 |
| |
|
|
Boco
|
 |
who was once King for a week.
Jan 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
This is a long post, but I could really use some advice.
As I develop El Aurens, v2, I wanted to get some ideas from the community on how to tackle some aspects of the scenario. El Aurens focuses on the campaigns in Egypt, Sudan, Arabia, Palestine, and Syria during WWI. It's a wargame simulation. I've tried hard to create the same historical restrictions and opportunities that faced the original commanders  , and yet make it fun, too. 
Here's where I could use some help.  Strategically, the Allies chose to slog it head-to-head with the Turks all the way from Suez to Aleppo. They chose this, despite having naval supremacy and an exposed Turkish seaward flank.  Why? There were several reasons. First and foremost, Gallipoli was an unmitigated strategic disaster. Everyone feared that a Levantine invasion would be a repeat.  Second, the French forbade the English from invading Syria.  True, DLG could have ignored their wishes, as he later did anyway, but there would have been repercussions elsewhere. Third, a Levantine invasion was logistically tricky. An invasion that failed to capture either Jaffa, Haifa, Beirut, Tripoli, or Alexandretta would face Gallipoli's fate.  Allied sealift was limited and vulnerable. All of these ports were mined (sparsely), and U-Boats were a constant threat.
So, how should I handle it in EA v2? In EA v1, I simply sealed off most of the coast with invulnerable mines, forcing the player to use the historical strategy — not fun for the player, but easy to design. 
For v2 I'd like to give the player more freedom (with consequences). I think I can limit the sealift by limiting the number of available troopships. Minefield values can be tweaked so that they're a nuisance rather than an impermeable barrier. They should cause the loss of a unit or two, but not more.
What about U-Boats? Should I use them only in a direct sense? That is, when minefields are destroyed and/or ports captured, U-Boats appear off the coast.
Or...should I also incorporate them in a strategic interdiction role as well?  Rope off the Levantine coast so that land units must travel via airport from Egypt to Cyprus before transports take them to the coast. This 'air' movement can be intercepted by civ2 fighter units (but the dialogs refer to U-Boats). IIRC, the interception rate is not huge, but you're going to lose units.  The problem lies in 'roping off' the Levantine coast. How do you allow the Allies to bombard the coast but not land troops and bypass the U-Boat interdiction.
Or is strategic interdiction no fun to face as a player? 
Finally, what should the repercussions be for ticking off the French?  Their direct contribution to the theater was tiny.
Any suggestions? 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mercator
|
 |
Sorekara no Nanimo
Jan 1970
time: 06:36
|
|
How about allowing the player to land on the coast, but make it really hard to advance away from the coast?
That would still make it possible for the player to go by sea. But you could make it more or less desirable.
 Say, how about placing a strip of impassible terrain units all along the coast a few tiles inland. Giving just enough space to attack the coastal cities, but not enough to advance further inland. Then set the home city of this impassible barrier to nearby inland cities. But, set the home city of the impassible barrier to the coastal cities around those critical cities you mentioned (Jaffa, Haifa, etc.).
This way you must conquer the area over land before it becomes fully accessible by sea. Landing troops will only start becoming useful after you've conquered the area inland. They'd only be helpful for reinforcements then.
The only exception will be the critical coastal cities. It will be possible to launch attacks around these cities. If you capture one of those you'd get a narrow corridor through the barrier. That makes the attack by sea still an option, but probably much harder to do.
Fine-tuning the barrier placement can help make certain approaches more desirable than others.
On the more technical side I just had a thought. What happens if you would give the barrier to an allied barbarian civ (e.g. to avoid zone of control), but still home them to the Turks (that is, have them homed to a city of a different civ)? This would require hex-editing though.
And another idea... Instead of an impassible barrier, perhaps you could give the coastal cities special immobile units with high-defense. But have those units homed to inland cities. Killing the high-defense units via a coastal approach should be doable but really hard.
The alternative, attacking by land, would mean the high-defense unit got disbanded earlier so it wouldn't be as hard to take the same city by land.
In any case, I know nothing about the historical situation and I haven't tested these idea either, but...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Boco
|
|
who was once King for a week.
Jan 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
Okay, it seems that vox populi votes for hamstringing by conventional methods—limited naval forces, nasty AI deployments, and restrictive geography—rather than strategic interdiction. I'll see if I can make it work.
Thanks for the link Fairline.  The push to plan an invasion at Alexandretta peaked in October, 1915. It was being considered as a relief option for Gallipoli. Kitchener was the highest ranking proponent, and much of his Cairo gang was for it. The French sent their refusal to permit the invasion in 11/15. AFAIK and as you suspect, no actual planning took place.
Btw, for some reason 33% sticks in my mind for the intercept rate. I tested it years ago.
Currently, the player is given a choice of strategic options on turn 1. One of the options is an invasion. My aim is to make it viable to capture a city, but only with substantial casualties. That will hurt you when it comes to counting up points for victory.
Case, thanks much for the OOB tips. After EAv2 is done, I'll work up that Sinai/Palestine (1916-1918) OOB I mentioned (if it's still needed). Orbat.com becomes more impressive each time I visit, but are you sure that their staff (incl Forum Editors) are reputable?
Sarstock, the art should be good. I shamelessly grabbed all the best work I could find. I also mercilessly badgered Fairline, Case, techumseh, Catfish, and many others.  [Edit]Some of the flags may seem familiar to you. [/Edit] The only link to V1 was in the old forum before its erasing. I'll see if I can dig up the zips again.
 Attachment: strategy1.gif
This has been downloaded 218 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
AGRICOLA
|
|
Canadian bush & Florida
Feb 2003
time: 00:36
|
|
Here's some feedback from a player who downloaded El Aurens six months ago, tried to play it, and gave up before completing the first turn.
The following are the straws that broke the camel's back.
1. I couldn't get the Guide to open with any software that comes with XP.
2. The heads of the health bars for all civs are the same yellow color. This makes unit ID extremely difficult, especially as there is great similarity in some of the unit icons. I also find that the red-yellow-green edging of the health bars to be of no help. It just adds to the visual clutter.
3. A file explaining the meaning of the Arabic terms would be most helpful as would some background on various unfamiliar units and improvements such as 8nci Ordu, Ikhawan and Qasr. I found that I was constantly having to refer to the minimal info available in the Pedia.
4. A writeup of the political alignments, alliances and goals of the various civs would help to clarify the overall situation. I doubt if I'm the only player who is unfamiliar with this segment of WWI.
5. The resource window in the city screen has little color contrast between food and trade, and the pickaxes (shields) almost disappear between the food and the trade icons. This is not unique to El Aurens. Virtually all current scens have very artistic icons for food, resources and trade. Unfortunately, none are designed to be instantly recognized and differentiated by color and shape as in vanilla CIV2.
To be fair to the scenario, some of my problems may be of my own making. Since making the changes to the TOT folder needed to play Market Garden, I've been downloading scen zips to an appropriately named subfolder in the Game Download folder (Desktop), extracting the files to a new Desktop folder and starting up TOT. This has worked fine for Market Garden, Red October and the scens under development, Dictator and Empire of the Rising Sun. Perhaps installation of El Aurens needs some additional changes that I'm not aware of.
Is there any possibility that the next version might have a second, optional set of RULES, EVENTS etc. files that use English terms as much as possible to give players the option of not having to learn Arabic?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Boco
|
|
who was once King for a week.
Jan 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by AGRICOLA
Here's some feedback from a player who downloaded El Aurens six months ago, tried to play it, and gave up before completing the first turn.
|
Ouch  , but finally a critique that isn't a reaction to the art. 
quote:
1. I couldn't get the Guide to open with any software that comes with XP.
|
It opens with Explorer, but not Opera. The file is very hard to maintain, and will probably be replaced. Which is better htm, rtf, or xls?
quote:
2. The heads of the health bars for all civs are the same yellow color. This makes unit ID extremely difficult, especially as there is great similarity in some of the unit icons. I also find that the red-yellow-green edging of the health bars to be of no help. It just adds to the visual clutter.
|
The initial offering did indeed lack the static.spr for about 48 hours. It was essential for showing civilization colors. I chose to show them as undiluted masks in the icon area rather than as grayed out civ colors in the unit key.
It appears that you are in the majority regarding the Mercator meter on the health bars. No other scen uses them. Back to the drawing board on that.
quote:
3. A file explaining the meaning of the Arabic terms would be most helpful as would some background on various unfamiliar units and improvements such as 8nci Ordu, Ikhawan and Qasr. I found that I was constantly having to refer to the minimal info available in the Pedia.
|
I've almost eliminated the use of Turkish to label units. The sole survivor is Jandarma (= Gendarmes = paramilitary police). Asiret Gönüllü are now Tribal Vols, 8nci Ordu (= 8th Army) is now Trench Line. Arabic is still used to describe improvements and selected units. Generally, wherever the official histories or Lawrence used Arabic, I did the same. That means, Ikhawan still describe Sanussi and Wahhabi holy-scholar/warriors, Agayl describe tribal mercenaries, and Qasr still means city defenses. I'm reluctant to eliminate all Arabic references, since they add atmosphere. After all the scenario's name is El Aurens, not Lawrence. That said, however, I'll revisit the language to make it more accessible.
A glossary is an excellent idea. I'll write an external one and also see whether I can put one in an easily accessible place within ToT.
Perhaps the greatest remaining language hurdle is the use of Arabic in @Terrain. If there is an accessible glossary, would Arabic remain a problem here?
quote:
4. A writeup of the political alignments, alliances and goals of the various civs would help to clarify the overall situation. I doubt if I'm the only player who is unfamiliar with this segment of WWI.
|
Good idea. It's on the list.
quote:
5. The resource window in the city screen has little color contrast between food and trade, and the pickaxes (shields) almost disappear between the food and the trade icons. This is not unique to El Aurens. Virtually all current scens have very artistic icons for food, resources and trade. Unfortunately, none are designed to be instantly recognized and differentiated by color and shape as in vanilla CIV2.
|
I was using generic ToT food and Trade icons. I changed pickaxes for v2. After your comment, I've started playing with shading and background.
quote:
To be fair to the scenario, some of my problems may be of my own making. Since making the changes to the TOT folder needed to play Market Garden, I've been downloading scen zips to an appropriately named subfolder in the Game Download folder (Desktop), extracting the files to a new Desktop folder and starting up TOT. This has worked fine for Market Garden, Red October and the scens under development, Dictator and Empire of the Rising Sun. Perhaps installation of El Aurens needs some additional changes that I'm not aware of.
|
El Aurens is unique to date in its use of Static.spr, but I don't think that requires an unusual directory arrangement (just need to have the file in the installation zip  ). Your problems with the Guide.htm could stem from either the use of a browser other than Explorer or installation of the supporting files in the wrong folder. When I get to that stage in EAv2, I'll make sure the instructions are clear.
quote:
Is there any possibility that the next version might have a second, optional set of RULES, EVENTS etc. files that use English terms as much as possible to give players the option of not having to learn Arabic?
|
Most likely, no. It's hard enough to maintain one version of these files. I've toned down the use of Asian terms substantially for v2 — there are only 7 Arabic terms in @Improvements and 8 in @Units. A few of the remaining ones are pretty commonplace: Souk, Masjid, Gurkhas, and Mujahid. I think the solution lies in your other suggestion to use a glossary. I do believe that the use of some Arabic is important for atmosphere.
quote:
Unfortunately, that [a structured scenario] has been the kiss of death to my enjoyment of a scen ever since I tried Nemo's Second Front, the ultimate in structured scenarios. |
El Aurens will never appeal to everyone . I've taken a lot of notice of the criticisms of 2nd Front. So I'm trying to allow a lot of freedom of choice in EA. However, historical accuracy is important to me as well. There are certain logistical and political limitations that I've designed into the scenario. Historically, no one, not even an "Easterner" like Lloyd George or Lawrence, wanted this theater to be flooded heavy artillery and tanks, even if it were logistically possible. The Arabs, friend and foe alike, were not very tolerant of Western troops in their territory. I'm afraid players who like to purge their armies to build one or two über unit types and conquer the map won't like EA. My target is the player who likes to make the most with the units at hand (in EA, that's a varied mix). The opportunity for creativity lies in how you use those units. My goal is to simulate the challenges facing the Allies, but not enforce their solution.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
techumseh
|
 |
of the frozen North.
Apr 1999
time: 22:36
|
|
Dave, I agree with Fairline about the historical approach being the best one.
What were the real limitations on the British, aside from fear of casualties? If it was shipping, then control the availability and capacity of transports - don't allow them to be built. BTW, since you don't have transports in the game, how would the British units get to the Levant at all?
If it were French objections, then what would be the consequences of the British proceeding anyway? Reduced French cooperation in other theatres probably - so perhaps cut down on future British reinforcements, or make a key wonder obsolete or unbuildable if a certain trigger is hit.
Or maybe the French would send some of their own troops. Can you use the Italian civ as French and put some annoying allied forces in the way of the British?
Perhaps the most likely reason that the Levant strategy was not undertaken is that this was a secondary theatre and the British didn't have the resources to pull it off alone. Before 1918, the Turkish reaction would have been fierce, and the Germans would likely have sent help. One way to handle it might be to allow the operation, but trigger strong reinforcements for the Turks, perhaps including German forces.
I did something similar with Market-Garden, when my pesky playtester kept driving up the west side of the map instead of up the middle where he was supposed to go. I added extra German reinforcements, triggered by the capture of certain towns on the west side. The alternate plan was not prohibited, just more difficult than the traditional one. More options for the human player = more fun!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Mercator
|
|
Sorekara no Nanimo
Jan 1970
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boco
The file is very hard to maintain, and will probably be replaced. Which is better htm, rtf, or xls? |
Not XLS! Make it either (simple) HTML, working on all recent browsers, or RTF.
quote:
Originally posted by Boco
It appears that you are in the majority regarding the Mercator meter on the health bars. No other scen uses them. Back to the drawing board on that. |
You have my permission to stop using it. 
quote:
Originally posted by Boco
Okay, next roadblock. I want to give Apollo to a small city on map1 before the game begins. Being lazy, I don't want the map revealed. How do I hex it in? Can a whiz show me the place and value?
Here's a screen dump of the city, Kas, with the x,y coordinates at the top left. |
The city coordinates are irrelevant, it's the city index number that you need.  You get that number by counting how many cities come before Kas in the savegame's city section. Enter that number at offset 956 (that offset's in decimal, it's 3BC in hexadecimal), and change byte 957 to zero.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boco
|
|
who was once King for a week.
Jan 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
Thanks Merc, with those instructions I was able to fix it in 30 seconds.
I still kinda like the meter. It looks good in River War. It may take a little more heckling to have me remove it. I'll just put a simpler alternative under it in the Units.bmp.
Does RTF support hyperlinks? Mouseovers? If not how difficult is it to write html mouseovers?
Curt, thanks much. Let me think it over. What you've already posted is 90% there. For gameplay, I'm thinking of showing some of the terrain under the smaller cities. Perhaps also some color coded roofs for the civs: blue vs. burnt orange. I'm undecided about how to depict city walls.
Oh yeah, Cairo is still unique.
There isn't a huge rush. I'd like to spend some time on River War.
Another question. There are about 2 dozen minor cities that follow a more or less standard improvement building sequence: city walls, market, courthouse, superhighways, libary, aqueduct, and capitalization. Where are the sequences stored for the autobuild choices?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AGRICOLA
|
|
Canadian bush & Florida
Feb 2003
time: 00:36
|
|
@ Boco
quote:
Originally posted by Boco
Agri, if you post your city resource icons, I'll put them in Icons as an alternative set. |
Here's a zip of ICONS fom Riverwar with the resource icons that you requested.
 Attachment: icons.zip
This has been downloaded 9 time(s).
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-06-2005 03:30
|
