Moderator: Cartographers
iancanton wrote:+3 for every 5 consecutive interstate cities means 15 bonuses for i-80, 3 bonuses for i-55 and so on. roughly 100 interstate bonuses is a figure that is by no means impossible or even especially difficult to code, but it'll be a lengthy and tedious process with a lot of copying where errors are hard to spot, unless someone knows of a shortcut; by shortcut, i mean something more elegant than the brute force method of copying the list of ordered i-80 cities 14 times, then deleting the unwanted ones from each bonus.
+3 for every 5 interstate cities is so easy that both players in 1v1 are almost certain to start with one or more of these bonuses, with the first player depriving the second player of one or more of his bonuses, which is not what we want. another downside is that, on the longer interstates such as i-80, the principles of best play dictate that a player has to keep counting the number of an opponent's cities on that road to determine how many cities he must conquer to reduce that opponent's current interstate bonus, which is not much fun. the upside is that the new collections xml makes implementing this bonus a piece of cake.
is +5 for every 7 consecutive interstate cities a reasonable alternative? this reduces the number of interstate bonuses by 28. will players bother with playing for such a long, thin bonus that can be broken at almost every city? if not, then this defeats the point of the bonus.
ian.
Gilligan wrote:Ian, your first scenario there I already have coded
Gilligan wrote:but the way isaiah wanted it was that you could travel through different interstates - IE, you could have Boston, Worcester, Albany, Syracuse, Buffalo.
iancanton wrote:Gilligan wrote:Ian, your first scenario there I already have coded
wow! u've done well!Gilligan wrote:but the way isaiah wanted it was that you could travel through different interstates - IE, you could have Boston, Worcester, Albany, Syracuse, Buffalo.
the example u've given is all on i-90. if u mean something like augusta, boston, worcester, albany, syracuse, then this does become something of a nightmare to code because u have to take account of every fork in each interstate. all through the gameplay stage, i had been working on the assumption that all 5 consecutive cities in each bonus had to be on the same interstate. if the 5 consecutive cities can be on more than one interstate, then the differences in interstate names and colours, such as i-90 being red, no longer have a part in gameplay and their function becomes purely decorative. to my mind, the map would lose a little something if that happened.
ian.
Gilligan wrote:So we are all okay that it's plus 3 for each 5 consecutive cities WITHIN an interstate? eg, +3 for 5 and +3 for each consecutive after that.
iancanton wrote:from +3 for every 5 consecutive interstate cities, we've changed to +3 for any 5 cities on an interstate includes 1 capital and you must hold one capital to recieve the bonus.
if u hold 10 cities on i-95, then do u still receive only +3 for i-95? receive has been misspelled as recieve.
ian.
nolefan5311 wrote:iancanton wrote:from +3 for every 5 consecutive interstate cities, we've changed to +3 for any 5 cities on an interstate includes 1 capital and you must hold one capital to recieve the bonus.
if u hold 10 cities on i-95, then do u still receive only +3 for i-95? receive has been misspelled as recieve.
ian.
I thought we agreed to change it to "for every 2 capitals held along the same interstate route you receive an additional +2", right?
nolefan5311 wrote:I think you need to clarify it to say, "For every 2 capitals held along the same interstate you will receive +2".
nolefan5311 wrote:Also, maybe transpose the "Capital Bonus" and the "D.C. Autodeploy" with each other, so that the Capital Bonus and Interstate Bonus are right next to each other.
sannemanrobinson wrote:It is on the small map not totally clear if there is a connection between Berlin and Waterville.
sannemanrobinson wrote:Also, could Gulfport move a bit to the left to be more clearly in MS? The border with FL is now not reallyu visible. New Orleans might then have to move a bit as well.
thenobodies80 wrote:Considering that it's really big, before I start to check it....the xml posted here is the final and correct one?
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=163962&start=15#p4061629
I would like to do it all at once, so a confirmation would be nice before proceed.
Thanks in advance
Nobodies
thenobodies80 wrote:Unclear Connections (not everyone is american )
Small Version
- Boston, it's not clear if is in Maine or Massachussets - Moved Boston down
-Newark, not clear if it is in New York or New Jersey (this one could be good because there's the abbrevaition into the legend) - I agree, since Newark is in the abbreviation legend it should be self explanitory
-Richmond <-> Virginia Beach, dots are almost invisible there - Moved down
-Philadelphia <-> Trenton, the road is invisible there - Moved to the left
-Augusta <-> Savannah, dot's visible, but they could be better - Added Augusta to the abbreviation list
-Kennewick <-> Spokane, again dots - Moved down and to the left
-Lawton <-> Oklahoma City, dots invisbile - Moved to the left
-D.C. is Maryland but looks VA on the map - For gameplay purposes D.C. is in neither Maryland or Virginia (though it is technically in Maryland) so no changes made
-Weston is not clear if it is West Virginia or Maryland - Moved down
Big Version
-Boston border is unclear - Moved down
Users browsing this forum: No registered users