Battle Isle : a serious map variant - Sign-ups

(Played as Game A of 2) GM: Pedros. Result: DIAS (AardvarkArmy - Winterfell; GhostEcho - Aiel; Netr0 - Borderlands; attitudes - Midlands; drrnwrstlr - D'Hara)

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby Pedros » 01 Jun 2013, 03:32

OK, heard from Frank again.

The original idea is that fleets in coastal provinces with bridge entrances can enter the bridge from there. It's a bit counter-intuitive, but still (so is the notion of bridges big enough to take a fleet!) Fleets in the water don't affect the bridges at all. But since fleets on the coast can't normally convoy, I don't think I'm going to allow convoys onto bridges, but the fleets enter from the coast rule I'm inclined to go with.

Which just leaves the map!
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby AardvarkArmy » 01 Jun 2013, 07:53

Pedros wrote:OK, heard from Frank again.

The original idea is that fleets in coastal provinces with bridge entrances can enter the bridge from there. It's a bit counter-intuitive, but still (so is the notion of bridges big enough to take a fleet!) Fleets in the water don't affect the bridges at all. But since fleets on the coast can't normally convoy, I don't think I'm going to allow convoys onto bridges, but the fleets enter from the coast rule I'm inclined to go with.

Which just leaves the map!


In any sort of "real world" sense, this seems 180 degrees counter-intuitive. I cannot visualize a ship sliding up a shoreline and then rolling out onto a bridge, but I can DEFINITELY visualize a ship under or next to a bridge offloading a shock force of marines onto the bridge (convoy) and/or providing cannon "support" for or against an approaching ground force. Hmmm...
SOLOS
ICE&FIRE.1-Martell/EXCALIBUR.1-Angles/EXCALIBUR.2-Scots/EMERALD-Sno/MOD.4-Italy/SENGOKU.1-OdaNobu/S.AMERICA.1-Peru

DRAWS
1930-China/BattleIsleA-Winterfell/S&S-Turkey/WORLD INFL-Venezuela/LECRAE-Dublin/WWIV.2-Cali/IMPERIAL1861.1-Trky/YNGSTWN.1-Grmny/AMERICAS.2-Mex/AFRICAN.2-S.Arabia
User avatar
AardvarkArmy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: 27 Feb 2009, 04:37
Location: Oakland, California, USA (San Francisco Bay Area)
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1066
All-game rating: 1284
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby Netr0 » 01 Jun 2013, 08:08

AardvarkArmy wrote:
Pedros wrote:OK, heard from Frank again.

The original idea is that fleets in coastal provinces with bridge entrances can enter the bridge from there. It's a bit counter-intuitive, but still (so is the notion of bridges big enough to take a fleet!) Fleets in the water don't affect the bridges at all. But since fleets on the coast can't normally convoy, I don't think I'm going to allow convoys onto bridges, but the fleets enter from the coast rule I'm inclined to go with.

Which just leaves the map!


In any sort of "real world" sense, this seems 180 degrees counter-intuitive. I cannot visualize a ship sliding up a shoreline and then rolling out onto a bridge, but I can DEFINITELY visualize a ship under or next to a bridge offloading a shock force of marines onto the bridge (convoy) and/or providing cannon "support" for or against an approaching ground force. Hmmm...


Amphibious boats!
If you can, win.
If you can't, draw.
If you stab, succeed.
User avatar
Netr0
 
Posts: 840
Joined: 10 Oct 2012, 00:06
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1315)
All-game rating: (1649)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby WarSmith » 01 Jun 2013, 08:14

It makes sense to me. Think of the bridges as the type that raise to allow boats to pass - like Tower bridge. If there is a boat in position - the bridge is impassable... Unles taken by force maybe? - could a 2 v 1 army attack on a bridge dislodge a fleet maybe?
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth even has a chance to put its pants on”
User avatar
WarSmith
Premium Member
 
Posts: 2178
Joined: 01 Mar 2009, 22:12
Location: Scandinavia
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1754)
All-game rating: (1664)
Timezone: GMT+2

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby Pedros » 01 Jun 2013, 10:18

But I think the rules are seeing fleets on the bridges as being just the same as armies. 2v1 would certainly shift them, but in the same way that fleets below the bridge don't affect the bridge, fleets on the bridge don't affect what's underneath. And the bridge and the spaces beneath it can both be occupied at the same time.

And I have another question - if there is a fleet on North Bridge of Hope, does North Bridge have a coastline? In other words, does the fleet affect the South Bridge? I think we have to say no coastline!
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby VGhost » 01 Jun 2013, 16:53

I'm thoroughly confused at this point, and in an attempt to clarify the rules (which actually seem mostly straight-forward to me, if awkwardly phrased and now clouded by "clarification), I'm going to restate them to show how I read them. I want to know which rules, if any, we are modifying.

1.a: Armies can move to a bridge space.
1.b: Armies can be convoyed to a bridge space.

2.a: Seas are not divided by bridges; a fleet therefore occupies the entire sea.
2.b: A fleet can move to a bridge space by moving "under" it. [This is the rule we're dropping/ignoring, right?]

3.a: The bridges mask some borders. The following are actually adjacent for both armies and fleets: Seagard and Northern Twins; White Harbor and Karhold, Drowned Lands and Tear; and all other territories at the ends of their respective bridge.
3.b: As a result, the following territories do not have coasts: Southern Twins; The Neck; Illian.

4. An army can only be moved on to a bridge (without convoy: see 1.b) from the end of a bridge. Armies cannot move to the respective bridge from Seagard, Karhold, or Drowned Lands.

5. Grey territories are impassible (cf. Switzerland in the regular game).

6. Stormy Island is impassable to fleets or convoys but its bridges (Bridge of Hope; North Bridge of Hope; South Bridge of Hope) are accessible to fleets [If 2.b is dropped, this would be for convoys only.].

7. The names of the starting locations are taken from George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire; Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time; and Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series.

8. The island territories are named for Alaskan mountain ranges.

Variant devised by Rene Krowkowski and Frank Bacher.


The only difficulty is caused by the rule I've labeled 2.b, where the creators tried to make a provision to let fleets move to the bridges. However, this creates a paradox: if a fleet can move to a bridge from a sea space, then how is the sea not divided by the bridge? Alternatively, if a fleet can only move to a bridge from the coast (as indicated by responses from the creators) that simply doesn't make sense.

Since this is the only rule that causes difficulty, it seems most sensible to simply ignore it, and say fleets cannot move to (but can convoy to) any bridges.
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
"I'm not panicking, I'm watching you panic. It's more entertaining." - Elli Quinn
"[Diplomacy:] No dice or chance. Just calculated insincerity." - Counter Trap
User avatar
VGhost
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1867
Joined: 10 Aug 2008, 04:56
Location: Baltimore
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 987
All-game rating: 901
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby WarSmith » 01 Jun 2013, 18:57

Yes, but a fleet must therefore be able to move past a bride in a single move. I dont think the creators intended for such quick movement of fleets around the board (and therefore also convoys moving faster going 'under' bridges than if they went over and across to a desired territory).
One way to sove would be to have a 'on bridge' and 'under bridge' territory description, e.g. Two territories in one place?
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth even has a chance to put its pants on”
User avatar
WarSmith
Premium Member
 
Posts: 2178
Joined: 01 Mar 2009, 22:12
Location: Scandinavia
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1754)
All-game rating: (1664)
Timezone: GMT+2

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby VGhost » 01 Jun 2013, 19:06

But the bridges specifically cross seas - the seas are that big and a fleet controls the entire thing.
"When you absolutely don't know what to do any more, then it's time to panic." - Johann van der Wiel
"I'm not panicking, I'm watching you panic. It's more entertaining." - Elli Quinn
"[Diplomacy:] No dice or chance. Just calculated insincerity." - Counter Trap
User avatar
VGhost
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1867
Joined: 10 Aug 2008, 04:56
Location: Baltimore
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 987
All-game rating: 901
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby Netr0 » 01 Jun 2013, 23:16

Pedros just have them act like Gilberta(from 1900 map) like I mentioned earlier.
If you can, win.
If you can't, draw.
If you stab, succeed.
User avatar
Netr0
 
Posts: 840
Joined: 10 Oct 2012, 00:06
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1315)
All-game rating: (1649)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Battle Isle : a serious map variant.

Postby sinnybee » 02 Jun 2013, 00:16

Netr0 wrote:Pedros just have them act like Gilberta(from 1900 map) like I mentioned earlier.

No, please don't have them act like Gilberta!
;)
Gold Classicist since 1-11-11
FT Asst GM of 35 player WWIV Aug 2011-Feb 2012
#1 ranked player of playdip early 2013
4th highest forum karma count at Apr 2013 ending (behind Craw, Dipsy, and Rick)
Tournament Director of the 31 game PDVT Feb-Dec 2014, the first playdip tourney with over 100 sign-ups
User avatar
sinnybee
 
Posts: 6097
Joined: 03 Sep 2010, 07:01
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1332)
All-game rating: (1467)
Timezone: GMT-7

PreviousNext

Return to Game 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests