

yes nelofan5311, as long as ian is happy with these bonuses etc.
and i'd still like to know from the "boss" or whoever if this is going to create "issues" with the game engine.

What issues? The size of the xml file?

And we will go ahead and get this stickied.

[cairnswk]

Are you comfortable with getting this one ready for the GP stamp cairns?

yes nelofan5311, as long as ian is happy with these bonuses etc.
and i'd still like to know from the "boss" or whoever if this is going to create "issues" with the game engine.

What issues? The size of the xml file?

...

no, the fact that the engine only allows for 8 players at present...and what happens with the 12 starting slots/colours?
I have asked about this in other threads.

[thenobodies80]

Are you comfortable with getting this one ready for the GP stamp cairns?

yes nelofan5311, as long as ian is happy with these bonuses etc.
and i'd still like to know from the "boss" or whoever if this is going to create "issues" with the game engine.

What issues? The size of the xml file?

...

no, the fact that the engine only allows for 8 players at present...and what happens with the 12 starting slots/colours?
I have asked about this in other threads.

Can you explain the issue to me, please? or can you point me where you asked? thanks

[cairnswk]

Are you comfortable with getting this one ready for the GP stamp cairns?

yes nelofan5311, as long as ian is happy with these bonuses etc.
and i'd still like to know from the "boss" or whoever if this is going to create "issues" with the game engine.

What issues? The size of the xml file?
...

no, the fact that the engine only allows for 8 players at present...and what happens with the 12 starting slots/colours?
I have asked about this in other threads.

Can you explain the issue to me, please? or can you point me where you asked? thanks

Sure tnb80...

1. we know we can play 8 player games officially.
we know we can play battle royal maps officially.
Is there capability in the system/game engine for a 12 player 1v1 game, and the various combinations that rise from 12 players i.e. 6 x doubles teams, 4 x triples, 3 x quads, 2 x sextiples?


2. what are the 4 extra colours that would be allocated to players 9, 10, 11, and 12.
Discussed here
and here

[thenobodies80]

For #1 you have to wait a bit, right now I don't have an answer.
For #2, Ender has given to you the right answer. Actually we have 8 colors, all others are random.

[Winged Cat]

Suggested rewording of Command Vessels, for compactness & clarity:

* consist of Bow & Stern
* the non-white sections are impassible
* Bow & Stern can assault each other & adjacent
vessels, or any other Monarch's (M) position in
the Treasury (e.g., Victory can not assault
Seymour but could assault Drake or Medrano)
* are not part of "Single Ships of same Nation"

On the right side, "assault & fort" should be just "assault". Fort is implied, and can be affected by gameplay choices.

Losing condition: is that any non-treasury region? For instance, if I held just LB Army Brussel and Drake M, would I be safe (so far as holding just two territories can be considered "safe")? Or would I need to hold one of Drake's other territories (his LB, Swiftsure, or one of Revenge's zones)?

What are the non-special-color monarch-stamped ships (such as Swiftsure and Diana) good for, if they aren't wards against elimination?

Why is SS Paxat La Isabela a different color than the other Spanish supply ships?

Are Elizabeth and Philip regions in play? Their graphics in "Hold a Monarch & entire Treasury" suggest they are, but I don't see army markings on them. The +11 seems a lot more than the +5 that the top row of the treasury is marked. Or did you mean that the +11 is if you conquer all of one side's monarchs & treasury locations, on top of the +5 you get from each of the 6 columns? That seems pithy if so, since you're already getting +30 from the columns; if it's meant to be a huge unbeatable bonus similar to Arms Race, it should be at least +100.

[thenobodies80]

1. Is there capability in the system/game engine for a 12 player 1v1 game, and the various combinations that rise from 12 players i.e. 6 x doubles teams, 4 x triples, 3 x quads, 2 x sextiples?

Unfortunately the answer is no.
But you can change the map in future when and if we will have a 12 players option.

[cairnswk]

1. Is there capability in the system/game engine for a 12 player 1v1 game, and the various combinations that rise from 12 players i.e. 6 x doubles teams, 4 x triples, 3 x quads, 2 x sextiples?

Unfortunately the answer is no.
But you can change the map in future when and if we will have a 12 players option.

Mmmm. that's a shame, i hope lack takes the opportunity to change things...but that may/may not happen.

Ah, the map is already set-up for 12 players, so i will leave it as it is and the enhancement of 12 player mode in the future will make the map playable fully then. For now it will have to be coded as 8 player start.

[cairnswk]

thanks Winged Cat for your contributions and discsussion.

Suggested rewording of Command Vessels, for compactness & clarity:

* consist of Bow & Stern
* the non-white sections are impassible
* Bow & Stern can assault each other & adjacent
vessels, or any other Monarch's (M) position in
the Treasury (e.g., Victory can not assault
Seymour but could assault Drake or Medrano)
* are not part of "Single Ships of same Nation"

Changed to:
* consist of Bow & Stern
* the non-white sections are impassable
* Bow & Stern can assault each other & adjacent vessels or any player's Monarch (M) position e.g. Triumph B to Frobisher M or Medrano M
* are not part of the "Single Ships of same
Nation" bonus i.e. +1 for 9

On the right side, "assault & fort" should be just "assault". Fort is implied, and can be affected by gameplay choices.

i'd like to leave the "fort" part in there as even though it is implied, it makes it distinctly more apparent what you can do.

Losing condition: is that any non-treasury region? For instance, if I held just LB Army Brussel and Drake M, would I be safe (so far as holding just two territories can be considered "safe")?

I've changed that in the text as below (i think it will be easier to code with any Monarch region)
Losing Condition: Players failing to hold any
non-treasury region and a Monarch region will be eliminated

Or would I need to hold one of Drake's other territories (his LB, Swiftsure, or one of Revenge's zones)?

These regions are part of non-treasury regions so you could hold these.
But if you don't hold one of these and a Monarch region, then you're eleminated

What are the non-special-color monarch-stamped ships (such as Swiftsure and Diana) good for, if they aren't wards against elimination?

They are "good for" because they are the 4th starting position that cannot be attacked from a Treasury position in the starting rounds of the game. Done this way to ensure that players are not eleminated in very early rounds.
They are Commander stamped only for now to show starting positions.
They are part of the Non-treasury regions.

Why is SS Paxat La Isabela a different color than the other Spanish supply ships?

Fixed.

Are Elizabeth and Philip regions in play? Their graphics in "Hold a Monarch & entire Treasury" suggest they are, but I don't see army markings on them.

No, they are only representative of the two national sides in the map. They are non-playable regions but do have a representational connection with each Monarch region on each side.

The +11 seems a lot more than the +5 that the top row of the treasury is marked. Or did you mean that the +11 is if you conquer all of one side's monarchs & treasury locations, on top of the +5 you get from each of the 6 columns? That seems pithy if so, since you're already getting +30 from the columns; if it's meant to be a huge unbeatable bonus similar to Arms Race, it should be at least +100.

Changed that to " Hold a Monarch & corresponding Treasury...+11"
it means if you hold the entire column for each Commander you get +11 on top of whatever autodeploy bonus you earn in that column.

Version 19

Click image to enlarge.

[pamoa]

What are the non-special-color monarch-stamped ships (such as Swiftsure and Diana) good for, if they aren't wards against elimination?

They are "good for" because they are the 4th starting position that cannot be attacked from a Treasury position in the starting rounds of the game.
Done this way to ensure that players are not eleminated in very early rounds.
They are Commander stamped only for now to show starting positions.
They are part of the Non-treasury regions.

correct me if I'm wrong but
if in first round I successfully bombard the Monarch position from another player
he is eliminated without being able to even start to play

[nolefan5311]

What are the non-special-color monarch-stamped ships (such as Swiftsure and Diana) good for, if they aren't wards against elimination?

They are "good for" because they are the 4th starting position that cannot be attacked from a Treasury position in the starting rounds of the game.
Done this way to ensure that players are not eleminated in very early rounds.
They are Commander stamped only for now to show starting positions.
They are part of the Non-treasury regions.

correct me if I'm wrong but
if in first round I successfully bombard the Monarch position from another player
he is eliminated without being able to even start to play

That player would still hold all of his non-Treasury regions (his supply ship/land base, command vessel, etc).

Cairns, it might be simpler to just state, "Players holding only Treasury Regions (not including a Monarch) will be eliminated". Just a suggestion.

[cairnswk]

What are the non-special-color monarch-stamped ships (such as Swiftsure and Diana) good for, if they aren't wards against elimination?

They are "good for" because they are the 4th starting position that cannot be attacked from a Treasury position in the starting rounds of the game.
Done this way to ensure that players are not eleminated in very early rounds.
They are Commander stamped only for now to show starting positions.
They are part of the Non-treasury regions.

correct me if I'm wrong but
if in first round I successfully bombard the Monarch position from another player
he is eliminated without being able to even start to play

do you think that will be possible with monarch holding 6 armies and you only have 2 on commander plus whatever the drop is - Max 3

[cairnswk]

....
That player would still hold all of his non-Treasury regions (his supply ship/land base, command vessel, etc).
Cairns, it might be simpler to just state, "Players holding only Treasury Regions (not including a Monarch) will be eliminated". Just a suggestion.

Ah. not really nolefan5311. the requirement is non-treasury regions AND the monarch not being held for elimination and i prefer to keep that. thanks for the suggestion though.

[nolefan5311]

....
That player would still hold all of his non-Treasury regions (his supply ship/land base, command vessel, etc).
Cairns, it might be simpler to just state, "Players holding only Treasury Regions (not including a Monarch) will be eliminated". Just a suggestion.

Ah. not really nolefan5311. the requirement is non-treasury regions AND the monarch not being held for elimination and i prefer to keep that. thanks for the suggestion though.

Right, if a player loses all his non-Treasury regions and a Monarch, they lose the game (meaning they hold only Treasury regions). I worded it the way I did since the Monarch's could possibly be mistaken as a Treasury region since it's so close to the Treasury regions.So something simple like "players holding only Treasury Regions will be eliminated" is a little more succinct than it currently is. Or, maybe having the Monarch regions as having a distinguishing outline or make them a different color entirely?

[pamoa]

What are the non-special-color monarch-stamped ships (such as Swiftsure and Diana) good for, if they aren't wards against elimination?

They are "good for" because they are the 4th starting position that cannot be attacked from a Treasury position in the starting rounds of the game.
Done this way to ensure that players are not eleminated in very early rounds.
They are Commander stamped only for now to show starting positions.
They are part of the Non-treasury regions.

correct me if I'm wrong but
if in first round I successfully bombard the Monarch position from another player
he is eliminated without being able to even start to play

do you think that will be possible with monarch holding 6 armies and you only have 2 on commander plus whatever the drop is - Max 3

in a triple game very easy
you pick the third player of the other team and make a triple attack before he can ever play

[cairnswk]

...in a triple game very easy
you pick the third player of the other team and make a triple attack before he can ever play

OK pamoa, point considered...but:
1. that can be countered by the team forting their third team member's monarch in a teams game; remember a player has to lose their Monarch and non-treasury regions to be eliminated
2. If each player on a triple side allocates their drop numbers to their third player, giving them 2+3+3+3=11 on their side's 3rd player CV, that still means they have to conquer 6 monarch armies plus - let's say:
...Capitania -> Triumph - 9 armies (total 15)
...Capitania -> Santa Ana - 11 armies (total 17)
best comment i can offer is it's not possible. even with the best dice.
3. If this occurs in a quads game i.e. 4 players per side, it means 14 has to conquer say 15 or 17....at 15 still going to be very hard with best dice....you would have to win every assault.
4. overall, i'd say it would be better to wait until perhaps 3rd round to wipe a team opponent out, when treasury might provide better odds.

[cairnswk]

....
That player would still hold all of his non-Treasury regions (his supply ship/land base, command vessel, etc).
Cairns, it might be simpler to just state, "Players holding only Treasury Regions (not including a Monarch) will be eliminated". Just a suggestion.

Ah. not really nolefan5311. the requirement is non-treasury regions AND the monarch not being held for elimination and i prefer to keep that. thanks for the suggestion though.

Right, if a player loses all his non-Treasury regions and a Monarch, they lose the game (meaning they hold only Treasury regions). I worded it the way I did since the Monarch's could possibly be mistaken as a Treasury region since it's so close to the Treasury regions.So something simple like "players holding only Treasury Regions will be eliminated" is a little more succinct than it currently is. Or, maybe having the Monarch regions as having a distinguishing outline or make them a different color entirely?

OK, i understand the desire to be succinct.
I am going to do some re-design, and will consider this, but i have to offer that if it is worded your way, there will be questions about the monarch having to be held, since the monarch is in that treasury area of the map, so i am trying to make it even more clear as to what has to be held in order to be eliminated.

[cairnswk]

Version 20.
I've moved the layout of the Commanders and treasury to a horizontal one, so that there is no mental association that has to be made referencing the commanders all the time.
I hope this will work better.
And i'll tidy it up as i progress further...since we're not really at graphics stage yet.

Click image to enlarge.

[pamoa]

in the upper legend remove the elizabeth and philip images and put a shield and all his line of treasury to be clearer (drake?)
what about adding a cloumn of starting position between the monarch and the treasury?

[cairnswk]

in the upper legend remove the elizabeth and philip images and put a shield and all his line of treasury to be clearer (drake?)

That can be done to see how it looks...and whether anyone will understand it.

what about adding a cloumn of starting position between the monarch and the treasury?

why do this, what is your objective by doing it, don't give me half the story if you want something done.
the monarch is the starting position, what is the objective of placing a column between it and the treasury?

and pamoa...it would be nice to hear a please or thank-you from you occasionally
...to me sometimes (and i know it is not meant this way), it seems as though you're just making a lot of demands without using any verbal or emoticon (face-to-face) body language clues.
writing in this bland manner we don't get to experience the face-to-face contact and thus it seems very sterile without using please and thank-you.