[Abandoned] Field of Gettysburg v04p4nov22

[koontz1973]

Quick question as I know very little of this area. Was Gettysberg just a field? Is the name correct or would fields be better. Either way is fine.

[Oneyed]

well that would be geographically incorrect
as you can see here Wheatfield is situated between Peach Orchard and Little Round Top

my bad explaintation. I mean to move units that between unionist and confederate here will be Wheatfield.

it was Hood who attacked Wheatfield Road behind Sickles position in Peach Orchard as Mc Law attacked him frontally
so in my next version I'll move the Hood Devil's Den - Sickles/Birney Peach Orchard attack route
to Hood Devil's Den - Wheatfield Battlefield

much depends also from which hour will be your postions. this map shows how was situation shaped.
[bigimg]http://imageshack.us/a/img208/4731/battleofgettysburg.png[/bigimg]

I surrender
Battlefields it will be

Oneyed

[pamoa]

I choose the starting position for two reasons
first to reflect the error Sickles made not respecting Meade orders when he choose to place himself in a position impossible to hold
and second for the gameplay I have to lower the bonuses collectable in the Union stronghold behind the Battlefields

[Oneyed]

I choose the starting position for two reasons

then (when I look at map which shows moves of armies and I read it right) Wheatfield was between unionist and confederates from the start.

do you think it is possible to made "active" map - so anyway to implement moves of armies?

Oneyed

[pamoa]

unfortunately not on CC
the map is a frozen image with gameplay trying to give the feeling of the movement it happen

[pamoa]

v02 small new features : wording, title, attack routes (Long Lane, Wheatfield), oval shaping (tribute to original map)[bigimg]http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm126/pamoa_ch/Gettysv02s.png[/bigimg]

[koontz1973]

Good luck pamoa and have fun.

koontz

[pamoa]

oh thanks
I didn't saw you edited your post
and now some gameplay comment?

question
should I put a "East Cemetery Hill" battlefield between "Rodes/Early at Gettysburg" and "Howard at Cemetery Hill"

[koontz1973]

oh thanks
I didn't you edited your post
and now some gameplay comment?

question
should I put a "East Cemetery Hill" battlefield between "Rodes/Early at Gettysburg" and "Howard at Cemetery Hill"

Hate double posts. As for the second question, what would it do to the map in your opinion?

[pamoa]

should I put a "East Cemetery Hill" battlefield between "Rodes/Early at Gettysburg" and "Howard at Cemetery Hill"

...what would it do to the map in your opinion?

it is about the link between the two enemy sides

now you have three "direct" attack route (Hood, East cavalry and Howard at Cemetery Hill)
and four Battlefield which require to hold a Commander to go through
even if a player can conquer/open it during his round and no opponent can prevent him doing it
it is an expensive attack
so the three direct route gives a more open map

but on the other hand historically there was also a big fight East of Cemetery Hill
which I would like to put on the map

I'm afraid of locking the gameplay too much
I'm always keen to be more accurate historically
but as I'm writing this explanation I feel more confident to do so
I'll do it
well thanks for asking

[koontz1973]

Accuracy to history is never going to win over game play. And who is to say what went on that day? Just because a book or wiki says something, only the ones there can truly say. I like the idea of opening it up more so as you say, it does not stifle GP.

Another thing to consider is to put more attack routes on. Try this for an idea.
Have two types of attack lines with a brief explanation, you seem to have room. A solid line for what went on that day for historical accuracy. A dotted line for the ones can could of happened but didn't. Sort of like, can the side that lost win if only they had attacked in this fashion or can the side that won, win faster if only they had.... This will allow you to have some things on that are not accurate to the battle.

[pamoa]

Accuracy to history is never going to win over game play. And who is to say what went on that day? Just because a book or wiki says something, only the ones there can truly say. I like the idea of opening it up more so as you say, it does not stifle GP.
Another thing to consider is to put more attack routes on. Try this for an idea.
Have two types of attack lines with a brief explanation, you seem to have room. A solid line for what went on that day for historical accuracy. A dotted line for the ones can could of happened but didn't. Sort of like, can the side that lost win if only they had attacked in this fashion or can the side that won, win faster if only they had.... This will allow you to have some things on that are not accurate to the battle.

good idea
in fact I made an accuracy error
as there really was a fight East of Cemetery Hill which I'll put on the map
but it never happen at Long Lane where troops draw back and fail to support the East Cemetery Hill attack
this one will be put as an "what if" direct route
so I keep the map more open

It would be nice to have more than one commentator to help me to develop this map

[Oneyed]

the generals would be sorted anyway, I think. in Confederate army the Corps Commanders were Lieutenant Generals - generals of all corps. then where Major Generals - generals for divisions.
in Union both (commanders of corps, commanders of divisions) had the same rank Major General, but there were still difference between corps commanders and division commanders.

do you think about cavalry? add them any importance maybe?
there were also more Union units/soldiers in battle but you have more confederate units...

will look at the map more later.

Oneyed

[pamoa]

v03 small new features : - gameplay - cavalry bonus, East Cemetery Hill Battlefield (replacing Long Lane) - graphics - attack route, legend, decor[bigimg]http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm126/pamoa_ch/Gettysv03s.png[/bigimg]

the generals would be sorted anyway, I think. in Confederate army the Corps Commanders were Lieutenant Generals - generals of all corps. then where Major Generals - generals for divisions.
in Union both (commanders of corps, commanders of divisions) had the same rank Major General, but there were still difference between corps commanders and division commanders.

your right for the ranking
but I had to simplify for gameplay purpose
I used stars to differentiate their level of command
althought some are over/underrated

do you think about cavalry? add them any importance maybe?

made them a +1 bonus if both hold

there were also more Union units/soldiers in battle but you have more confederate units...

I know but I choose to made the gameplay even
as it ended in a relative draw around 23,000 casualties on each side
I could have fusion McLaw/Hood divisions
but the fight around Peach Orchard would have been to simplified

[Oneyed]

your right for the ranking
but I had to simplify for gameplay purpose
I used stars to differentiate their level of command

I did not mean to differentiate them only. but add them another role, maybe for Corps commanders add another bonus.

made them a +1 bonus if both hold

try to think about any strategic role for them more as just simple bonus. it was common that who won cavalry battle he used cavalry for any attack from behind or so... lets think about this map more as strategis as bonuses, I think.

I know but I choose to made the gameplay even
as it ended in a relative draw around 23,000 casualties on each side

this was just end of battle. but your map shows 3 days of battle.

I could have fusion McLaw/Hood divisions
but the fight around Peach Orchard would have been to simplified

... and you made it right when you did not unite them

I am off now fro longer time, when I will come home I will post any draw.

Oneyed

[pamoa]

back from holiday

your right for the ranking
but I had to simplify for gameplay purpose
I used stars to differentiate their level of command

I did not mean to differentiate them only
but add them another role
maybe for Corps commanders add another bonus

as I didn't used that level of command for the Union it would unbalance the gameplay

made them a +1 bonus if both hold

try to think about any strategic role for them more as just simple bonus
it was common that who won cavalry battle he used cavalry for any attack from behind or so...
lets think about this map more as strategis as bonuses, I think

they already are positioned as historically it was as a bypass
but it can be empowered by giving an attack range of 2 or even 3

there were also more Union units/soldiers in battle but you have more confederate units...

I know but I choose to made the gameplay even
as it ended in a relative draw around 23,000 casualties on each side
I could have fusion McLaw/Hood divisions
but the fight around Peach Orchard would have been to simplified

this was just end of battle. but your map shows 3 days of battle.
... and you made it right when you did not unite them

oh btw
I don't have more confederate units but more officers

[ManBungalow]

Did all the leaders of the American Civil War have such awesome beards?

[nolefan5311]

Did all the leaders of the American Civil War have such awesome beards?

Not just beards...

[pamoa]

not much of an enthusiasm I'm getting here
or development input

[nolefan5311]

I've been busy with a couple other things Pamoa. I promise to look at this one in the next few days and provide some gameplay feedback.

[nolefan5311]

First things first, and I know I haven't posted in this thread much, but this is a very nice looking map.

Ok, first, I think you need to remove "The Gettysburg Campaign" from it's current spot, make it stand out on it's own. It's supposed to be an introduction to the map, but right now it sort of gets muddled in with all of the gameplay instructions.

I don't like that Lee can only be attacked by 3 regions (Ewell, Hill, and Longstreet) while Meade can be attacked by 7 regions. Even more unbalanced is that those 3 regions are then protected on both sides. It seems Meade is significantly more vulnerable to the rest of the map, and thus his bonus easier to break.

I think the legend needs quite a bit more sorting as well. For instance, break each of the Map Legend components out separately and indicate what they can do in their own little box, as opposed to how it currently is.

What are the dimensions of the map? I think it could stand to be enlarged a little bit so that things aren't so congested and that your legend markers (Troops, Battlefield, Cavalry, etc) can be a little easier to distinguish.

I'll admit I wanted to get something posted tonight because I haven't posted anything in a while, so that's a start. I will try to look closer at things soon, see if things make more sense when I'm not tired .

[trinicardinal]

First things first, and I know I haven't posted in this thread much, but this is a very nice looking map.

Ok, first, I think you need to remove "The Gettysburg Campaign" from it's current spot, make it stand out on it's own. It's supposed to be an introduction to the map, but right now it sort of gets muddled in with all of the gameplay instructions.

I don't like that Lee can only be attacked by 3 regions (Ewell, Hill, and Longstreet) while Meade can be attacked by 7 regions. Even more unbalanced is that those 3 regions are then protected on both sides. It seems Meade is significantly more vulnerable to the rest of the map, and thus his bonus easier to break.

I think the legend needs quite a bit more sorting as well. For instance, break each of the Map Legend components out separately and indicate what they can do in their own little box, as opposed to how it currently is.

What are the dimensions of the map? I think it could stand to be enlarged a little bit so that things aren't so congested and that your legend markers (Troops, Battlefield, Cavalry, etc) can be a little easier to distinguish.

I'll admit I wanted to get something posted tonight because I haven't posted anything in a while, so that's a start. I will try to look closer at things soon, see if things make more sense when I'm not tired .

An extremely nice looking map at this stage. I understand and agree with most of what nolefan is saying but I would suggest that the introduction to the map remain where it is... those who are interested in it will still read it and those who aren't will overlook it anyway and I honestly like the look of where it is

[pamoa]

... this is a very nice looking map.

An extremely nice looking map at this stage.

thanks for encouragement

[pamoa]

thanks for your patience

Ok, first, I think you need to remove "The Gettysburg Campaign" from it's current spot, make it stand out on it's own. It's supposed to be an introduction to the map, but right now it sort of gets muddled in with all of the gameplay instructions.
I think the legend needs quite a bit more sorting as well. For instance, break each of the Map Legend components out separately and indicate what they can do in their own little box, as opposed to how it currently is.

I understand and agree with most of what nolefan is saying but I would suggest that the introduction to the map remain where it is... those who are interested in it will still read it and those who aren't will overlook it anyway and I honestly like the look of where it is

for the moment I'll keep everything in a single box
but I keep in mind your suggestion about moving out of it the historical part
as it is not a gameplay legend

What are the dimensions of the map? I think it could stand to be enlarged a little bit so that things aren't so congested and that your legend markers (Troops, Battlefield, Cavalry, etc) can be a little easier to distinguish.

as I said in first post this is the small map ( width 630 pixels - height 600 pixels )
I always work on the small map first to be sure all fits in
in this case the lower left corner was tricky to adjust

I don't like that Lee can only be attacked by 3 regions (Ewell, Hill, and Longstreet) while Meade can be attacked by 7 regions. Even more unbalanced is that those 3 regions are then protected on both sides. It seems Meade is significantly more vulnerable to the rest of the map, and thus his bonus easier to break.

corps and army commanders aren't part of any bonus
they just trigger the attack through battlefields
the difference is in command structure on both side
for the Union only Meade can trigger attack thus is attackable by all is generals
instead for the Confederates you have two level of command
corps commanders can trigger attack only for generals under his command
Lee can do it for all the army

[koontz1973]

pamoa, from me a couple of things. In assault conditions can you swap the army and corps commanders around. Army commander seems to be higher in rank so should come first. Secondly, do you have room to increase the text size at all. I am finding it slightly hard to read at the moment (not imposable) but with the conditional border, it might be nice to see if the text itself can become easier to read. It might be the italics.