SteamWorks

[djak.]

Like the map, but the last few times I have played it, the bonuses and descriptions just don't seem to match. Could some error have been inserted at some point?

The -1 is still in the description, but isn't being implemented. In Game 10036329 (fogged), or several turns I've had 4 of the engines, while the other 3 engines are neutral. My 2 opponents each have 1 steam, and no engines. The description says they should get a -1 per turn, but they're not.

i thought the same as you, but if you read closer, you'll understand that the last portion says, "steam with no engines is a waste and grants no bonus" this means that as long as you have no engines then the -1 is not enforced.

i personally think this could be made clearer, but it's probably more trouble than it's worth, once people start figuring it out it shouldn't be so much of a problem.

just my opinion.

-1 isn't a bonus, it's a penalty, therefor the "steam with no engines is a waste and grants no bonus" sentence doesn't negate the -1 sentence.

[DiM]

it's a negative bonus.
this thing has been debated and reiterated several times.
as always i'm open to suggestions even though the map is already out of beta. if you have a better rephrasing that also fits in the specific place i'll be glad to hear it and if more people come and agree your suggestion is better and clearer then i'll implement it.

[djak.]

it's a negative bonus.
this thing has been debated and reiterated several times.
as always i'm open to suggestions even though the map is already out of beta. if you have a better rephrasing that also fits in the specific place i'll be glad to hear it and if more people come and agree your suggestion is better and clearer then i'll implement it.

How about replacing

"Having more Steam than Engines is bad. For each excess Steam you lose all Engine bonuses and get a -1 troop per turn."

with

"If you have at least 1 Engine, and more Steam than Engines, you lose all Engine bonuses and get a -1 troop per turn per excess Steam."

?

[MrSping]

Bit of a nit-picky point/question that might have been said aleready, but why are some of the areas named counties and some are cities etc? Especially confused by 'Gloucester' and 'Worcester' rather than 'Gloucestershire' and 'Worcestershire' when Devon (which doesn't need the 'shire' part anyway) is called 'Devon shire'.

[army of nobunaga]

This is really nice. Very classy.