England Map [Quenched]

[MrBenn]

Map Title: England
Mapmaker: MrBenn
Territory Count: 43
Bonuses: 9ish regions
Gameplay Features: Open map with many 'create your own' bonuses.

There are maps of the British Isles, Scotland and Ireland already in play. Wales is in development (Final Forge), and I've finally got around to making a start on the England map which will complete the set.

Foundry Stamps


Version 23a - 3rd October 2009

XML: http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/1/9/2259283/England-04.xml
Small: http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England23aS.jpg
Large: http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England23.jpg

XML Update - 25 Sept 2009
http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/1/9/2259283/England-03.xml

I can't remember what happened with the "no territory bonus" idea in the end - I think I decided to leave it out while debating whether or not the gameplay would work.... I'm no longer sure whether it would be TOO confusing or not

Here's the amendments I've made in this XML:
1. Rename the abbreviated territories
2. Add in the starting neutral in Durham
3. Remember what was eventually decided about starting positions

XML Update - 6th Sept 2009
http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/1/9/2259283/England-02.xml

I've knocked up some XML - the only thing I have some reservations about is the naming of the abbreviated territories within the XML...

Staffordshire (Staffs)
Worcestershire (Worcs)
Derbyshire (Derby)
Nottinghamshire (Notts)
Northamptonshire (Northants)
Bedfordshire (Beds)
Huntingdonshire (Hunts)
Cambridgeshire (Cambs)
Hertfordshire (Herts)
Oxfordshire (Oxford)
Buckinghamshire (Bucks)
Gloucestershire (Gloucs)
Currently I've labelled them as shown in that list, but I'm not convinced by it... Some other options I'm considering are:

1. Gloucestershire - Gloucs
2. Gloucs / Gloucestershire
3. Gloucs - Gloucestershire
4. Gloucs (Gloucestershire)

Any thoughts/suggestions?

Version 23 - 1st Sept 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England23.jpg
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England23S.jpg

I've been fiddling around with the "white lines" in the background (it's actually the strategic roads network), and brough some more consistency between the appearance of them.

I should probably get around to doing the XML soon

Version 22 - 27th August 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England22.jpg
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England22S.jpg

At long last I've got around to publishing an update...

I can;t really remember all the things I've done - most of them are silly little tweaks that you probably wouldn't notice unless I pointed them out in any case

The most notable thing I've done is to change the font on the small map to make it easier to read (although it's a very similar typeface to the one I was using in any case) and less blurry.

The third lion will stay slightly smaller than the other two (only on the small map), because it looks stupid if I shrink the others down to be the same size - and if I make the smallest lion any bigger, then he (his name is Dexter) will overlap the land.

Version 20 - 16th July 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England20S.jpg
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England20.jpg

I've smoothened out the pixellated border in the sea, and have made some other minor tweaks... Including a subtle change to the build-your-own-bonuses (for 10/11/13/15 terrs etc) which shouldn't have any effect on the gameplay issues discussed ad nauseum over recent weeks

The most noticeable thing I've done is to get a working copy of the small map together

Version 19 - 30th June 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England19.jpg

I was on the verge of throwing in the towel when I had a revelation....

I'll stick with 3 coded starting positions (with Durham as an underlying neutral), but will reduce the number of territories in each. This has the effect of increasing the number of neutral armies on the map; and decreasing the odds of picking up bonuses on the drop. in 2/3 player games. 4p+ games are left unchanged:


In 4p games, the odds for the Midlands are 5.28% for +2, trace% for +4; In the South the odds are 2.33% for +2, trace% for +4. There is 1.05% chance of getting Yorkshire, and less than 1% for any of the other discrete bonus areas. For >4 player games, the odds are significantly lower, and in 7/8 player games a physical impossibility.



1v1 Games

With the three starting positions in a 1v1, each player would be given one of the red/green/blue sets of 9 territories. There are 16 territories still in the pot, to which the unused position would be added. This means that there will be 25 territories (24 if Durham reverts to neutral) to be handed out at random. This means that each player will receive 8 additional territories into their hand.

The Midlands
Each player will have 3 Midlands terrs, with 12 left in the pot. The odds of dropping an additional 4 or more terrs for +2. is now 66.66% (reduced from 95%). The odds of dropping an additional 7 terrs for +4 is now 1.36% (reduced from 4.7%).

The South
It's a similar picture in the South, with each player having 3, and 10 left in the pot. The odds of dropping an additional 4 or more for +2 is now 43.89% (reduced from 70.6%), and 0.2% of dropping an additional 7 terrs for +4.

Both
If you drop 4 Midlands terrs for +2, then the 4 remaining terrs you get given must all be in the South. My brain is too tired to work out whether the odds of this occurring are 4.33% or 2.89% (=66.66% x 4.33%); well below the arbitrary 10% threshold.
I'll reiterate what I said earlier; that if one player has a "good" Midlands drop, then the other player is more likely to have a "good" Southern drop. The idea of regional capitals is intriguing, but I'd rather not overcomplicate things any more
Without compromising the direction I've taken thus far, the setup below offers the most balanced start I believe I can achieve for 1v1 games (which will always be biased towards the first player in any case).

Version 18 - 10th June 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England18.jpg

Does this make the legend clearer?

Version 17 - 26th May 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England17.jpg

If I were to code the whole map into 3-player starts, then In 3p games, no-one would get any bonus to start and Middlesex would start neutral (through virtue of being unhandoutable rather than coded neutral). I could code Durham as an underlying neutral for 4p+ games, and 2p games if the blue set doesn't get dished out.

In 4p games, the odds for the Midlands are 5.28% for +2, trace% for +4; In the South the odds are 2.33% for +2, trace% for +4. There is 1.05% chance of getting Yorkshire, and less than 1% for any of the other discrete bonus areas. For >4 player games, the odds are significantly lower, and in 7/8 player games a physical impossibility.

This leaves the 'problem' of 1v1 games, which are well-documented to be drop/dice/1st-turn dependent in any case.

1v1 Games

With the three starting positions in a 1v1, each player would be given one of the red/green/blue sets. This leaves 14 or 15 territories to hand out (depending on whether the blue ones are served up with the underlying neutral on Durham).

Each player will have 6 Midlands terrs, with 6 left in the pot. There is a 95% chance of any player getting one additional Midlands territory for a +2 bonus, but only 4.7% that they'll get 4 of them to get up to a +4 bonus. An even distribution would see each player getting 8 Midlands terrs - so to break the opponents +2 bonus, you'd have to kill 6 with a deployment of 5.... which I think is going to be the best balance without screwing up other game-types.

It's a similar picture in the South, with each player having 5, with 6 left in the pot. here there is a 70.6% chance of getting the +2 for any 7 bonus, and 0.2% chance of getting the +4 for any 10. If one player has a "good" Midlands drop, then the other player is more likely to have a "good" Southern drop (out of the 11 territories available in those areas) , and I'm satisfied that this is as balanced as we could possibly get, without changing the system to something completely different.

Version 16 - 25th May 2009

How about this for an update... I'm actually fairly happy with this, although have been debating whether the BYOB should start at 6 or 7 terrs (settled with 7 to appease the 1v1'ers). To mitigate this I've upped it to a +2, with +2 for each subsequent 3 (so 7 terrs=+2, 10 terrs=+4, 13 terrs=+6, 16 terrs=+8) I was umming and ahhing about whether to make it +1 per 2, but went with +2 for 3...

Version 15 - 11th May 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England15.jpg

• After some time away from this map, I've had a bit of a think about the bonus structure, and have another update...
• The neutral on Durham makes sense, and I'll have to decide whether to start it with 2 or 3 neutrals in due course.
• The Northern Bonuses and Thames Valley can be split up with the use of starting positions, which ensure that nobody will get those areas on the drop. I've represented these on the map by using coloured 88s, each representing a start-position group, for 4 players. I added in the NorthWest to the start positions too. For 5+ player games, I'm happy that the chance of dropping a Northern bonus are small enough (below .5%)
• After a lot of thought, I have decided that I'd like to go with something along the lines of +1 for every 4 in the Midlands and the South. Yes, the chance of dropping 4 Midlands terrs is high, but the fact that it is a single army bonus in some way mitigates against that. Furthermore, if somebody has a good Midlands drop, then the chances of their opponent having a good Southern drop is higher. In either case, we're talking about single army bonuses, and not the +7s (or more) that can decide Pearl Harbour. By bringing the two bonuses in line with each other, I think I can get back to something like the original vision I had for the gameplay.
• With this in mind, I have slightly updated some of the bonus values, and added the line about 'No territory' bonus.
• On the graphical side of things, I have added line breaks in the Blake quote so it reads more easily and got rid of a pale blob from the background (that was behind the text).
• I've adjusted the gradient and texture of the roadsign, and am more happy with it now.
• Right now, I want to focus on the gameplay side of things and get it sorted before I lose the will to live

Version 14 - 29th Apr 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England14.jpg

Right, I've had a bit of a think about the build-your own bonuses, and came to the conclusion that the probability of dropping them were too high. With that in mind, I'm planning to amend the build-your own for each region to require half (or slightly over half) of the territories in the area (ie North, Midlands, South).

I've updated tentative values, and while I think I'm settled on the number of terrs required, the actual bonus values for regions is still very much up for debate.

On the graphics side, I wasn't really happy with the roads in the background, so have tried a whiter version, but am still not convinced. I've experimented with a wooden sign, but it looked even worse than the green one, so the green one is back - it fits the green theme at any rate The sign has had a minor overhaul: I've moved the poles to go off the side of the map (which looks a million times better than having them disappear into Cornwall); and I've added a slight texture to the sign but am not that keen on it...

For Discussion Please: Bonus values

Version 13 - 18th Apr 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England13.jpg

• Some of the very pale blue/white bits of sea around the coast of Yorkshire were a bit pixelly, so I've smoothed that out a bit.
• The position of a couple of army numbers and region names have been moved slightly (North East and South West).
• In order to help bring the roadsign-themed legend into play, the main road network of the country has been added to the background of the map.... I'm not too sure if it adds a bit too much detail or not, but it only took about an hour(!)

Points for debate/discussion:

• The bonus structure... I'm still flexible on the bonuses... how about these as alternative suggestions: North +2 for 4(of 9); South +3 for 5(of 15); Midlands +5 for 7 (of 19).... the bonuses for actual regions would then be adjusted so that they remained more or less as I suggested before... Any/all thought appreciated...
• 'Build your own' - currently I've written 'Any x terrs'.... although in myu head I've got 'Every x terrs'. I've just realised that the 'No territory bonus' text has been dropped since I've rejigged the legend. Please bear this in mind when thinking about the gameplay...
• Isle of Wight - does it really need an obvious connection to Hampshire, or is it fine as it is?

Version 12 - 18th Apr 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England12.jpg

I have changed the gameplay a bit, giving each region a specified bonus, in addition to freer 'build-your-own' bonuses. The way I have them at the moment is so that the North (which looks like a better start) doesn't yield such a large bonus, while the South and Midlands are slightly richer.

The North East is only 2 terrs, so you wouldn't get the +1 for 3, but you would get +1 for the region. Yorkshire is 3 terrs, so you would get +1 for that, and +1 for the region. The 'actual' bonus table is as follows, which takes into account the build-your-own's too:

NorthEast 1
NorthWest 3
Yorkshire 2
West Midlands 5
East Midlands 6
East Anglia 7
Thames Valley 5
SouthWest 3
SouthEast 4

Version 11 - 30th Mar 2009
Small Map
Large Map

It is with great pleasure that I introduce you to the little brother of the big map, as I have finally got around to making a small version!
The small has a slightly different aspect, as I've topped-and-tailed the map to assist legibility. I thought I was going to struggle to fit army numbers in, but it seems to have been relatively simple once I turned off the army shadows
There are a couple of minor changes to both versions, including a slight reduction in the opacity of the region names - if I go any lower some areas become difficult to read.

Version 10 - 25th Mar 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England10.jpg

• To satisfy the pedants, Yorkshire has been divided into the three Ridings.
• I have redrawn the Sussex/Surrey/Kent border to clarify the connections there.
• The region names have been shifted slightly, and West Midlands has been rotated to give a better fit. The text colour has been toned down and adjusted so that it blends into each region a little more

Version 9 - 12th Mar 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England09.jpg

London has gone, primarily because it didn't really work as an inset or a small dot. I'll stick with the "historic counties" theme
Huntingdonshire has emerged from the shadow of Cambridgeshire
I've jiggled around with territory names, placements, and added some nice army shadows and numbers.
I think I'm settled with the three lions now - I'm also planning to keep the 'Green and Pleasant Land' subtitle. The eagle-eyed may notice the opening lines of Land of Hope and Glory skirting along the western edge of the map

Version 8 -
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England08.jpg

Version 7b - 25th Feb 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England07b.jpg

I've moved the label for Wales, and have replaced the single lion rampant with three lions passant...

Version 7a - 20th Feb 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England07a.jpg

It seems like the public have spoken... I vaguely imagined that people would like to see a Northern City on the map, but I was proved very wrong... (if only it were this easy to obliterate undesired places in real life)... Whatchester?

Version 7 - 20th Feb 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England07.jpg

• East & West Sussex will be staying as they are - primarily because this is the area of the country I call home!
• With regards to the Kent/Sussex/Surrey "4-way" border... It's not my intention to allow West Sussex/Kent or East Sussex/Surrey to border. This seems fairly logical to me, but I'm not sure if it could be represented in any way, or whether I should tweak the borders a bit (which I don;t really want to do).
• Gloucestershire... Like yeti, I think Gloucs looks and feels wrong in the West Midlands... I moved it there from its native South-West to prevent the SouthWest being a more favourable start, and harder to hold... any ideas?
• North East - I'm reluctant to add neutral starts to the map... Yes, somebody might drop the pair, but it's only +2... any thoughts?
• Yorkshire... 1 vote to merge West & South Yorkshire to create the Three Ridings.... 1 vote to keep them how they are... Personally I think it's good how it is
• London... London... I've had an idea about London - I've added it as an inset in this update... it looked a bit strange on its own, so I added Manchester too... I'm imagining that each will start with neutrals on, and will have a +1 autodeploy or something

Version 6 - 11th Feb 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England06.jpg

I've been in a mappy mood this evening, and have put together another update...
I've been playing around with some of the texture layers, and changed bits of the sea, and made it a bit bluer. The Isle of Wight has found a home, and the map is now sprinkled with army numbers. I tried a couple of circles, but think they're going to create more clutter than they're worth. I still need to sort out the positions of the names and numbers, but that isn't much of a priority right now... I'd much rather get the gameplay more-or-less worked out - I think it's fairly balanced... The North East is the smallest and easiest to hold bonus, but I don't think it's overpowered. The South West is easier to hold than some other areas, but this is partly because it's tucked away in the corner. I'm reluctant to add any paths across the water, because I think they'd just be a bit contrived. The two easier bonuses are at opposite ends of them map, so I'm not too worried about unbalancing things.

Now I've added the Isle of Wight, does it need an attack line to connect it to Hampshire, or is it obvious that's where the two bits of land connect?

Version 5
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England05.jpg

Version 4 - 5th Feb 2009
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England04.jpg

I like the idea of a very open 'make your own bonuses' map... I also like the minimalist legend, and (relatively) simple bonus rule...

Version 3
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England03.jpg

Version 2 - 31st Oct 2008
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England02.jpg

From the few comments so far, it looks like traditional gameplay will be staying
I've given my rough draft a bit of a facelift, and want to guide discussion towards gameplay...

Version 1
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj320/bpawley/england/England01.jpg

My first draft is pretty rough and ready - I'm more interested in gameplay discussion at the moment. I think the main problem is going to be the connectedness of everything, especailly as there are not very many natural features that could be used to create impassable borders in the necessary places.

I have opted for traditional counties as opposed to current administrative ones... so there is no Greater Manchester / West Midlands. Even London isn't really on the map

The numbers on the legend purely relate to the number of territories in each area, and do not reflect tentative bonuses.

My first topic of discussion is the region groupings.

[MrBenn]

There are maps of the British Isles, Scotland and Ireland already in play. Wales is in development, and I've finally got around to making a start on the England map which will complete the set.

My first draft is pretty rough and ready - I'm more interested in gameplay discussion at the moment. I think the main problem is going to be the connectedness of everything, especailly as there are not very many natural features that could be used to create impassable borders in the necessary places.

I have opted for traditional counties as opposed to current administrative ones... so there is no Greater Manchester / West Midlands. Even London isn't really on the map

Click image to enlarge.

The numbers on the legend purely relate to the number of territories in each area, and do not reflect tentative bonuses.

My first topic of discussion is the region groupings.

[InsomniaRed]

First! haha I'm excited to watch this one. It looks like it'll be great!

[samuelc812]

Looks Good I don't see the bonus with Norfolk and Suffolk listed

[MrBenn]

Looks Good I don't see the bonus with Norfolk and Suffolk listed

Good catch... That's the excitingly named "East of England"... with 6 territories. I'll add it to the next update.

[Incandenza]

I understand the impetus behind the map, but personally this seems like an extraordinarily well-represented part of the world in CC maps. Now, if you were to pick up Hastings again, that would be different, but this seems like it would be a pretty ho-hum addition to the canon: classic gameplay, 42ish terits, ultra-familiar geography... sorry, MrB, but it's kinda meh.

[mibi]

Hasn't this been done about 5 times already?

[edbeard]

I understand the impetus behind the map, but personally this seems like an extraordinarily well-represented part of the world in CC maps. Now, if you were to pick up Hastings again, that would be different, but this seems like it would be a pretty ho-hum addition to the canon: classic gameplay, 42ish terits, ultra-familiar geography... sorry, MrB, but it's kinda meh.

I disagree. Classic-style gameplay is what this site is really all about. Yes we've had some people with great imagination bring us different styles but new classic-style maps will always have a place here. If he were making another Europe map, I'd be right there with you. But, we don't have an England map. It'd be like making a Pennsylvania map. We've got tons of maps about the USA or areas of the USA but no actual Pennsylvania map.

[Incandenza]

I disagree. Classic-style gameplay is what this site is really all about. Yes we've had some people with great imagination bring us different styles but new classic-style maps will always have a place here. If he were making another Europe map, I'd be right there with you. But, we don't have an England map. It'd be like making a Pennsylvania map. We've got tons of maps about the USA or areas of the USA but no actual Pennsylvania map.

Sure, classic-style gameplay is important, but that's not exactly an unfilled niche on the site. Roughly a third of all the maps here have pure classic gameplay and are within a half-dozen terits of the magic 42. That number grows to well over half when you include smaller and larger maps, or maps that have a small tweak (like tamriel, say, or space). I know I'm not alone in wanting more variety in my gameplay experience. I'm not sure I'd still be here were it not for waterloo and arms race.

I can see an argument for an England map (certainly there'd be more call for that than a speculative Pennsylvania map), especially given the extant Scotland and Ireland map and MrB's in-progress Wales map. A few people have already posted here in support of it, and should MrB continue I wish him good fortune. I just feel that he's walking down an exceedingly well-trod path, in both theme and gameplay.

[MrBenn]

The main reason I've started (and intend to finish) this England map, is to complete the 'Home Nations' set. There's been plenty of discussion about the number of European maps (ie places in Europe) - but the same could be said about the number of US maps.

I have no preconceptions about how this map will turn out in terms of gameplay... If you wanted to move away from 'classic' gameplay, make a suggestion about what you might do differently... One idea floating in my head is to add some motorways...

I'm not sure if these would work quite the same way as the subway in NYC, but I'm open to it... then again, people might prefer to stick to what they know...

Let's discuss gameplay, and any modifications to regions, or gimmicks...

[InsomniaRed]

Just making sure but Gloucestershire borders Berkshire, correct? I had to squint and I just want to be sure.

[cena-rules]

*hugs benn*


LOVE YOU MAN

[lozzini]

I think it should have 'classic' style gameplay - as we hav lost classic and because there isnt allready an england map - USA had a classic USA map - and is now branching out to other styles

Looks Good I don't see the bonus with Norfolk and Suffolk listed

Good catch... That's the excitingly named "East of England"... with 6 territories. I'll add it to the next update.

if you moved beds and herts into east midlands and thames valley respectively - you would then have east anglia as your missing bonus

[drake_259]

*hugs benn*


LOVE YOU MAN

[ZeakCytho]

I think classic gameplay is the best style for a map like this.

[MrBenn]

From the few comments so far, it looks like traditional gameplay will be staying
I've given my rough draft a bit of a facelift, and want to guide discussion towards gameplay...

[MrBenn]

I've just run the numbers through one of the bonus spreadsheets and come up with the following:

NorthEast 2
NorthWest 4
Yorkshire 4
West Midlands 5
East Midlands 6
East Anglia 5
Thames Valley 5
SouthWest 4
SouthEast 3

The numbers have come up on the high side, as the map is currently incredibly open....

[edbeard]

I'd prefer if some real life impassables were found and utilized. way way too open I think

[MrBenn]

Hmm... Real-life impassables are slightly tricky, as there aren't a lot of mountains in the right places. Rivers might be more feasable, but I've worked out a solution that we can use to put borders wherever we like...

The red lines are tentative borders that I have semi-randomly placed.



I'm open to suggestions - I've uploaded a copy of the map without any red lines for people to show examples, if they so desire.

[yeti_c]

Really like the look of this map Benn...

Small nitpick with the name (I know it's early for that but I thought I'd do it anyway) you're mixing some of your namings up...

Like "Gloucester" "Warwick" vs "Worcs" "Staffs"

The latter 2 imply they are shortened from "shire" - whereas the former aren't (when in fact they are).

Gameplay?

What about the Rivers - there are some pretty hefty rivers in England that could make impassibles (with bridges in vital places)

Although I see the main problem with that - is that (for instance) the thames will bisect the Thames Valley continent. (Although as that's right in the middle it'll be a bitch to hold anyway

C.

[Balsiefen]

I think for impassables, what you have now is probably the best bet, Most major rivers would not only go through the middle of continents, but the middle of counties.

[MrBenn]

Any thoughts on the tentative connections?

[The Neon Peon]

Northeast bonus should be 1 instead of 2. A bonus of 2 for 2 territories on the very edge of the map seems to much.

[MrBenn]

I've played around with rivers, but they're just not in the right places...

Click image to enlarge.

Looks like it'll be maunally working out where the best connections will be. Any advice/thoughts?

[Try Again]

you could change it to make it possible