TRAFALGAR [12.4.2012] QUENCHED (V65)

[waseemalim]

This is pathetic. The map seemed fine as it is and cairns is right to get pissed off by all the criticisms. There may be 1 or 2 confusion about cannons but those shouldve been reasonably easy to fix.

[the.killing.44]

i am not looking for critical opinion in any of my maps.

Wait, what? Very poor choice of words, if that's what it comes down to …

.44

[lt_oddball]

Woahh a crisis here...
(Effectively I agree with the criticism on the very unnecessary complex map..the original map was a lot better).

Maybe time to put my suggestion of a while ago under the attention:

I am too late to make a concept gameplay comment, but maybe it is worthwhile for a next seabattle map;

In order to simulate the movement of vessels and moreso the movement choice a commander of a vessel has to make and be stuck(!) with that movement choice for the next hour, why not had the map made like this:

players start at a starting location of one big ship (up to 4 brits, up to 4 spanish/french). On the map a variety of the other ships (frigates etc) are positioned in the field.
From each starting ship location there are 3 (or 4 or 5) lines emanating with sequential one direction attack "territories" each line represents one certain sail manouevre. By chosing one direction you pretty much have chosen a certain attack (or defense) sailing strategy.
These lines can and will cross eachother so that at a certain moment one can "jump" to someone other's line (like circus maximus map).
Sometimes a territory can also allow a bombardment at other lines over a certain distance.
Especially in a fog map it will be realistic in that at each crossroads you'd have to decide to stay (and build up) or continue-but in which direction.

To prevent a player to begin with attacking each of his choice saillines and keep all his options open for a long time , you can think of disheartening measures;
like
a) starting position will automatically lose -2 (or -4 whatever) troops per turn, so that after turn 3 all starting ship locations have turned to neutral.
or b) bonusses can only be acquired if one controls a minimum of "a" territories of one line and not controlling the first territory of the other lines.

What do you think ?

[cairnswk]

If a new size is available via a new game play screen, i might consider finishing this.
For this battle, a smaller version is not feasible, but the larger size is.
Several reasons were prominent for this being trashed...among them my inadequacies...but also the confusion of the battle and not enough "eye room".
A new size would assist to alleviate this issue.

Click image to enlarge.

[Industrial Helix]

The only thing I don't understand is how the bombardments work because I can hardly find a ship with those colored cannons.

[cairnswk]

The only thing I don't understand is how the bombardments work because I can hardly find a ship with those colored cannons.

IH, the cannon are not on there yet, sorry. I ran out of time yesterday to finish that, but thought i'd put up what i had done.
My main concern was the size.

[MrBenn]

I'm hoping that we'll be able to allow for bigger large maps, but as far as I am aware, small map sizes will remain unchanged until there is a change to the UI.

[cairnswk]

I'm hoping that we'll be able to allow for bigger large maps, but as far as I am aware, small map sizes will remain unchanged until there is a change to the UI.

Thanks MrBenn.
Oh well. I'll still work on this to get it completed, but i think as has been pointed out, it is simply too confusing in its small version.

[cairnswk]

The only thing I don't understand is how the bombardments work because I can hardly find a ship with those colored cannons.

IH. map now adorned with cannon and cannon-fire

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

I'm hoping that we'll be able to allow for bigger large maps, but as far as I am aware, small map sizes will remain unchanged until there is a change to the UI.

If the small map size limit stays the same, then what good does it even do to increase the large map size limit? You'll still have to do a small version, and your large version will still be constrained by what you can fit in the small...

[cairnswk]

I'm hoping that we'll be able to allow for bigger large maps, but as far as I am aware, small map sizes will remain unchanged until there is a change to the UI.

MrBenn.
I am away from uni for 6 weeks.
Is there any movement on a new map size that might allow this trafalgar map to be completed?

[Victor Sullivan]

I dare say this is entirely possible now... It would sure be nice to see this map out of the bin!

-Sully

[natty dread]

MrBenn.
I am away from uni for 6 weeks.
Is there any movement on a new map size that might allow this trafalgar map to be completed?

Cairns, where have you been? We have supersize maps now - only one has so far been completed, but they are completely allowed now.

[thenobodies80]

Is there any movement on a new map size that might allow this trafalgar map to be completed?

Yeah, you can take the space you need to develope this map. Feel free to send me a PM if you need/want discuss more details.

viewtopic.php?f=127&t=136363#p2978848

• Standard maximum sizes: 630x600 pixels for a small map and 840x800 pixels for a large map.
• SuperSize limits: 1000x800 pixels for a small map, and 1400x1200 pixels for a large map

Nobodies

[cairnswk]

Possible sizes:
Small 900w x 650h

Click image to enlarge.

Large 1023w x 739h

Click image to enlarge.

[cairnswk]

The only thing I don't understand is how the bombardments work because I can hardly find a ship with those colored cannons.

IH, are the cannon clearer now for you with the new V45s?

[thenobodies80]

[Moved] back into the foundry process.

Now, you should change your signature....Mr.Map!

Welcome back.

[cairnswk]

[Moved] back into the foundry process.

Now, you should change your signature....Mr.Map!

Welcome back.

Done!
(I'd actually changed it before you posted this, but the caching was not working for some reason, so i changed the file name and now it's good).

[DiM]

at a first glance i find it kinda difficult to spot all the connections that exist on the map.

i have 2 beefs:

1. swiftsure and bahama have colossus between them and if i'm reading the legend corectly then they can both attack collossus and be attacked from it but they can't attack eachother (since they aren't opposing side ships locked together). the problem is that when i first look at them i see swiftsure touching bahama and my instinct tells me they are connected. if you could rearrange them a bit it would be great.
2. bombardments aren't very clear. i mean some are in plain sight and obvious (ie achille and montanes) but others are a bit problematic. for example berwick fires in the direction of defence but defence is tied up with sj and one might think berwick can also bombard sj.



...or perhaps i'm just to rusty and lost my touch at quickly spotting connections. i mean it's been a long time since i actually played a game

[cairnswk]

Thanks Dim for dropping in....

at a first glance i find it kinda difficult to spot all the connections that exist on the map.

i have 2 beefs:

1. swiftsure and bahama have colossus between them and if i'm reading the legend corectly then they can both attack collossus and be attacked from it but they can't attack eachother (since they aren't opposing side ships locked together). the problem is that when i first look at them i see swiftsure touching bahama and my instinct tells me they are connected. if you could rearrange them a bit it would be great.

OK. i see where you are coming from...those three are all meant to lock together and border each other. I will change the legend to..."Same Side ships (French & Spanish) can assault each other locked together or via row boats"

2. bombardments aren't very clear. i mean some are in plain sight and obvious (ie achille and montanes) but others are a bit problematic. for example berwick fires in the direction of defence but defence is tied up with sj and one might think berwick can also bombard sj.

OK i see what you're saying, but i have to ask why would you bombard a ship that was on your side? i.e. (F) Berwick bombard (S) San Ildefonso.

I had thought about changing the lines for attack to plain lines, and then placing dotted lines between the bombardments, but this only adds more lines to possibly muddle players even more and make the map busier.

...or perhaps i'm just to rusty and lost my touch at quickly spotting connections. i mean it's been a long time since i actually played a game

no, i think everyone will have some issues with this one unless a suitable alternative can be found. Remember when i first proposed line attacks for P.H.
Unfortunately this map suffers from all the ships being intermingled in combat...dotted lines has so far been the best way to indicate connections.
The little puffs of cannon fire were placed to solve the issue of which ship has cannon firing...i would draw an imaginery straight line of fire in my mind to determine if one ship can bombard another.
Let me know if this clears things up any for you, Dim, or if you have any other suggestions.

[DiM]

maybe you could add some arrows for bombardments?
double headed arrows like this one: http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/74400/74442/74442_147_M6-5_s_mth.gif
but make them slightly transparent like watermarks. this way they won't be to intrusive and clutter the map.
i don't know, it might work. maybe it's worth doing one arrow just to see what it might look like.

[cairnswk]

maybe you could add some arrows for bombardments?
double headed arrows like this one: http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/74400/74442/74442_147_M6-5_s_mth.gif
but make them slightly transparent like watermarks. this way they won't be to intrusive and clutter the map.
i don't know, it might work. maybe it's worth doing one arrow just to see what it might look like.

that would work for long range bombardment, but between Prince and Principe De Asturias....mmmm, too close at quarter i think, but i'll give it go and put something up shortly.

[DiM]

maybe you could add some arrows for bombardments?
double headed arrows like this one: http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/74400/74442/74442_147_M6-5_s_mth.gif
but make them slightly transparent like watermarks. this way they won't be to intrusive and clutter the map.
i don't know, it might work. maybe it's worth doing one arrow just to see what it might look like.

that would work for long range bombardment, but between Prince and Principe De Asturias....mmmm, too close at quarter i think, but i'll give it go and put something up shortly.

to solve the issue of really close ships simply add curvature to the arrow. make it like a parabola instead of a straight arrow. with a slight curve for longer distances and a more visible one for the really close distances.

[cairnswk]

maybe you could add some arrows for bombardments?
double headed arrows like this one: http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/74400/74442/74442_147_M6-5_s_mth.gif
but make them slightly transparent like watermarks. this way they won't be to intrusive and clutter the map.
i don't know, it might work. maybe it's worth doing one arrow just to see what it might look like.

that would work for long range bombardment, but between Prince and Principe De Asturias....mmmm, too close at quarter i think, but i'll give it go and put something up shortly.

to solve the issue of really close ships simply add curvature to the arrow. make it like a parabola instead of a straight arrow. with a slight curve for longer distances and a more visible one for the really close distances.

OK, here is the arrows between bombarding ships...it doesn't look too bad, perhaps not as intruding as i thought it would.
I've also changed the font in the legend so that it more legible, and also changed some of the instructions for better flow and spacing.


Small

Click image to enlarge.

Large

Click image to enlarge.

[DiM]

great job. they are just the right opacity. not too intrusive but nut too faded either. perfect.
just a couple of minor tweaks:
1. some of the arrows are pixelated and some aren't. for example berwick <-> defence is pixelated while prince<->sjn is perfect.
2. also some arrows are turquoise instead of grey (ie mars<->fougueux or africa <-> neptuno)


other than that i think the arrows are great and if this turns out to be the general consensus then they should definitely stay.


PS: i was just thinking that this map really cries out cairnswk. you do have a style of your own and you've managed to keep it after all these years. well done mate.