Crazy Europe: House of Habsburg
-
@crazyg Also when you integrate the new file you may want to look at the connections in Sweden that surround Lakes Vanern & Vattern. there are several connections there that currently shouldn't exist.
-
@hepps
Those were also fixed in the old file -
@crazyg
Hope these will help you with the connection problems:
1_1531421604908_connections_new.txt 0_1531421604907_connections.txt
The connections file is the one with your latest download, removed and sorted. The other file is a new run from the polygons.txt file. All Sea Zones that have connections to land were marked with an 'x' prior to running so any that didn't connect were removed. Those were the only changes. Load both into notepad++ so that they can be compared side by side.Hope this helps in your efforts.
Cheers...
-
Don't know if this has come up... but @CrazyG what did you envision as the default way this game should played? Dice or Low Luck?
-
@hepps
Dice. I have LL on as default for early testing purposes -
@crazyg Good to know.
-
@CrazyG
One of the things that I really like about this map is the absents of clutter. With the amount of territories, leaving the names off makes this map seem 'roomier'. But I would think about adding the city names to give a feel of location.Also I would think about splitting up the 'Navy' unit into two different units. A Caravel used to transport troops and receive the movement tech. The other a Galleon that would attack like Cannon (two dice, and added to the supportAttachmentCastleRolls) and receive a bombard tech, but not movement.
I would increase the transport cost of Knights and Cannon to 3 and set canInvadeOnlyFrom to none. The Caravel's transportCapacity could be set to 3 (maybe 4, or set it to 4 as a tech) and isCombatTransport to true.
Any way to both you and @Hepps this is a very nice map.
Cheers...
-
@wc_sumpton This was all @CrazyG . I just drew some pretty pictures. The real beauty of this map is in its design.
-
If not splitting up the "Navy" unit, I would recommend the unit be renamed "Fleet". I feel it is more appropriate to say "I am attacking with two fleets" than say "I am attacking with two navies". A nation only has one navy as far as I know.
-
@frostion That'd be surely an improvement but, still, "fleet" is a concept that doesn't envision an unitary or quantitative distribution, but, rather, a strategic one. Likely, game wise, a stack of sea units in the same sea zone would be a fleet (while, of course, the navy is the whole for the potentate).
Why not just "ships"?
Anyways, I suggested to change navy, as well, way back:
@cernel said in Crazy Europe: House of Habsburg:@crazyg
Names changes suggestions, if it is the early XVII century, in my order of preference, left to right:
crossbow->crossbowmen (but, really, from 1600 there should be none; they are almost extinct)
musketmen->musketeers
cannon->cannons
horsemen->harquebusiers/petronels
knights->cuirassiers/gendarmes/reiters/lancers
navy->ships (or man-of-wars and barques, if you split military and transport)
castle is a touch too medieval, and I remember you gave some good suggestions for this time in Age of Tribes -
@wc_sumpton
I won't be adding new types of ships unless I get art for them that matches the current style. I'm at the mercy of an artist to volunteer on this.I had the same thought about cannons and knights invading from sea, and having techs that improved capacity. I'm leaving it as is for the moment for two reasons
- I'm hardly ever seeing those units used amphibiously anyways
- Without cannons, its almost impossible to take castles by sea. You need at least 6 navies to do so, which seems like too many.
-
-
I will see what I can do in regards to making a new and bigger ship image for a new unit type.
-
Personally, I'm confortable with a single ship unit, even tho it makes sense to have the choice to focus on a transport or warring navy.
In TripleA, I always had issues with warships and transports, as the old rulesets have fodder transports and the new have defenceless transports, and I don't like either.
At the end, it all depends on what is gonna be here. -
Here is a battleship type unit. I hope I have hit the mark in regards to the right player color. Otherwise, please adjust them:
-
@frostion Fitting names for (referring to) this timeline (not talking about the unit image) are, in my order of preference (but plural, if the other units are), man-of-war or galleon.
I guess warship or battleship are good too (not really a clue, actually), with the generic meaning of ships for battle.
Also, isn't the current "navy" representing a cutter (a very small single-masted warship, armed with cannons)? -
@frostion To hijack the topic, I surely suggest using the new image in substitution of the Sail-Ship one currently in Age of Tribes.
-
@Frostion
Looks great, Ill add it ASAP.There will be an update tomorrow
-
@CrazyG I did my best to manually match the colors of the units you use (I donât know if the colors have been altered compared to AoT). I think I am within 95% of a color match but I am not sure. Maybe @Hepps can at some point take all your units and re-color them so that players colors are 100% in alignment with the player color. But you have to ask him REALLY nicely
Btw, some units face left and others right. Do you have any system in regards to what way they face? In AoT all âwestern allianceâ units face one way and the âEastern Allianceâ face the other way. But I donât know about your map?
Maybe you could use the unit names âBattleshipsâ or âWarshipsâ and then âTransportsâ for the small ship?
@Cernel I am not sure what âclassâ the ships are. Maybe the small one is a sloop? In AoT it is just called âSail-Shipâ. And in HoH I get the impression that it is also more about the dedicated role of the sea units. So the real class is not that important.
-
@frostion Well, we are not talking about XVI century ships for that one, but, I guess you can call it either a sloop or a cutter (and also other names, like hoy). What a sloop and a cutter are varies overtime, but, assuming that picture is Napoleonic, I think cutter would be surely a better definition, also since I see cannons in it. I was not suggesting names to use in this game, here.
Anyways, I don't think the small ship picture is really taylored for this game, so maybe @CrazyG will prefer sticking with 1 ship type, but using the new picture for it.
If a merchant/transport ship has to be, I'd surely take the boat image of Age of Tribes, over the Sail-Ship one for the same game, that is really representing a very small sailing warship (clearly smaller than a brig-sloop or even a gun-brig), if I'm right in seeing a line of cannons.
By the way, galleys were still very important and the main (or even only!) warships of this era, in the Mediterranean (tho the Age of Tribes galley would be very anachronistic looking for the role of a modern galley), while the long range merchant ship (primarily for the Italians) was the great galley, whose militarized version would be the galleass or galliass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galley
The zenith of galley usage in warfare came in the late 16th century with battles like that at Lepanto in 1571, one of the largest naval battles ever fought.
For naming:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rating_system_of_the_Royal_Navy#Origins_and_description
The earliest categorisation of Royal Navy ships dates to the reign of King Henry VIII. Henry's Navy consisted of 58 ships, and in 1546 a list divided them into four groups: 'ships, galliasses, pinnaces, and cow barges.
(still thinking England and Scotland need to be players or impassable, btw)
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better đ
Register Login