Moderator: Cartographers
Version 29 fixes those dotted lines.thenobodies80 wrote:The only concerns I have are the dotted arrows. Why the first one is darker than the others? (sorry if it's explained somewhere)
Moreover the dark one is much better: more clear and clean.
I think that arrows can be improved a bit, for example teh one between Portland and Poole LB has a dot that is darker because it overlap the border between the two regions and there's also a dot that is visible under the arrowhead.
That's all. Everything else looks fine, but give me the time to sleep and take a second look tomorrow with less tired eyes, just to be sure to not miss something.
+1thenobodies80 wrote:Perfect!
cairnswk wrote:Ah Doom....this is the balancing aspect of the gamplay...to make it a little harder to conquer these terts as an attack line to opponents command vesselsDoomYoshi wrote:Why are there neutral 2s in the southern regions?
sorry for the delayed response, doom. the n2 on la manuela prevents paxat san estaban (the correct spelling is actually paxat san esteban) from bombarding the ss paxat la isabela auto-deploy from the start. the intention is to prevent all cases of player 1 using his first turn advantage to conquer a single, then immediately bombard an opposing bonus before anyone else has played. ordinary starting ships do not necessarily have this protection.DoomYoshi wrote:The 2 on La Manuela does not achieve this.
The other ones do make sense, I will go back and look at his reasons for that.
EDIT:So it slows yellow from taking Paxat San Estobel as easily, but it doesn't stop teal from taking Santa Ana so easily.
Triumph and Revenge have no such block between them.
I realize Gameplay is closed, I just want to look at these last things.
Iancanton, do you have a comment?
ian, esteban is fixed...iancanton wrote:...
sorry for the delayed response, doom. the n2 on la manuela prevents paxat san estaban (the correct spelling is actually paxat san esteban) from bombarding the ss paxat la isabela auto-deploy from the start. the intention is to prevent all cases of player 1 using his first turn advantage to conquer a single, then immediately bombard an opposing bonus before anyone else has played. ordinary starting ships do not necessarily have this protection.
in the main legend, command ship is used, while the conditional borders text has vessel. perhaps flagship can be used in both places to avoid confusion?
ian.
yes they are part of that bonus.nolefan5311 wrote:Couple questions regarding the XML cairns...
Are the SS Ships part of the Single Ships of Same Nation bonus? I don't think so but I want to make sure.
well, yes intentionally, just to mix up the gameplay...not all ships would have faced the same way in battleAnd Vanguard Command Ship...are the bow and stern intentionally reversed compared to every other ship? Same with San Lorenzo.
yes these are starting positions, refer map front page.And perhaps I'm being dense here, but regions like Diana, Sun, Moon, Doncella, etc., aren't LB's or SS's, but have the Monarch's Commander's shields there...is there something special about these regions?
That is correct except for the LB Army Brussel, which counts as part of the same side for the Spanish +1 for 9 bonus. i'll have to put something in the map about that - done.I'm operating under the assumption that only the Spanish side has the SS's, and only the English side has the LB's, and that both sides don't have both a SS and a LB.
the ship below Santa Ana has been changed to São CristóvãoAlso, there are two San Salvador's on the map. First one is right below Santa Anna Command Ship and the second one is to the upper left of San Cristobal Command Ship.
Are U sure you haven't doubled up somewhereThe XML is over 3500 lines and I haven't even done borders/bombardments yet lol
Yes. Note Plymouth Beacons are now named also A and B.Every single beacon territory ALSO has a regular territory there, right? i.e., Beacon Poole, and Poole, are two separate regions.
This bonus should include the bow and stern of the command ship, plus all the treasury territories but not the Monarch position.The +11 bonus...is that ONLY for holding the Monarch and 4 Treasury territories? Or does that include the bow and stern of the command ships as well? The "Commander's" in the legend has me a little confused. I don't believe it includes any part of the command ships, but I just want to make sure.
Thanks cairns. Can they also be assaulted by the Treasury positions like the Command Ships and SS's/LB's can?cairnswk wrote:yes these are starting positions, refer map front page.And perhaps I'm being dense here, but regions like Diana, Sun, Moon, Doncella, etc., aren't LB's or SS's, but have the Monarch's Commander's shields there...is there something special about these regions?
nolefan5311 wrote:Thanks cairns. Can they also be assaulted by the Treasury positions like the Command Ships and SS's/LB's can?cairnswk wrote:yes these are starting positions, refer map front page.And perhaps I'm being dense here, but regions like Diana, Sun, Moon, Doncella, etc., aren't LB's or SS's, but have the Monarch's Commander's shields there...is there something special about these regions?
that is now fixed in v30 above. SS and colour has been removed from Julia Zabra. and SS Amor is now same colour as other SS's.And SS Amor (for D. Medina Sedona) is not the same color as all the other SS's.
Sure does. Thanks cairns!cairnswk wrote:nolefan5311 wrote:Thanks cairns. Can they also be assaulted by the Treasury positions like the Command Ships and SS's/LB's can?cairnswk wrote:yes these are starting positions, refer map front page.And perhaps I'm being dense here, but regions like Diana, Sun, Moon, Doncella, etc., aren't LB's or SS's, but have the Monarch's Commander's shields there...is there something special about these regions?
Instructions- Treasury Movement:
Each player can move one-way outward to earn additional bonuses or can assault from any treasury position to same player's Command Ship (B & S), Supply Ship (SS), or Land Base (LB) only.
Does that modification answer that? In other words no they cannot be assaulted from the treasury.
that is now fixed in v30 above. SS and colour has been removed from Julia Zabra. and SS Amor is now same colour as other SS's.And SS Amor (for D. Medina Sedona) is not the same color as all the other SS's.
Still wanting someone to address this issue please.cairnswk wrote:This question needs to be examined again.
This bonus should include the bow and stern of the command ship, plus all the treasury territories but not the Monarch position.The +11 bonus...is that ONLY for holding the Monarch and 4 Treasury territories? Or does that include the bow and stern of the command ships as well? The "Commander's" in the legend has me a little confused. I don't believe it includes any part of the command ships, but I just want to make sure.
I think that now the wording has changed a little, this bonus can be brought down somewhat...what do others think?
please don't hesitate to comment simply because you're doing the xml.nolefan5311 wrote:I've been hesitant to comment on this since I'm involved with the project, but I do think it could be reduced, possibly even removed altogether, especially with the high amount of autodeploys in the treasury positions.
How about: "Hold a Monarch's Commander's Ship and corresponding Treasury +2"You know what you could do is institute a new XML feature, the multiplier. Maybe have the bonus as a +3, and multiplied for every Command Ship held, or something like that.
If you do keep it, I think the wording needs to be changed to, "Hold all Treasury positions and both Command ship regions for a Monarch, +11 (or whatever the bonus will be). Or something like that. As it's currently worded, it sounds like the Monarch's Commander is a required territory.
So it will be +13 for holding all the Treasury then?cairnswk wrote: How about: "Hold a Monarch's Commander's Ship and corresponding Treasury +2"
i think +2 is enough to give out as incentive on top of the other:
+1 for holding the B & S
+13 for holding all the treasury.
While i am at it...i think it will change also the Losing condition wording to:
"Players failing to hold any non-Treasury and Commander's ship will be eliminated"
well yes, that's what that adds up to, unless you think it can be dropped down to +1 +1 +2 +3 = +7 instead of +1 +3 +4 +5 = +13nolefan5311 wrote:So it will be +13 for holding all the Treasury then?cairnswk wrote: How about: "Hold a Monarch's Commander's Ship and corresponding Treasury +2"
i think +2 is enough to give out as incentive on top of the other:
+1 for holding the B & S
+13 for holding all the treasury.
While i am at it...i think it will change also the Losing condition wording to:
"Players failing to hold any non-Treasury and Commander's ship will be eliminated"
And I do think you need to leave "region" after "non-Treasury".
i poo-pooed...done!I think i'd like to stick with the current wording and play.And I like that you have to hold a Monarch's Commander to stay alive. It's not too easy to kill someone off because of the whole conditional borders thing, and because those are the most important regions on the map, honestly. That's where everything starts. You could word it to say, "Players holding only a Treasury territory will be eliminated". That would make it easier for me to code too
I like the autodeploy amounts at what they currently are, and think any "droppable" bonus should be reduced to something like a +2 or +3, since they can really only be attacked, conditionally, through the Commander's Command Ship.cairnswk wrote:well yes, that's what that adds up to, unless you think it can be dropped down to +1 +1 +2 +3 = +7 instead of +1 +3 +4 +5 = +13nolefan5311 wrote:So it will be +13 for holding all the Treasury then?cairnswk wrote: How about: "Hold a Monarch's Commander's Ship and corresponding Treasury +2"
i think +2 is enough to give out as incentive on top of the other:
+1 for holding the B & S
+13 for holding all the treasury.
While i am at it...i think it will change also the Losing condition wording to:
"Players failing to hold any non-Treasury and Commander's ship will be eliminated"
And I do think you need to leave "region" after "non-Treasury".
OK. +3 it is.nolefan5311 wrote:...
I like the autodeploy amounts at what they currently are, and think any "droppable" bonus should be reduced to something like a +2 or +3, since they can really only be attacked, conditionally, through the Commander's Command Ship.
