War of the Triple Alliance

by **Shrinky** on Sat Jul 12, 2008 12:44 pm

in the map legend, "disease" has been wrongly spelt as "desease"

by **gimil** on Sat Jul 12, 2008 1:33 pm

Here you go bud. Get out o' here!

by **t-o-m** on Sat Jul 12, 2008 1:36 pm

congratzz

by **oaktown** on Sun Jul 13, 2008 7:08 pm

t-o-m wrote:congratzz

thanks... happy to be here, as always.

The gameplay stamp for this map will be "licked" by iancanton.

by **oaktown** on Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:25 pm

Click image to enlarge.

Since nobody's talking I'm going to forge ahead. Added some elements - border, legend, coloreddots next to the region titles in the legend which will be replaced by something else that shows the color better and works with the map.

Somebody talk to me about the use of colors... I started with all greens in Brazil, but now I'm wondering if this is necessary, Maybe it'd be best to mix it up?

And am I just spinning my wheels on this one? Because I'm not hearing much, either positive or negative.

by **AndyDufresne** on Mon Jul 14, 2008 9:06 pm

I'm always a fan of Standard Maps, and this map is pretty standard I'd say. There was a topic in the Foundry Discussion, and I believe more talk in the Map Ideas, that users want more Standard Maps.

I say keep pushing on, but I say this as user who wants to play the map, it's not an order by the Foundry Foreman.

--Andy

by **whitestazn88** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:45 am

this looks good. never saw it before. I was looking through the whole thread, and was about to comment about how the disputed area had the same color as another continent, but you've changed it, and it looks good now.

can we get an indication on how that one water territ will be obtained? will it start neutral? and maybe we can get a bonus for holding it and some capitals?

ps. i really like the look of the map's background... really.... mappy? lol

by **fireedud** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:51 am

I don't think Gran Chico should have a bonus. It's disputed territory and this is in a war.

by **trapyoung** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:57 am

i disagree with the above poster, if its disputed it should be the most coveted territory on the board. i really like the map so far, lots of territories, lots of gaps and ways to maneuver about including the capitals... maybe include a bonus for holding all 4 capitals would be my only suggestion but im really looking forward to when this comes out, this looks awesome

by **ZeakCytho** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:24 am

Maybe I'm being dense, but is there a reason Rio de la Plata can attack/be attacked by the capitals?

by **InkL0sed** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:44 pm

ZeakCytho wrote:Maybe I'm being dense, but is there a reason Rio de la Plata can attack/be attacked by the capitals?

Yes, they're basically fighting over it...

by **oaktown** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:52 pm

InkL0sed wrote:
ZeakCytho wrote:Maybe I'm being dense, but is there a reason Rio de la Plata can attack/be attacked by the capitals?

Yes, they're basically fighting over it...

Right. And note that they are all port cities.

A bonus for holding the capitals is totally something I would do on a map (see Scotland) but in this case I'm trying to go classic gameplay.

Gran Chaco began without a bonus, but when I added a third territory it seemed a waste of space - makes for an awful place to start, and why engage there? I think the +1 is appropriate - less than Uruguay, whic is the same size and has the same number of borders.

by **pepperonibread** on Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:06 pm

It took me a long time to find the Rio de la Plata mentioned in the legend. Maybe it's just me, but could something be done to distinguish this from the other army circles (besides it being in the water)?
Anyway, I like the contour lines off the coast. They're... Indochina-ish. How'd you end up making them? I experimented with something similar awhile ago, I figured I could select the land then go Select > Modify > Expand. That worked for me, though I remember hearing that WM did it another way.

by **oaktown** on Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:43 pm

pepperonibread wrote:It took me a long time to find the Rio de la Plata mentioned in the legend. Maybe it's just me, but could something be done to distinguish this from the other army circles (besides it being in the water)?

I'll think about that... a boat maybe?

pepperonibread wrote:Anyway, I like the contour lines off the coast. They're... Indochina-ish. How'd you end up making them? I experimented with something similar awhile ago, I figured I could select the land then go Select > Modify > Expand. That worked for me, though I remember hearing that WM did it another way.

I copied the paths of the each coast and created a new path that would be the first line out on each side. I sized them up a little, and bumped them out from the coasts. Then I went in and flattened them slightly by bumping a few anchor points in or out and just deleting a lot of points - the west coast path is probably 50 anchor points, the last line probably less than 20. Once the first one was done I copied the new path and repeated the process for the second path, etc. The first lines on each side are in the same layer, but each set going out is a new layer; each layer out has a slightly lower opacity - i think they're like 45, 35, 25, 15 or so.

Don't know how wid did his - he probably did something much easier than I did, but too late. The flattening out of each line was easy but kinda tedious - next time I might just draw new ones.

by **ZeakCytho** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:15 am

InkL0sed wrote:
ZeakCytho wrote:Maybe I'm being dense, but is there a reason Rio de la Plata can attack/be attacked by the capitals?

Yes, they're basically fighting over it...

Oh. Does it say that somewhere?

Paraguay is typo'd in the legend.

Some thoughts on bonuses:
Goyaz is four territories with 3 borders for a +2. I think +3 might be more in order, considering Paraguay has the same number of territories and borders and has a +3. Or seal off one of the borders. If you extend the mountains from San Felis and Bahia Ocidental, the +2 for Goyaz is a bit more justified and I think Brasil Este can stay as a +4.

I think Brazil Sudeste should be a +5. 5 terrories, 5 borders. You need men on every single one - this will be hard to take and hold.

Argentine Republic could go up to +7, since it's almost impossible to hold. 11 territories, 3 borders. Maybe not, though, since it has so few borders.

Gran Chaco and Uruguay have the same number of territories and borders, so they should have the same bonus, no? I'd favor +1 over +2, personally.

Maybe give a bonus for holding all capitals + Rio de la Plata? That's 5 territories, 4 borders, so +3? Or +2, if you'd like another smaller bonus.

Graphically, some of the mountains look a bit off. Mostly when a border crosses them. Look at the northern border of Rio Xingu where the mountains go over it. I think the mountains should hide the border, no? The same thing happens by Cordillera Gera/Cuiaba.

by **Androidz** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 8:45 am

Maybe give a bonus for holding all capitals + Rio de la Plata? That's 5 territories, 4 borders, so +3? Or +2, if you'd like another smaller bonus

What about this?:

1 Capital = 0
2 Capitals = 1
3 Capitals = 3
4 Capitals = 5
All Capitals = 7

by **pamoa** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:17 pm

Again a very cool map by oaktown! =D>

I'll watch more closely later...

by **Hatchman** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:34 pm

Quite stunning Oaktown 8-)

by **MrBenn** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:27 pm

Androidz wrote:
Maybe give a bonus for holding all capitals + Rio de la Plata? That's 5 territories, 4 borders, so +3? Or +2, if you'd like another smaller bonus

What about this?:

1 Capital = 0
2 Capitals = 1
3 Capitals = 3
4 Capitals = 5
All Capitals = 7

I think Oak has already made it quite clear that he is going for classic gameplay, which means no capital bonusses ;-)

by **Androidz** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:32 pm

MrBenn wrote:
Androidz wrote:
Maybe give a bonus for holding all capitals + Rio de la Plata? That's 5 territories, 4 borders, so +3? Or +2, if you'd like another smaller bonus

What about this?:

1 Capital = 0
2 Capitals = 1
3 Capitals = 3
4 Capitals = 5
All Capitals = 7

I think Oak has already made it quite clear that he is going for classic gameplay, which means no capital bonusses

hmm to bad:D i personally think it will still look like classic, and since its so easy to border captialts to end continents. They should be worth something.

by **ZeakCytho** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:35 pm

MrBenn wrote:
Androidz wrote:
Maybe give a bonus for holding all capitals + Rio de la Plata? That's 5 territories, 4 borders, so +3? Or +2, if you'd like another smaller bonus

What about this?:

1 Capital = 0
2 Capitals = 1
3 Capitals = 3
4 Capitals = 5
All Capitals = 7

I think Oak has already made it quite clear that he is going for classic gameplay, which means no capital bonusses

But making a continent out of all the capitals and Rio de la Plata is not out of the question, is it? Because Rio de la Plata borders each capital, it's a contiguous continent with five territories and four borders. Hardly non-classic gameplay.

by **whitestazn88** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:05 pm

he said he didn't want captial bonuses... its been brought up and shut down before

by **Androidz** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:08 pm

whitestazn88 wrote:he said he didn't want captial bonuses... its been brought up and shut down before

Well it wouldent hurt voteing for it...i dont think capital bonuses will destroy the gameplay since its should be pretty hard to hold on. If you get the captials you should be awarded for your hard work if you actully maintain holding them..

by **oaktown** on Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:47 pm

Click image to enlarge.

No gameplay changes, but I'm open to further discussion about bonuses. I really don't want to give a Capitals bonus - a bunch of maps already do that, and I'd like to keep this as classic as possible. And I'm not too hung up on keeping the bonus formula entirely standard across this map as I'd like to give preference to the the key battle areas in this map, namely Paraguay. The Chaco area was little more than desert, and so historically it shouldn't have the value of Uruguay, even though it is of similar size.

As there has been some confusion around the role played by Rio de la Plata, I have both included a reference in the history passage and come up with a frigate of the era that represents on the map and in the legend.

As for the borders showing through the mountains - that was just me being careless with my layers. I did a quick fix in a few areas, hiding the problem rather than solving it. :oops:

by **iancanton** on Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:20 am

on reading the blurb for this map, my first impression is that the odds in this war were so ridiculous that one can't help but wonder at paraguay's optimism.

should there be a second double-headed arrow from igatim to corrientes, since this attack was what brought argentina into the war? to compensate for the extra border, an impassable river (rio bermejo or vermejo?) between corrientes and llanos de manso can be shown.

to focus the play more on the areas that saw some action during the conflict, i'd have been tempted to make the map, which looks great, classic-sized (42 to 44 territories) by losing brasil este continent (the only blue one in an otherwise-green brazil) - filling the space with illustrations of one or two of the personalities involved - and merging all of the northern matto grosso territories (a quiet area for gameplay), which i understand were largely undeveloped indian tribal areas, into one. presentationally, the brazilian continents can then be grouped together in the legend. however, u've already eliminated two brazilian continents, so i imagine u'll be loath remove brasil este too.

the ship stands out well enough against the water without being intrusive. stick with the classic-style bonuses for the time being and let's see how things develop.

ian.