Re: 1588 Spanish Armada [16.01.14] V45 Fixes

[Gilligan]

Game 13101811

[cairnswk]

2013-08-15 22:28:07 - Seamus76 assaulted G. Miguel Oquendo M1 from Triumph Bow and conquered it from Gilligan

should this be able to happen? I understand from the legend that you are only able to assault your own monarch, not others?

Game 13101811

This shouldn't be able to happen.
That is where the error is in the xml apart from Margate LB being 0 instead of 1.

So the conditionals for all command ships were incorrect on the current working xml.
that's why the new xml file on previous page needs checking and uploading ASAP.

[Gilligan]

I will have to give it another runthrough. There's just so much to this one!

[cairnswk]

I will have to give it another runthrough. There's just so much to this one!

Gilligan
we know that all those other aspecets appear to be working apart from the errors, so why not just check the errors
1. Margate LB
2. the conditionals to command ship

[Gilligan]

I will have to give it another runthrough. There's just so much to this one!

Gilligan
we know that all those other aspecets appear to be working apart from the errors, so why not just check the errors
1. Margate LB
2. the conditionals to command ship

Yeah, that's what I mean There may be a few bombardments missing here or there, but those'll pop up as we go. I feel like MOST of them are there. Tricky to get 100% of them when it's two territs away.

[cairnswk]

I will have to give it another runthrough. There's just so much to this one!

Gilligan
we know that all those other aspecets appear to be working apart from the errors, so why not just check the errors
1. Margate LB
2. the conditionals to command ship

Yeah, that's what I mean There may be a few bombardments missing here or there, but those'll pop up as we go. I feel like MOST of them are there. Tricky to get 100% of them when it's two territs away.

Gilligan, there are two spelling errors i found, which i fixed in that attached file - 05Arm17AugV5.xml
1. Pezance > Penzance
2. Treaasry > Treasury

Check these:
1. Truro LB bombmards Swiftsure
2. Tiger bombards Rainbow Stern
*I've checked all command ships, land armies, Spanish Support ships and land bases up to this point
3. Achatae bombards Swiftsure

[kizkiz]

Game 13106879
* player game
First turn all but 1 player has a deploy of 4
It's foggy, but someone has posted that they had the SS bonus
Have i just had a bit of bad luck or is it an uneven drop?

[nolefan5311]

Game 13106879
* player game
First turn all but 1 player has a deploy of 4
It's foggy, but someone has posted that they had the SS bonus
Have i just had a bit of bad luck or is it an uneven drop?

Margate LB didn't have the proper bonus. It's been corrected in the file posted above, just waiting for the upload.

[Jippd]

I have some questions about the legend:

"Bow and Stern separately border adjacent ships". What are the ships adjacent to bow and stern? Take Santa Anna for example. Do you mean a region like el sanson?

"non-white sections are impassable". There are a lot of non white sections for example EYS A,B,C,D I would consider these non white regions. However from looking at the map they don't look like impassables to me. Looking for some clarification. As far as I can see for non passable borders you have forests, blue shaded areas (Looks like water to me), and thick black lines around the stern & bow.

Conditional border. Is it true that you need to hold bow and stern of the same respective monarch shield to be able to attack that monarch. I read back 2 pages in this thread but don't have time to read all of the pages to look for the answer. I saw there was some confusion about this. From what I understand from your post a few up it is currently broken and any stern/bow can attack any monarch but the XML upload that is now ready will fix the error. If it is true that you need the same stern and bow with the same shield can only attack that monarch I would consider re wording. Perhaps something along the lines of "Each Monarch commander can only be attacked by the respective stern or bow of the same earn. Must hold both stern and bow of the respective earn." or something along those lines. The way bob shows it to me is that any stern or bow can attack any monarch commander which is giving me confusion that I can't decipher with the key.

The monarch commander is a treasury region right? So If I am playing a quads game and eliminate a colors two regions besides their monarch commander and their bow/stern then they would die? IE if they have Don Diego Madrano and I kill their Diana and SS before they go then they would die because they would meet the losing condition?

Is whether a player starts with S or B of a certain earn pre decided or random with the drop? (Taels gave me this link: http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... utrals.jpg) for the starting positions.

I have an issue with the bombardment description. When you say a territory has a bombardment range of 2 to me that means it can bombard ANY region UP TO 2 reigons away. Including adjacent regions. It also says "ship region, army and land base". Should it say "ship region, supply ship and land base"? The word army is what is confusing me. Perhaps reword to "Each ship region, supply ship or land base may bombard any region 2 spaces away" instead of saying it has "range of 2"

Under the Treasury description area. It states "Each Monarch's Commander can also assault from any Treasury "T" region to same....." Above this description you describe the reigon listed as M as the monarch's commander. Then using that region in the description for the assault that the T's can make is confusing. The way you have it listed is that the Monarch's commander is doing the assaulting. It is not though as that region cannot assault SS/LB. I would shorten it to " Any Treasury "T" region can assault the LB, SS or command ship of the same earn".

In some places you refer to the Stern and bow combo in two different ways. You say "command ship" and "commanders ship". I think for consistency and clarity it would be better to pick one or the other and use it everywhere.

I am using "Earn" here because that is what is listed above the banners/shields. Is earn a foreign word of similar meaning?

[TaelS]

There is a typo.
It's not "Neustra Señora del Barrio", but "Nuestra Señora del Barrio".
Also, "Senora" should be "Señora", with "ñ", not "n".

Also, "Sãn Mateo". It should be either "San Mateo" (Spanish) or "São Mateo" (Portuguese, if I'm not mistaken).

[cairnswk]

There is a typo.
It's not "Neustra Señora del Barrio", but "Nuestra Señora del Barrio".
Also, "Senora" should be "Señora", with "ñ", not "n".

Also, "Sãn Mateo". It should be either "San Mateo" (Spanish) or "São Mateo" (Portuguese, if I'm not mistaken).

Taels, could you provide reference for those changes please

[Gilligan]

Margate LB bonus of 1: check
Penzance spelling: check
Treasury spelling: check
Conditional borders: check

One nitpick - the image on Triumph ship is different than the one on Sr Martin.

Truro LB - needs to bombard Swiftsure
Achatae - needs to bombard Swiftsure
Tiger - needs to bombard Rainbow Stern

The only thing I have amended in this update is are the 3 bombardments that were missing.

[TaelS]

There is a typo.
It's not "Neustra Señora del Barrio", but "Nuestra Señora del Barrio".
Also, "Senora" should be "Señora", with "ñ", not "n".

Also, "Sãn Mateo". It should be either "San Mateo" (Spanish) or "São Mateo" (Portuguese, if I'm not mistaken).

Taels, could you provide reference for those changes please

Sorry, my first time here and I don't know what you mean with reference.
If you mean where they are:
Sãn Mateo is one of the 3 first territories if you start with D. Medina Sedonia (m2 in your map of the first post).
Neustra Senora del Barrio is one of the 3 first territories if you start with C. Flores de Valdés (s2 in your map of the first post).

[Gilligan]

There is a typo.
It's not "Neustra Señora del Barrio", but "Nuestra Señora del Barrio".
Also, "Senora" should be "Señora", with "ñ", not "n".

Also, "Sãn Mateo". It should be either "San Mateo" (Spanish) or "São Mateo" (Portuguese, if I'm not mistaken).

Taels, could you provide reference for those changes please

Sorry, my first time here and I don't know what you mean with reference.
If you mean where they are:
Sãn Mateo is one of the 3 first territories if you start with D. Medina Sedonia (m2 in your map of the first post).
Neustra Senora del Barrio is one of the 3 first territories if you start with C. Flores de Valdés (s2 in your map of the first post).

I believe he means why you think the text should be changed

[TaelS]

There is a typo.
It's not "Neustra Señora del Barrio", but "Nuestra Señora del Barrio".
Also, "Senora" should be "Señora", with "ñ", not "n".

Also, "Sãn Mateo". It should be either "San Mateo" (Spanish) or "São Mateo" (Portuguese, if I'm not mistaken).

Taels, could you provide reference for those changes please

Sorry, my first time here and I don't know what you mean with reference.
If you mean where they are:
Sãn Mateo is one of the 3 first territories if you start with D. Medina Sedonia (m2 in your map of the first post).
Neustra Senora del Barrio is one of the 3 first territories if you start with C. Flores de Valdés (s2 in your map of the first post).

I believe he means why you think the text should be changed

Ah, just because it has no sense at all as it is right now : P
Señora:
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=se%C3%B1ora (as you can see there, "Nuestra Señora" means "Virgin" in Spanish).
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=senora

Nuestra:
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=nuestra
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=neustra

San:
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=san
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=S%C3%A3n

[cairnswk]

....Ah, just because it has no sense at all as it is right now : P
Señora:
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=se%C3%B1ora (as you can see there, "Nuestra Señora" means "Virgin" in Spanish).
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=senora

Nuestra:
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=nuestra
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=neustra

San:
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=san
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=S%C3%A3n

TaelS, sorry, but giving me those references (i do not speak/read Spanish) is like putting me in a bullring with no training on how to fight the bull.

I've checked the wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sh ... ish_Armada
and indeed you are correct.
I'll adjust this.
Thanks for your comment

[TaelS]

Sorry, but those are the only references I knew : P (besides my own knowledge, of course, but you didn't accept it : P).

[cairnswk]

Sorry, but those are the only references I knew : P (besides my own knowledge, of course, but you didn't accept it : P).

no problems TaelS, but it is better to provide written evidence where possible.
If you had said you are spanish, that might have added weight to your argument.
But i have fixed it now, so let's move forward.

[cairnswk]

I have some questions about the legend:

"Bow and Stern separately border adjacent ships". What are the ships adjacent to bow and stern? Take Santa Anna for example. Do you mean a region like el sanson?

Yes.
El Sanson is adjacent to the bow...Santa Marta and Urca Doncella are adjacent to the stern.

"non-white sections are impassable". There are a lot of non white sections for example EYS A,B,C,D I would consider these non white regions. However from looking at the map they don't look like impassables to me. Looking for some clarification. As far as I can see for non passable borders you have forests, blue shaded areas (Looks like water to me), and thick black lines around the stern & bow.
....

This comes under the section in the legend of "Command Ships" therefore i would assume from reading it, it applies to Command Ships.

I'll answer the rest soon.

[Jippd]

I have some questions about the legend:

"Bow and Stern separately border adjacent ships". What are the ships adjacent to bow and stern? Take Santa Anna for example. Do you mean a region like el sanson?

Yes.
El Sanson is adjacent to the bow...Santa Marta and Urca Doncella are adjacent to the stern.

"non-white sections are impassable". There are a lot of non white sections for example EYS A,B,C,D I would consider these non white regions. However from looking at the map they don't look like impassables to me. Looking for some clarification. As far as I can see for non passable borders you have forests, blue shaded areas (Looks like water to me), and thick black lines around the stern & bow.
....

This comes under the section in the legend of "Command Ships" therefore i would assume from reading it, it applies to Command Ships.

I'll answer the rest soon.

Okay so is each space on this map a ship then? IE El Sanson is ship? I think that is what confused me I didn't know the spaces are all ships.

The thing about command ships makes sense now. Thanks.

[cairnswk]

Version 40 for upload with XML.
There are adjustments to names surrounding the previously known as San Martin > now São Martinho (Portuguese).
These have been adjusted in the xml that Gilligan provided corrections for from the previous page

Click image to enlarge.

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... g~original

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... g~original

[cairnswk]

I have adjusted the above xml for centering on those images above...now it needs to be uploaded.

[codierose]

hell this map makes my head spin. just one small thing Plymouth, Truro and the eddystone not really in the right places

[cairnswk]

hell this map makes my head spin. just one small thing Plymouth, Truro and the eddystone not really in the right places

yeh they're not really are they? let's call it creative license

if there is another major update...perhaps Truro LB could become Torridge LB

[cairnswk]

...

Conditional border. Is it true that you need to hold bow and stern of the same respective monarch shield to be able to attack that monarch. I read back 2 pages in this thread but don't have time to read all of the pages to look for the answer. I saw there was some confusion about this. From what I understand from your post a few up it is currently broken and any stern/bow can attack any monarch but the XML upload that is now ready will fix the error. If it is true that you need the same stern and bow with the same shield can only attack that monarch I would consider re wording. Perhaps something along the lines of "Each Monarch commander can only be attacked by the respective stern or bow of the same earn. Must hold both stern and bow of the respective earn." or something along those lines. The way bob shows it to me is that any stern or bow can attack any monarch commander which is giving me confusion that I can't decipher with the key.

well, as you know the xml is borken for the losing condition, so it shouldn't be confusing when it is fixed.
the time for re-wording has long passed and there was considerable effort put into this on many occassions.
only if lots of others have great difficulty with the wording will i consider changing it.

The monarch commander is a treasury region right? So If I am playing a quads game and eliminate a colors two regions besides their monarch commander and their bow/stern then they would die? IE if they have Don Diego Madrano and I kill their Diana and SS before they go then they would die because they would meet the losing condition?

no, treasury can still be alive and if you don't hold either bow or stern of a command ship and any other non-treasury region, you should(?) be kicked out.

Is whether a player starts with S or B of a certain earn pre decided or random with the drop? (Taels gave me this link: http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... utrals.jpg) for the starting positions.

Random as with any other map.
that link only shows the possibilities.

I have an issue with the bombardment description. When you say a territory has a bombardment range of 2 to me that means it can bombard ANY region UP TO 2 reigons away. Including adjacent regions. It also says "ship region, army and land base". Should it say "ship region, supply ship and land base"? The word army is what is confusing me. Perhaps reword to "Each ship region, supply ship or land base may bombard any region 2 spaces away" instead of saying it has "range of 2"

well think about this.
if i bombard my neighbouring region, am i not assaulting it as per normal border assault...
so to me (and others who defined this) range of 2 is the correct wording since it is still possible to keep the neighbour alive anyway.
are not supply ships a ship region?
as with complicated directions, there is always going to be someone who doesn't quite see the world via the same glasses, and space is a premium

Under the Treasury description area. It states "Each Monarch's Commander can also assault from any Treasury "T" region to same....." Above this description you describe the reigon listed as M as the monarch's commander. Then using that region in the description for the assault that the T's can make is confusing. The way you have it listed is that the Monarch's commander is doing the assaulting. It is not though as that region cannot assault SS/LB. I would shorten it to " Any Treasury "T" region can assault the LB, SS or command ship of the same earn".

There are two points in Treasury Movement. Please re-read them carefully and understand what they say individually.
As stated before, considerable length was taken to ensure the workding was correct.

In some places you refer to the Stern and bow combo in two different ways. You say "command ship" and "commanders ship". I think for consistency and clarity it would be better to pick one or the other and use it everywhere.

well they are two different things and are required differently in different context.

I am using "Earn" here because that is what is listed above the banners/shields. Is earn a foreign word of similar meaning?

Earn refers to the bonuses available on that line..i think it is correct.

Jippd, this map was in development for over two years.
Can i ask if at any time you bothered to have input during that time?
I am most astonished that you raise these issues now when there has been plenty of time to study the map and provide same input as you have.