[Abandoned] - Angevin Empire

[tokle]

Oh, I'm sure there are lots of adjustments that need to be made for it.
But I'm not sure if this issue is such a problem, though. It might make for an interesting gameplay.

[Industrial Helix]

This one is ready for a closer look in the gameplay workshop.

[porkenbeans]

Well... then you're going to have to clog up the smaller bonuses with player starting points or starting neutrals if you're unwilling to change the bonus sizes... adding territories could work as well but I think its congested in places enough...

what does it mean to clog up the bonuses with player starting points?

As for the graphics... photoshop 7? Isn't that the ancient version from the 90s? If so, you might have to get an update somewhere as I'm unfamiliar with its capabilities. I'm on CS2, so I can at least help you get the graphics up to snuff and walk you through trouble spots you're having.

Yeah, it's pretty old. never had any reason to upgrade it.

I use 7.0 also.

[tokle]

I use 7.0 also.

Actually, about a month ago my computer died. So now I have a new one and I don't have photoshop anymore. I'm learning to use gimp instead.

I expect to come up with a third draft soon.

[porkenbeans]

I use 7.0 also.

Actually, about a month ago my computer died. So now I have a new one and I don't have photoshop anymore. I'm learning to use gimp instead.

I expect to come up with a third draft soon.

Do you like it, and how easy is it to use ? Are there things that you can not do, that you could in Photoshop ?

[natty dread]

It's not about the software, it's about how you use it

[tokle]

I use 7.0 also.

Actually, about a month ago my computer died. So now I have a new one and I don't have photoshop anymore. I'm learning to use gimp instead.

I expect to come up with a third draft soon.

Do you like it, and how easy is it to use ? Are there things that you can not do, that you could in Photoshop ?

It's fairly similar. The basics are done in much the same way. Of course there are some small things that i was doing on ps that i haven't figured out to do in gimp yet. Right clicking to quickly select a layer, f.ex. And all the layer folders dissappeared when I opened the psd in gimp.
But overall I find the experience very similar.

[tokle]

Ok. Here are my latest changes.

Click image to enlarge.

I've removed Cork, Dublin, Oxford and Orleans. And I've made the inset larger.

I can't find a way for gimp to do strokes on the inside of a selection, like what I was doing with ps. So I came up with another way to colour in the regions. Feedback please.

[Evil DIMwit]

Now that we're on gameplay, I'll raise this again:

This is all still very much possible, and probably wouldn't be too taxing on the engine. I see a sort of problem emerging, though. Say, for example, that you hold Ireland along with every territory of Norman Ireland except for Dubh Linn. There's five of them, so you have +3 for Ireland and +5 for bordering territories. Now you have a disincentive to conquer Dubh Linh, since all those border territories would now be inside a bonus you control -- you'd only have +3 for Ireland and +4 for Norman Ireland. Likewise, if by some grace of God you hold Toulouse and Anjou, and you want to conquer Aquitaine, you're better off leaving out Saintogne and taking the +7 bonus from the other territories.
Not that this breaks the system, but there might be some adjustments called for.

It's not true for Ireland anymore, but it is for Aquitaine. Or if you hold Domaines Royales, Blois, Chartres, Troyes, and Meaux, you really don't want to take Champagne and Rethel. Actually, the Blois/Champagne region is rather undervalued.

[tokle]

Now that we're on gameplay, I'll raise this again:

This is all still very much possible, and probably wouldn't be too taxing on the engine. I see a sort of problem emerging, though. Say, for example, that you hold Ireland along with every territory of Norman Ireland except for Dubh Linn. There's five of them, so you have +3 for Ireland and +5 for bordering territories. Now you have a disincentive to conquer Dubh Linh, since all those border territories would now be inside a bonus you control -- you'd only have +3 for Ireland and +4 for Norman Ireland. Likewise, if by some grace of God you hold Toulouse and Anjou, and you want to conquer Aquitaine, you're better off leaving out Saintogne and taking the +7 bonus from the other territories.
Not that this breaks the system, but there might be some adjustments called for.

It's not true for Ireland anymore, but it is for Aquitaine. Or if you hold Domaines Royales, Blois, Chartres, Troyes, and Meaux, you really don't want to take Champagne and Rethel. Actually, the Blois/Champagne region is rather undervalued.

Yes. I made Blois a +2 back when it was only two regions, so that should change. I didn't put a lot of thought into how much each bonus region should be worth, because I don't really know how to calculate it. I guess that's what we should be figuring out now.

Maybe there is a way to put a cap on the bonus that you win from +1 border terits bonus?
That said, I think that it might be interesting to have it so that you in some cases might not want to capture some regions. That might possibly lead to some interesting novel gameplay, no?

[Evil DIMwit]

Yes. I made Blois a +2 back when it was only two regions, so that should change. I didn't put a lot of thought into how much each bonus region should be worth, because I don't really know how to calculate it. I guess that's what we should be figuring out now.

Most of the values are pretty good, actually. Blois should change, you can raise Aquitaine by 1, and Tolouse might be better as 4. Ireland and Norman Irealand are the big problem area, since combining them gives +7 for just 8 territories and 3 borders. The most I can see that being worth is 4, possibly 3 since Ireland is so far off to the side of the map. Maybe you should cut Ireland and Norman Ireland down to 3 territories each, each worth +2?

Maybe there is a way to put a cap on the bonus that you win from +1 border terits bonus?

Do you mean territories bordering each bonus, or bordering your empire in total? Either way I believe it's possible.

That said, I think that it might be interesting to have it so that you in some cases might not want to capture some regions. That might possibly lead to some interesting novel gameplay, no?

It may be interesting if it's part of the main point of gameplay, but on a complex map like this it could just end up frustrating and confusing people. There's no real logical reason why uniting an area under your rule should give you less power, is there?

[tokle]

Yes. I made Blois a +2 back when it was only two regions, so that should change. I didn't put a lot of thought into how much each bonus region should be worth, because I don't really know how to calculate it. I guess that's what we should be figuring out now.

Most of the values are pretty good, actually. Blois should change, you can raise Aquitaine by 1, and Tolouse might be better as 4. Ireland and Norman Irealand are the big problem area, since combining them gives +7 for just 8 territories and 3 borders. The most I can see that being worth is 4, possibly 3 since Ireland is so far off to the side of the map. Maybe you should cut Ireland and Norman Ireland down to 3 territories each, each worth +2?

OK. What would you reckon Blois/Champagne to be worth then? 3 or 4?
We can set the bonuses for the irish regions to +2 each. We don't need to reduce the terit number any more, considering that it is on the periphery.

Maybe there is a way to put a cap on the bonus that you win from +1 border terits bonus?

Do you mean territories bordering each bonus, or bordering your empire in total? Either way I believe it's possible.

Bordering each held bonus, while counting each terit only once.

That said, I think that it might be interesting to have it so that you in some cases might not want to capture some regions. That might possibly lead to some interesting novel gameplay, no?

It may be interesting if it's part of the main point of gameplay, but on a complex map like this it could just end up frustrating and confusing people. There's no real logical reason why uniting an area under your rule should give you less power, is there?

Well, what I was thinking was; in feudal wars, capturing border castles would help strengthen your country, but if you went as far as to attempt to occupy a whole country there would be so much tension there that you would have to put so much resources into keeping control that it might not be worth the trouble to begin with. If you understand what I mean. Richard Lionheart for example, spent practically all his military resources on reigning in his unruly vassals. In the end he was even killed during a petty squabble with one of his counts. This was one of the major reasons why the Angevin Empire never function as a unified body, and why it was easy for Philippe Augustus to conquer most of it.

I understand what you mean about the frustration and confusion, though. I don't want it to be frustrating to play it, only a bit complex.

[Evil DIMwit]

Well, what I was thinking was; in feudal wars, capturing border castles would help strengthen your country, but if you went as far as to attempt to occupy a whole country there would be so much tension there that you would have to put so much resources into keeping control that it might not be worth the trouble to begin with. If you understand what I mean. Richard Lionheart for example, spent practically all his military resources on reigning in his unruly vassals. In the end he was even killed during a petty squabble with one of his counts. This was one of the major reasons why the Angevin Empire never function as a unified body, and why it was easy for Philippe Augustus to conquer most of it.

I understand what you mean about the frustration and confusion, though. I don't want it to be frustrating to play it, only a bit complex.

One possibility is to undervalue all the bonuses, so that it's usually better to own a certain set of core bonuses and only part of the bonuses around them than to conquer every single bonus you come across. Then you can make a note in the legend like, "Completely held bonuses are handed off to vassals and no longer count towards your empire bonus." Now the players expect to deploy fewer troops if they unite a bonus and players have to be quite strategic about who they want to conquer.

Moreover I think this would work better without some arbitrary limit on your empire bonus.

[tokle]

Yes. Is that not the case the way the bonuses look at the moment?
If we change the Irish bonuses to +2 each, and set scotland to +3. Maybe england and Aquitaine could be set down to +7 and +5.

[Evil DIMwit]

Yeah, that's the idea (though I'd've made Alba 3 anyway).

[tokle]

Update.
I've changed the bonuses sligthly, and added text about giving power to vassals.

Click image to enlarge.

[Victor Sullivan]

Do the grey territories in the east have a bonus associated with them? Also, I'm concerned about the colorblind test.

[tokle]

No. I don't want a bonus for the German terits in the east. They would still count for the +1 for each bonus.
Colours are easily changed, that's graphics though, isn't it?

[Victor Sullivan]

So what's the point of the German territories, then? And what does "Additional bonus regions are handed down to vassals..."?

[tokle]

So what's the point of the German territories, then? And what does "Additional bonus regions are handed down to vassals..."?

They're still counted for your overall bonus. They are marginal in this story, but have the power to add a little extra power.
For the other question see my discussion with evil dimwith above.

[tokle]

OK.
Any other thoughts, or issues on this one?

[Evil DIMwit]

Actually, if I were unfamiliar with the map I would find the "additional resources" phrasing somewhat unclear. Additional to what? To your first bonus? How much lower are the vassal bonuses? And so on.

Also, can you get it so the legend doesn't obscure the connection between Ui Neill and Moreibh?

[tokle]

Actually, if I were unfamiliar with the map I would find the "additional resources" phrasing somewhat unclear. Additional to what? To your first bonus? How much lower are the vassal bonuses? And so on.

I was thinking additional to your first bonus. I agree the phrasing is a bit difficult, I find it hard to explain the situation adequately in one sentence. The bonuses you get from your vassals are the ones in the legend.

Also, can you get it so the legend doesn't obscure the connection between Ui Neill and Moreibh?

Oh, I didn't even notice. Of course.

[theBastard]

nice progress.
maybe Alba could be Scotland in this era.
about bordering bonuses: if you hold Anjou you have +9 for bordering regions?
hm, it not be too much? what about that bordering bonus will valid only for "enemy" regions? if you hold any Angevin´s lordship only vasal´s and French bordering regions could valid. and vice versa, if you hold any French lordship only Angevin´s and German bordering region could valid.

[tokle]

nice progress.
maybe Alba could be Scotland in this era.
about bordering bonuses: if you hold Anjou you have +9 for bordering regions?
hm, it not be too much? what about that bordering bonus will valid only for "enemy" regions? if you hold any Angevin´s lordship only vasal´s and French bordering regions could valid. and vice versa, if you hold any French lordship only Angevin´s and German bordering region could valid.

I don't really think +9 is too much for that bonus. It will be a pretty difficult one to hold. That might be an interesting idea, though. I'll have a think about it.

As for Alba, it is the Scotish name for Scotland. It still is today.