Salem's Switch V36 [Quenched]

[cairnswk]

Hmmmm, I think that either one or both of us is confused about the nature of starting positions as proposed... I confess that it may be me

As I understand it, starting positions as you showed in the XML psuedocode below-

Code: Select all
<positions>
<position>
<territory>Ann Putnam Jr</territory>
<territory>Samuel Brabrook</territory>
<territory>Alice Shaflin</territory>
</position>
....
</positions>

-would have a 'batch' of three starting positions that would be distributed to a random player along with the other batches (of three). It would not automatically get assigned to the 1st (red) player.

Then my error for misunderstanding the way the starting code works. If they are distributed randomly, then no problems.

Sorry guys, i have a head cold at present and my head is not working well....

ender516, tell me, and i am sorry for not understanding straight up what you are proposing...
so the coding would have 16 batches of 3 starting positiions, but none of the accused terts would be included in these batches?

[ender516]

Sorry to hear you are under the weather, cairnswk. (Or is that down under the weather?)

Allow me to present a short tutorial regarding starting positions.

A starting position is a collection of one or more territories. When the game engine is determining the drop for a map, before individual territories are randomized, the starting positions are randomized and distributed evenly among the players. The territory or territories in each starting position are thus randomly assigned as a group to one player or another. If the number of starting positions does not divide evenly by the number of players, the remaining starting positions are ignored and their territories are "returned to the pot" along with those territories not part of any starting position for the usual random distribution to the players. So, for example, a map with eight starting positions would give four to each player in a 1v1, two to each in a 1v1v1 (ignoring two), two to each in any 4 player game, and one each in games with 5 to 8 players (ignoring 3, 2, 1 and 0, respectively). A map with three starting positions would give one to each player in 1v1 and 1v1v1 games, and ignore them at larger tables. (One of the three starting positions would be ignored in the 1v1 case.) This scheme is commonly used to divvy up zones of 3 regions (continents of 3 territories) so that no one gets a bonus on the drop, which would happen annoyingly often if left entirely to chance.

Starting positions also allow territories to be distributed to players in some situations and to start neutral in others. Territories marked neutral but included in positions are called "underlying neutrals" and are assigned to players when their positions are assigned, but start neutral when their positions are ignored. In conquest-style maps like this one, it is common to declare all the territories as neutral so that only the active starting positions are distributed in the drop.

On some maps, it may be undesirable to give multiple starting positions at the start, especially if combining positions can lead to bonuses, as this may give an enormous advantage to the first player in a 1v1 game. So, it is possible to limit the maximum number of starting positions given to each player. This limit might be set to one, so that no matter how many players there are in a game, they each get exactly one position. In your case, with 24 territories arranged into 8 starting positions, I am proposing a limit of two, so that in 2-, 3- and 4-player games, everyone starts with two positions (six territories) and in 5- to 8-player games, everyone starts with one position (three territories).

It should be noted, that unlike the situation with territories, there is no special provision with regard to starting positions for a "neutral player" in 1v1 games. The starting positions are simply divided in half (up to any specified limit).

[MarshalNey]

Btw, for the record I think the second of Ender's options (to not use the Accused in starting positions) could only be negative in the sense that thematically the gamepaly might suffer a bit by excluding players from taking a role as Accuser or Accused. However, even this wouldn't necessarily be true, especially if each batch of starting positions included an Accuser, for instance. Then every player would have a starting 'role'. (starting with just townsfolk is not a very active role thematically I think)

-- Marshal Ney

[ender516]

Well if every starting position included both an Accuser and an Accused, then the immediate bonus would apply to everyone, and that would be fair. Is there any chance that real historical pairings of Accuser and Accused would work on the map?

[MarshalNey]

Well if every starting position included both an Accuser and an Accused, then the immediate bonus would apply to everyone, and that would be fair. Is there any chance that real historical pairings of Accuser and Accused would work on the map?

ooh, that would be neat if it could be done. Plus, it would give games a bit of a jump-start, so that they wouldn't have that wasted time of several rounds before they really got going. I second this if possible.

[ender516]

Typo: "Ann Pudeator".

[cairnswk]

Guys, keep suggestions coming please, and thank you for the offerings.
I am still not recovered so don't think i am not ignoring you.
I will post something on this later this week.

[cairnswk]

Typo: "Ann Pudeator".

Fixed, thanks ender516.

[cairnswk]

Well if every starting position included both an Accuser and an Accused, then the immediate bonus would apply to everyone, and that would be fair. Is there any chance that real historical pairings of Accuser and Accused would work on the map?

ooh, that would be neat if it could be done. Plus, it would give games a bit of a jump-start, so that they wouldn't have that wasted time of several rounds before they really got going. I second this if possible.

Yes i think this might be able to be done.
I'll have to do some research to see whom to match with whom.

[cairnswk]

Here is my list of starting positions....below

[cairnswk]

Accused <- Accuser + Third person

• Sarah Good <- Abigail Williams + Ann Pudeator
• Tituba <- Elizabeth Parris + George Jacobs Sn
• Sarah Osbourne <- Thomas Preston + John Proctor
• Dorcas Haore <- Edward Putnam + Giles Corey
• William Hobbs <- Samuel Brabrook + Sarah Bishop
• Rebecca Nurse <- Ann Putnam Jr + Sarah Osbourne
• Martha Corey <- Judge Hathorne + Sarah Cloyce
• Elizabeth Prctor <- Judge Corwin + Susannah Martin

It is proposed that Accuser and Accused start as a pair (everyone gets equal bonus) and the third person starts as a neutral.

Does that work?

[MarshalNey]

I'm confused about the 'third person'. Every one of the third persons is an Accused... are they a starting position? You state that they are neutral, but isn't all of the map neutral except for the starting positions?

Anyway, if you're grouping the starting positions by threes (which I think is best) I would recommend having an Accused + Accuser pair, plus a townsfolk (not an Accuser or Accused). The townsfolk would be free to choose without having to worry about history, so you could use it to tweak your starts.

I noticed that at least two of the sets contain Accusers that start right next to each other (Sam Holbrook and Ed Putnam), which might be unfair to whomever gets them.

-- Marshal Ney

[cairnswk]

MarshalNey wrote:I'm confused about the 'third person'. Every one of the third persons is an Accused... are they a starting position? You state that they are neutral, but isn't all of the map neutral except for the starting positions?

Duh!, what was i thinking, still trying to work all those accused in there i think.
Anways here is the adjsuted list...

Accused <- Accuser + Third person

Sarah Good <- Abigail Williams + George Corwin
Tituba <- Elizabeth Parris + Joseph Buxton
Sarah Osbourne <- Thomas Preston + Lot Conant
Dorcas Haore <- Macy Lewis + James Putnam
William Hobbs <- Samuel Brabrook + Alice Shaflin
Rebecca Nurse <- Ann Putnam Jr + J Trask
Martha Corey <- Judge Hathorne + Eliza Putnam
Elizabeth Prctor <- Judge Corwin + Buffinton Family

MarshalNey wrote:Anyway, if you're grouping the starting positions by threes (which I think is best) I would recommend having an Accused + Accuser pair, plus a townsfolk (not an Accuser or Accused). The townsfolk would be free to choose without having to worry about history, so you could use it to tweak your starts.
I noticed that at least two of the sets contain Accusers that start right next to each other (Sam Holbrook and Ed Putnam), which might be unfair to whomever gets them.
-- Marshal Ney

Ed Putnam is no longer on that list.

Thanks for that MarshalNey

[cairnswk]

On the back of the discussion above....
Version 20 with those start positions as above.

[mr. CD]

I just looked at this for the first time and literally gasped. It is so terribly good looking.

[cairnswk]

I just looked at this for the first time and literally gasped. It is so terribly good looking.

Mmmm, sorry mr.CD, i am not sure how to take you comment...why the gasp...gameplay or graphics?

[Nola_Lifer]

I just looked at this for the first time and literally gasped. It is so terribly good looking.

Mmmm, sorry mr.CD, i am not sure how to take you comment...why the gasp...gameplay or graphics?

lol it was a compliment on the graphics. i think you need a bit more midori in your life.

[MarshalNey]

Excellent, the starting positions are almost set I think.

Just 3 things (really 2):

(1) Judge Hathorn- not so keen on starting a player with a judge, since they can bombard the accused, and hence a starting position for every other player.
(2) Judge Corwin- see above. If you want some starting positions in the township, I'd recommend Tom Beadle and John Best, they're both townsfolk and it would set up an opposing dynamic where whomever started there would have someone opposing them nearby, rather than having a free reign.
(3) Eliza Putnam- she's right next to Marcy Lewis, the only 2 starting positions right next to each other. Eliza Putnam can be exchanged for some other townsfolk away from the other start positions it seems without any problem.

-- Marshal Ney

P.S. I'm putting this in the bulletin this weekend for review by the Surveyors, in anticipation of the gameplay being done as far as my eye is concerned. A few days after that- barring any comments otherwise- a stamp will follow.

[cairnswk]

Excellent, the starting positions are almost set I think.

Just 3 things (really 2):

(1) Judge Hathorn- not so keen on starting a player with a judge, since they can bombard the accused, and hence a starting position for every other player.

(2) Judge Corwin- see above. If you want some starting positions in the township, I'd recommend Tom Beadle and John Best, they're both townsfolk and it would set up an opposing dynamic where whomever started there would have someone opposing them nearby, rather than having a free reign.

OK i understand, but this is what the historical facts are:
Martha Corey was accused by Judge Hathorne + Judge Corwin after examination.
Same with Elizabeth Proctor.
So do you want historical accuracy or gameplay tweeks.

(3) Eliza Putnam- she's right next to Marcy Lewis, the only 2 starting positions right next to each other. Eliza Putnam can be exchanged for some other townsfolk away from the other start positions it seems without any problem.
-- Marshal Ney

Well no, Eliza Putnam was right in the thick of things. my best offer would be to fence between them. She can't be left out of the starts if you want historical accuracy.

P.S. I'm putting this in the bulletin this weekend for review by the Surveyors, in anticipation of the gameplay being done as far as my eye is concerned. A few days after that- barring any comments otherwise- a stamp will follow.

OK, thanks, but let's make syure we've got everyone happy before stamping.

[mr. CD]

I just looked at this for the first time and literally gasped. It is so terribly good looking.

Mmmm, sorry mr.CD, i am not sure how to take you comment...why the gasp...gameplay or graphics?

lol it was a compliment on the graphics. i think you need a bit more midori in your life.

Indeed, I love it.
Wouldn't it be a bit unfair to have a judge as starting point? You could bombard someone who has an accused as starting point righ away.

[cairnswk]

I just looked at this for the first time and literally gasped. It is so terribly good looking.

Mmmm, sorry mr.CD, i am not sure how to take you comment...why the gasp...gameplay or graphics?

lol it was a compliment on the graphics. i think you need a bit more midori in your life.

Indeed, I love it.

That's what i like to hear

Wouldn't it be a bit unfair to have a judge as starting point? You could bombard someone who has an accused as starting point righ away.

Indeed it would be unfair. Therefore historical accuracy has to be foregone in favour of the alternative of having some other names as those two accusers. Heaven help us if Cotton Mather were alive.

[cairnswk]

Current Version 21

[Victor Sullivan]

Does B11 connect to Dodge's Grist Mill? I assume no, but I thought I'd double check as it isn't abundantly clear.

-Sully

[cairnswk]

Does B11 connect to Dodge's Grist Mill? I assume no, but I thought I'd double check as it isn't abundantly clear.

-Sully

No it doesn't connect. I'll see what i can do.

[MarshalNey]

Ahhh, excellent! The starting positions look most satisfactory to me now. Into the bulletin with this map!