Crazy Europe: House of Habsburg
-
@cernel I'm giving it to Venice to make that area of the world more interesting. Venice controlled several islands that aren't in the map
-
@crazyg Ok, then, since you surely want to have Cyprus Venetian too, I would just suggest maybe changing the intro to:
"A game based on Europe in the second half of the 16th century."
That would be fine with Cyprus Venetian too (because it wasn't in the 17th century), and would help with having the crossbowmen a bit more around.
Reading the intro as 17th century confused me a bit, making me think in terms of 1601 to 1700, but you did clarify in this post that it was around 1600. -
@crazyg All the map changes you indicated are included.
Just hammering away on cleaning everything else up.
Keep me in the loop if there are any other "moments of clarity".
-
@hepps
As a matter of fact there was
Delete the lines I've put in red. They are pointless, there were only 2 sea zones in the pictureI'm looking at maybe changing something in the Romania-Bulgaria area as well
-
@crazyg On the graphics, regarding the sea zones, a thing I just noticed is that, if you have your sea zones ending in "Sea Zone", then you can avoid having those lines for the sea zones encircling the islands. That is the normal way to handle it (the method you used is a popular workaround, that works too, but looks strange).
Those lines will become more visible if you thin out the actual borders from current (tho, of course, you plan to cover them with the relief). -
@cernel
This is good to know. Would it be possible to extend this feature so that territories beginning with sea zone also apply? I find it really useful to begin with sea zone, as it makes sorting the territories to find all the water very easy. -
@crazyg Uhm, as long as the sea zones are numbered and the land territories are not, as it is usually the case, and it is the case in your map too, I actually prefer it ending in Sea Zone, so that the sea zones (being the only territories starting with numbers) are all listed before anything else, instead of in between of the territories starting with "S".
I see this would be the case in your map too, since the land territories don't start with a number.
Anyways, that would be a feature request, I would agree with, but rather it allowing to set priority without depending at all from the name of the territory, which is still hacky.
So, to answer your question, if I'm not missing some recent changes, as it works now, nope; either you have to follow a hacky fixed engine behaviour or use a hacky workaround.
I already mentioned this matter in:
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/1331 -
@crazyg Personally, I'm not big on it, since I tend to think having "10 Sea Zone" is preferable than having "Sea Zone 10". And, if you name it, still I think "Aegean Sea Zone" would sound better than "Sea Zone Aegean Sea".
The only issue I see is only in the case that both land and sea are just numbered (starting with a number), and, in that case, the land and sea territories would end up all mixed up. But this is not your case, as you have "Name Number" for the land territories.
But being obliged to have the name ending in "Sea Zone", to have it deprioritised, is definitely not great, even tho I believe that ending in "Sea Zone" is a good standard itself. -
@cernel
I plan to change the land names from the numbered version to actual location names -
@crazyg Ok, well, then I don't think having "X Sea Zone", with X being a number, may be an issue, as only the sea zones would still be numbered (thus would be listed before all territories), unless you plan to name the sea zones too.
I guess you are talking about your WWI game, not this one, as that would be a massive effort to find names for everything and checking it being fine for more than 4 centuries ago.
But, as I said, I think you should make a feature request about it, and I agree with it, even tho I've no problem with the standard of ending in Sea Zone, but it shouldn't be mandatory. -
Wouldn't this make more sense? Then you could have the strait represented at it narrowest point.
"A joyous heart sours with the burden of expectation"
Hepster -
@hepps Yah, I'd agree it should be that. Since the late middle ages it is possible to have cannons able to sink ships moving through the Marmara straits, tho it is not a sure thing as a canal blocking.
-
Regarding those straits, another advice is allowing normal land movement between Turkey02 - Turkey06 and Turkey03 - Turkey04.
Those straits are narrower than a lot of big rivers; so, in the moment you don't have the Danube, the Dnepr, etc., on the map, then those should be simply land connected too, for coherency. -
Uhm, I was thinking about the Turkish straits myself, sorry. For the Kerch Strait, that is too wide to matter for this timeline. Still I would agree having that sea border. Seems the most natural way to draw it.
-
-
Sea of Azov changes done.
-
@crazyg Also, on the other hand, you may want to consider having canals dynamics for 184-190-191.
This is a tuff one, as canals are very strong, and it may overvalue the ability to close the straits at that time, but the Turks were indeed able to do something the like, with very big cannons.
A compromise might be to require having both sides to block sea movement, but that would be not that right, either, as you just need to a 1 side to put a big cannon on it and shoot at the ships passing through.
On this matter, I really don't know; as having a canal would be too much, as the Venetians were able to pass the Dardanelles, despite the Turks having both sides, but having nothing is too little.
The correct way to do it would be to invest in costly stuff to block sea movement from the shores of a strait, and getting a sort of AA shot for it each time a hostile ships tries to pass through; but, as we all know, that is not supported. -
Ok so a bit more work than I had hoped for.
France is now done with a couple other isolated areas...
France before...
Taking a break and will get back to it later.
-
Making more head way.... but as I was zooming out to get a glimpse of the overall picture something dawned on me....
since the Sea Zones are square.... and the Land territories are all jagged.... would make sense to visually differentiate the Coastal Waters by making them rounded.
Let me know.... since I have to re-draw them either way.
"A joyous heart sours with the burden of expectation"
Hepster -
@hepps
I agree. They were supposed to be rounded from the beginning, if you wanted to remove things like the pointy bits they sometimes have (the french picture has one) it would make sense too
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 💗
Register Login