hellenic wars, bin it

[nolefan5311]

Having the losing condition as not holding a capital, and then having some capitals so close is going to cause problems. Some of the capitals are only separated by one territory.

[Oneyed]

Your English is pretty good, but if there's any problems I'll be happy to help with that aspect.

So far only one mistake: "Fleets lose 1 army per turn" not "Fleets lost 1 army per turn" but I'll have a closer look at the end of the week.

thanks for help with English. you know how it is if language is not used often

It would be nice to have a map that reflects the real strategic issues in the Pelo War. Good work!

unfortunately the name of map will be changed...

Having the losing condition as not holding a capital, and then having some capitals so close is going to cause problems. Some of the capitals are only separated by one territory.

the bonus system is "build" on Capitals. if player lost Capital he will hard gain any bonus. I will replace some Capitals.

new mountains. what do you think?

Click image to enlarge.

Oneyed

[nolefan5311]

Having the losing condition as not holding a capital, and then having some capitals so close is going to cause problems. Some of the capitals are only separated by one territory.

the bonus system is "build" on Capitals. if player lost Capital he will hard gain any bonus. I will replace some Capitals.

If he loses his capital, he's out of the game, right?

And the mountains look good.

[koontz1973]

Fleets, If I am reading this correctly then if I hold DI, I can attack my ports and neutral ports (all ports look the same so need to be able to tell the difference), I can bombard PI as this ship has a different sail and also attack DM. Is this correct?

[Oneyed]

If he loses his capital, he's out of the game, right?

yes. maybe it will be too complex to have winning objectives and also losing objectives? thoughts?

And the mountains look good.

thanks. nothing better from me here

Fleets, If I am reading this correctly then if I hold DI, I can attack my ports and neutral ports, I can bombard PI as this ship has a different sail and also attack DM. Is this correct?

yes. in the same sea. I hope that it is clear that red sails are Delian League ships and green sails are Peloponnesian League ships.

(all ports look the same so need to be able to tell the difference)

port is located in region and it is clear which region belongs to which League. but if this will be still confusing I can do coloured anchors...

thanks for inputs, guys.

Oneyed

[koontz1973]

yes. in the same sea. I hope that it is clear that red sails are Delian League ships and green sails are Peloponnesian League ships.

Needs to be in the legend some way. Put the leagues name under the ships should solve that one.

port is located in region and it is clear which region belongs to which League. but if this will be still confusing I can do coloured anchors...

Coloured anchors may be the way to go (same colour as the sails). This way, anyone who does not understand English can get the idea by looking at the map.

[nolefan5311]

It won't be too complex to have a winning condition and a losing condition. My concern is the proximity of some of the capitals to each other. In large player games, I could eliminate a player in a turn or two with good dice.

[koontz1973]

nole has a point with this about good dice and large games.

But why this I want to know. What does this have to do with the original map apart from the name Peloponnesian War. It might be an idea, if you want to continue down this road, go and have another look at the qwerts map and ask why does this need a sequel to it? What makes it stand out from the rest of the maps? What is good about it (in your opinion) and try to emulate it, what is bad and throw that away. I must admit that I never really play it apart from tournies and random map play. It just never struck me as qwerts finest (unlike his WW2 maps).

Right now, the legend is huge and can be reduced if the game was made simpler. qwerts use of symbols, while used a lot, gives the effect of a much deeper game than this one and saves a lot of space.

Will have another look tomorrow for you and give some more thoughts on this one Oneyed.

[Oneyed]

It won't be too complex to have a winning condition and a losing condition. My concern is the proximity of some of the capitals to each other. In large player games, I could eliminate a player in a turn or two with good dice.

I changed capital Korinthos to Elis. so now there is less capitals in small area. and also because Korinthos is crossing region between Peloponnese and Greece on the land.

nole has a point with this about good dice and large games.

some skilled guys posted here, so I believe this will be solved.

But why this I want to know. What does this have to do with the original map apart from the name Peloponnesian War. It might be an idea, if you want to continue down this road, go and have another look at the qwerts map and ask why does this need a sequel to it?

only theme is the same. the gameplay is different. I will change name of map...

What makes it stand out from the rest of the maps? What is good about it (in your opinion) and try to emulate it, what is bad and throw that away.

to be honest, there are few maps which realy stand out from the rest of the maps . as I wrote, my map could be interesting in gameplay - when you attack members of your league at wrong time you will be in troubles...

I must admit that I never really play it apart from tournies and random map play. It just never struck me as qwerts finest (unlike his WW2 maps).

qwerts map is very nice and has simple (and clear) gameplay. but my map is much closer to history, gameplay and bonuses are more complex, but I think not so much.

Right now, the legend is huge and can be reduced if the game was made simpler. qwerts use of symbols, while used a lot, gives the effect of a much deeper game than this one and saves a lot of space.

agreed. I need to find anyway how to reduce legend. but some my favourite maps have also huge legends.

Will have another look tomorrow for you and give some more thoughts on this one Oneyed.

thanks

here is updated version. main changes:

changed colours of Leagues.
added symbol for each League.
added symbol to fleet.
made new border around map.
some graphics changes.

Click image to enlarge.

Oneyed

[Oneyed]

I did two versions with different legends.

version 01

Click image to enlarge.

version 02

Click image to enlarge.

Oneyed

[koontz1973]

Oneyed, here are some more thoughts and ideas for you.

I think it was natty who said forget the small version for now and do the large one. Do this, it will make your life easier later on and also it will make issues with the map easier for everyone else to see earlier.

Lose the colour. Give everything a nice sandy look to it (like the original map). You can then use ways to make each territ stand apart (glows, icons). This will give the map a less cluttered feel to it.

Your capitals have not got even spacing, so payers will start with an advantage or a disadvantage. This needs to be dealt with. One way would be to have the capitals start neutral and give them a different bonus system. 1 capital +1, 2 capitals +2 but put an auto deploy onto each as well. This will solve the majority of GP issues right away.

Winning condition, right now, you need to hold 4 enemy capitals and 2 of your own (league). Make it simple for people to understand and just hold all capitals or any six like you have it now.

Your cut out (top left), this can be removed if you draw that section larger on the map itself. You have the room for it and will make it easier for players.

Fleet legend (first letter is league, second letter sea), this is not needed as each ship has a different name so this can come out. This gives more room.

Rework your legend, it is very spaced out. You should be able to get everything at the bottom. This way, everything that is above the winning condition text can become territs.

On the second map, you have the cut out for the sea. Lose this completely but you can keep the lines and text for bombard/attack. Just out these onto the map, or even better would be to hold a sea region to get a bonus. Sea regions can only be attacked by the ports in that region. Again, easier for players to understand.

Lose the neutral areas. No area was neutral, back then. Just not conquered. More room for the legend.

[Oneyed]

I think it was natty who said forget the small version for now and do the large one. Do this, it will make your life easier later on and also it will make issues with the map easier for everyone else to see earlier.

no problem. the large map could be done in two days...

Lose the colour. Give everything a nice sandy look to it (like the original map). You can then use ways to make each territ stand apart (glows, icons). This will give the map a less cluttered feel to it.

forgot "original" map. I changed map name. this is totaly diferent map and gameplay, thereofre the colours are needed. is here another way how to differentiate continents bonuses? cluttered feel? this sounds as each coloured map is cluttered...

Your capitals have not got even spacing, so payers will start with an advantage or a disadvantage. This needs to be dealt with. One way would be to have the capitals start neutral and give them a different bonus system.

I will lok what is possible to do here. but except totaly symmetric maps the most of maps have problems with advantage/disadvantage from the start. and players will not start only with capital, there are 8 capitals and 36 regions to distribute between players. maybe I will kick off losing conditions...

1 capital +1, 2 capitals +2 but put an auto deploy onto each as well. This will solve the majority of GP issues right away.

this will not works toether with victory conditions...

Winning condition, right now, you need to hold 4 enemy capitals and 2 of your own (league). Make it simple for people to understand and just hold all capitals or any six like you have it now.

any 6 sounds fine to me. maybe also as I had it before: Hold your capital and all enemy capitals.

Your cut out (top left), this can be removed if you draw that section larger on the map itself. You have the room for it and will make it easier for players.

I can not see enough space on the map for this. when I played Peloponnesian wars the first time I had no problem to understand Corinth box...

Rework your legend, it is very spaced out. You should be able to get everything at the bottom. This way, everything that is above the winning condition text can become territs.

I reworked it 100 times. to be honest, all legend is in bottom and a little in the right side. each help here is welcome

On the second map, you have the cut out for the sea. Lose this completely but you can keep the lines and text for bombard/attack. Just out these onto the map, or even better would be to hold a sea region to get a bonus. Sea regions can only be attacked by the ports in that region. Again, easier for players to understand.

you mean to add attack and bombard lines to the map? impossible with so much attack/bombard routes. or you mean to add them only in one part of map as example?
no sea regions. this will totaly ignore fleet...

Lose the neutral areas. No area was neutral, back then. Just not conquered. More room for the legend.

these areas were neutral. these were not membes of any League and many of them were neutral during all war.

thanks for input. you hit some nails

Oneyed

[koontz1973]

Look at the colours used for Berlin and Middle East maps.

But the cut out is with the legend and not stuck in a corner some where. As for putting it on the map, just move the large sticking out part further into the sea. I checked and you do have more than enough room for it to go into the main map.

Legend, if you are able to put that large cut out of the sea in there, you can move the legend around some more.

No, do not add the lines to the map, but it might be wise to have a think about the ships part of the game play. Maybe make it simpler. Remember, not everyone knows English like you and me so they must be able to play the game without google translate.

[DJ Teflon]

Lose the colour. Give everything a nice sandy look to it (like the original map). You can then use ways to make each territ stand apart (glows, icons). This will give the map a less cluttered feel to it.

forgot "original" map. I changed map name. this is totaly diferent map and gameplay, thereofre the colours are needed. is here another way how to differentiate continents bonuses? cluttered feel? this sounds as each coloured map is cluttered...

The clutter can be a combination of coloured regions and other features.

An alternative could be coloured region names? Different types of army circle?

Your capitals have not got even spacing, so payers will start with an advantage or a disadvantage. This needs to be dealt with. One way would be to have the capitals start neutral and give them a different bonus system.

I will lok what is possible to do here. but except totaly symmetric maps the most of maps have problems with advantage/disadvantage from the start. and players will not start only with capital, there are 8 capitals and 36 regions to distribute between players. maybe I will kick off losing conditions...

You could perhaps somehow not have some of the capitals too close together - is there anywhere on the turkish coast that could be used? Any of the western islands? Or are the capitals all essential to the historical context?

If the capitals aren'ttoo close together and you have plenty of carefully placed regions that start neutral in between then the losing condition could still work- it is a great feature. The details could be worked-out later for neutral cvalues and which regions start together etc.

1 capital +1, 2 capitals +2 but put an auto deploy onto each as well. This will solve the majority of GP issues right away.

this will not works toether with victory conditions...

Interesting point - you are meaning that if a player gains these capital bonuses then it makes the victory condition more and more likely and reduces the strategic options to win the game?

On the second map, you have the cut out for the sea. Lose this completely but you can keep the lines and text for bombard/attack. Just out these onto the map, or even better would be to hold a sea region to get a bonus. Sea regions can only be attacked by the ports in that region. Again, easier for players to understand.

you mean to add attack and bombard lines to the map? impossible with so much attack/bombard routes. or you mean to add them only in one part of map as example?
no sea regions. this will totaly ignore fleet...

I think you are intending for the ships of the same fleet to connect?

One way of explaining could be to have a text explanation along the following lines: "Ships two way assault ports in the same sea and ships of the same fleet in an adjacent sea. Ships also bombard ships of the enemy fleet within the same sea." (this text could be improved though)

Or, the graphic to explain could be smaller without using a section of the map, just one / two of each region type (one port, two green and two red ships)?

Lose the neutral areas. No area was neutral, back then. Just not conquered. More room for the legend.

these areas were neutral. these were not membes of any League and many of them were neutral during all war.

Referring to the point above, its maybe the neutral colour that gives a little colour-clutter - anyway, if you go for using one background colour and coloured region names or similar then I dont see anything wrong with 'neutral' regions - although it would be best to call them something different if you need some of the regions of the leagues to also start neutral as discussed above. So maybe, call them "non affiliated", "non aligned", or something?

[Oneyed]

The clutter can be a combination of coloured regions and other features.

I will try to find better colours. the other features, the Capitals could be different maybe... please be more presentive here

An alternative could be coloured region names? Different types of army circle?

do not frogot that I need 8 different colours/shapes. and this is not end - 4 must be alike and 4 must be alike... what is bad on coloured maps?

You could perhaps somehow not have some of the capitals too close together - is there anywhere on the turkish coast that could be used? Any of the western islands? Or are the capitals all essential to the historical context?

yes, most of capitals are made by importance of towns. for me is unimaginable that for example Delphi will be capital for Thebai. towns in Asia were not so important, but Ephesus is one possibility. but the main problem is area Athenai - Thebai and Sparta - Elis. the Korinthos was changed to Elis.

If the capitals aren'ttoo close together and you have plenty of carefully placed regions that start neutral in between then the losing condition could still work- it is a great feature. The details could be worked-out later for neutral cvalues and which regions start together etc.

there are 36 regions (except capitals and independent reagions) which could be used. I think we need only two to start as neutral - Mantineia and D (Delion).

Interesting point - you are meaning that if a player gains these capital bonuses then it makes the victory condition more and more likely and reduces the strategic options to win the game?

I think that if capitals have autodeploy bonus mentioned by koontz will realy do much easy to take objective.

One way of explaining could be to have a text explanation along the following lines: "Ships two way assault ports in the same sea and ships of the same fleet in an adjacent sea. Ships also bombard ships of the enemy fleet within the same sea." (this text could be improved though)

Or, the graphic to explain could be smaller without using a section of the map, just one / two of each region type (one port, two green and two red ships)?

I made text legend. with help from any englishmen the text could be short and clear as possible. about problems with english knowledge, my english is poor so when I am able to write legend everybody could understand it.

Referring to the point above, its maybe the neutral colour that gives a little colour-clutter - anyway, if you go for using one background colour and coloured region names or similar then I dont see anything wrong with 'neutral' regions - although it would be best to call them something different if you need some of the regions of the leagues to also start neutral as discussed above. So maybe, call them "non affiliated", "non aligned", or something?

as I mentioned - to do 8 continents different and 4 of them must be alike and others 4 also must be alike it is (for me) impossible to do without colouring regions...

I renamed them to Independent regions. fine?

thank you guys for advices.

here is new version of map. legend will be text.

Click image to enlarge.

Oneyed