Conquer Club

Ok, Anzac Day is Apr. 25 and Cairns has retired. I asked him if I could pick up on Gallipoli where he left off and he said yes, presuming a few conditions. First, keep the gameplay as close as possible to his ideas, which I think were about spot on. He did his research well and I hope to be as faithful to the actual battle as his map was. The second was that the graphics remain as unchanged as possible. This sketch doesn't show it, but I'm going to steer the graphics in an homage to Cairns once the competition ends and if this map wins (which judging by my distinguished competitors it's going to be a tough match!)

Here's the link to the original thread:
viewtopic.php?f=242&t=73475&start=0

Without further ado, here's the map:

V3

show

This has been tried already.. It is best to leave this project alone until Cairns decides to return and finish it one day.

Bruceswar wrote:This has been tried already.. It is best to leave this project alone until Cairns decides to return and finish it one day.

That's a lousy attitude... Nothing great would ever be accomplished if people just thought "this has been tried already and it didn't work, so let's not even try"...

I say this has enormous potential to be a great map, so let's give it a shot.

Bruceswar wrote:This has been tried already..

...and the project was dropped because i was awaiting an xml update, that's all. However, now that i am retiring, i have given permission for IH to work on this, and i wish him all the very best.

It is best to leave this project alone until Cairns decides to return and finish it one day.

Bruseswar...i don't think i will be coming back to finish it, so let's give IH all the encouragement,eh!? please.


For IH, that's a good start considering you only had a short period to work on this...given that all the files couldn't be adapted.
Good luck with it, and my only other consideration is that the top of the legend with the outline of the Australian War Memeorial and that rising sun should be included please, as that is also a part of the Anzac tradition, and timing of much of this battle landings.

cairnswk wrote:

Bruceswar wrote:This has been tried already..

...and the project was dropped because i was awaiting an xml update, that's all. However, now that i am retiring, i have given permission for IH to work on this, and i wish him all the very best.

It is best to leave this project alone until Cairns decides to return and finish it one day.

Bruseswar...i don't think i will be coming back to finish it, so let's give IH all the encouragement,eh!? please.


For IH, that's a good start considering you only had a short period to work on this...given that all the files couldn't be adapted.
Good luck with it, and my only other consideration is that the top of the legend with the outline of the Australian War Memeorial and that rising sun should be included please, as that is also a part of the Anzac tradition, and timing of much of this battle landings.

Thanks for the support CairnsWK, I hope to do the map justice. I will make the addition of the Australian War Memorial at the top of the legend. To be honest, I just threw it together as quick and simple as possible cause I didn't want to break the 'sketch' rule.

@Bruceswar: I hope I can get your support for this map. I hope to make it as close to Cairn's version as possible while still resolving some of the problems.

This was an incredible battle in WWI ... I hope its WWI you are talking about or ill be embarrassed. I believe the retreat is still being taught as a piece of doctrine at westpoint and other military courses/colleges.

I would really really like to play this map. I hope it doesnt get to tough and it dies out.

There is a high point if I remember right that NZ'ers or aussies captured very briefly but If I remember right the story alone of just that part was epic.

Ok, first off congrats to all the participants in the April contest. There's some definite gems.

Secondly, I ought to deal pursuing this map rather than putting it off as I have been lately.

At the end of Cairns version: I intend to keep everything as close to Cairn's version as possible. From what I can tell the only major problem facing the gameplay of the map was the battleships not being able to decay until neutral. This is still a problem.

How I propose to resolve it: The best option that I can think of was to create another territory which will serves as a commanding ship for the bombarding battleships. All active battleships will border the commanding ship. The commanding ship can bombard the active ships.

How it fits in the history: The French and British suffered some command problems and disjointedness. Rather than the commanding ship attacking its own ships, this will act more like a commanding officer relieving a ship captain from his post.

As Cairns pointed out, the Turks didn't have the power to fire back at the Allied ships and for that reason such an option will not be considered.

I'll have an image illustrating my thoughts soon.

I think the BB's are going to be a key point of debate in terms of gameplay. I'm not sure that I like the solution for bombarding all of the battleships, IHelix, but I'll reserve judgement until I see the specfics. In any case, the 2-troop decay is a pretty radical feature for territories that can be assigned randomly, if I'm reading the map correctly. Some poor schmuck could end up with 3 or 4 BB's and lose most of his starting troops in a round or two.

I'm not necessarily against the 2-troop decay or the 'command ship' idea, but I get a sense that the battleships are the most imbalanced feature right now in terms of gameplay.

Oh yes, forgot to mention, 'BS' isn't the conventional abbreviation for battleship. 'BB' (don't ask me why) is used in all of the literature I've read. Although, really, even HMS would work I think. BS... well, it seems a little immature but I giggle when I read it.

ON the original version, each one of those Battleships was to be assigned as a starting position for each player...up to 8 of course. I hope IH sticks with this.

cairnswk wrote:ON the original version, each one of those Battleships was to be assigned as a starting position for each player...up to 8 of course. I hope IH sticks with this.

Correct, I will be sticking with that. I should have mentioned it before.

So... no territory can assault the battleships? So if you lose your battleship there's no way to get it back?

Basically, yeah.

But since the victory condition is taking the land territories, losing you're battleship won't lose you the game. I mean, the Turks didn't have squat for navy at the time and they won at Gallipoli, so it seems realistic to me.

Hmm, yeah, it might be an interesting twist.

The instructions about the forts could be worder a bit better, it seems a bit ambiguous to me. I had to think for a while before I figured it out...

Also, where exactly is the left border of the Dardanelles sea range, ie. can F5 bombard L5, L4, L3? L2 even?

You'd be looking for the light blue border which is hidden between the various mines and ships... I've got to find a way to clear that bit out as well and clarify the instructions.

me wrote:the left border

Or do you seriously suggest those forts can bombard all the ships, up to the very northern edge of the map?

The border between Dardanelles & Narrows is clear...

natty_dread wrote:

me wrote:the left border

Or do you seriously suggest those forts can bombard all the ships, up to the very northern edge of the map?

The border between Dardanelles & Narrows is clear...

I really need to sit down and give this map some tender love and care. It was kind of a rush job given that it was a contest... I need a totally overhauled version.

But yeah, the narrowest point between the two land sections is where the border should be.

Alright, updated version with a more complete legend and numbers indicating how the first round of the game should start.

Anything further happening here....i like the escarpments around YXWV beaches.

Well, i'm kind of waiting for some sort of input. I was talking with Evil D about the map actually and I ought to bring it up with him again.

Glad you like the cliffs, I plan on doing that around the rest of the map (as opposed to those attractive brown blobs).

The two things I don't have good feeling about, gameplay-wise, on this map:

1) The closed-circuit BBs... I know, they never seem to sit right with me, and honestly as it stands right now they're better than they were at -2 per round- the Admiral is an improvement I think. Still, I cannot imagine a more joyless experience than trying to attain the nearly-hopeless victory objective in order to get rid of some private who decided that
taking over the BBs would be cool. Is there no way to connect the BBs to the rest of the map, or to simulate their bombardment without having them at all?
Along those last lines, what about a simple decay for the bombardment areas, like on the beaches? And then axe the BBs altogether, since they seem pretty removed from the battle anyway?

2) I'm a bit puzzled by the bombardment instruction for the beaches... they can bombard any landing craft and assault adjacent ones, perhaps? Hmmm, that can't be right. Anyway, I need some clarity there.

I especially love how the land all autodeploys +1. This map has good, solid gameplay elements that come together very well thematically. There's probably some balancing factors that need to be looked at... but I must hie myself to bed.

1) The decay is not a bad idea... the key thing about it that worries me is that then the bombardment becomes uniform rather than relevant to the actual game. I'll give it some thought as I'm tussling with the idea of perhaps having something bombard the ships.

2) I'm a bit unsure where you read that they assault adjacent ones. As I read the map: "Beaches are marked by sand, lose one man per round, can bombard landing craft."

MarshalNey wrote:2) I'm a bit puzzled by the bombardment instruction for the beaches... they can bombard any landing craft and assault adjacent ones, perhaps? Hmmm, that can't be right. Anyway, I need some clarity there.

Industrial Helix wrote:2) I'm a bit unsure where you read that they assault adjacent ones. As I read the map: "Beaches are marked by sand, lose one man per round, can bombard landing craft."

Heh, I didn't read it, I was re-typing in mid-thought at 2AM...

Anyway, yeah, those are the instructions but they surely aren't complete. I mean, can beach Y bombard MS5 in the Dardenelles... and if so, why? Furthermore, if the landing craft can assault the beaches but not vice-versa, then an arrow I think is called for to indicate one-way attack.

Good point, I'll change it to read "can bombard adjacent landing craft"

And arrows would be better too, i think.

Rmmmmm.... haven't seen any movement on this for a while. Is this map still in progress?

For my part, here's how I view this puppy:

Perks

The Theme. It's a generally forgotten war in a generally forgotten theater where hudreds of thousands of soldiers fought in a failed amphibious invasion. It was a defining moment for the ANZAC forces, who gained a reputation for dogged resistance and aggression. Sooo, a plus in the uniqueness department and a plus in the educational department and a bonus for including both land and sea forces.

Mixed Gameplay. Is this a conquest map? Not really... but it's got too many neutrals to be a 'normal' map either. It's got lots of low-level autodeploys as well, and no continent bonuses, which also makes the case for a conquest-type map. Finally, there are killer neutrals and bombardments, so there's a whole lot of variety and options. If done right, the gameplay could give this map a very broad appeal.

Concerns

The BB Merry-go-round. I mentioned it earlier, so I won't repeat myself.

The Mines & the Drop. I'm worried about players getting put into tiresome starting positions, for instance at the back of the "mine train" is a pretty crappy place to be as compared to the front. Also, getting a perponderance of land areas as opposed to the landing craft could be frustrating.

Clarity on the Landing Craft. Also already mentioned.