I'll darken Nyrond a bit in next release. But to my eyes when Nyrond gets much darker it starts to lose contrast with Neutral. I've thought about changing some of the colors more drastically, but my laziness doesn't want to tackle changing all the units.
The shields are just relief. They're the coats of arms from the Greyhawk world. I just threw them in as flavor for any fans of the world.
"New unit purchase" changed to "new unit recruitment" in notes. Thanks.
Two-hit point units cannot be healed or repaired, with the exception of Furyondy's national advantage. This is now more explicit in the notes.
From the Gameplay section of the notes: "Any excess units are not lost, and will be available for future placement."
Not an engine issue. I just wanted to amplify the benefit of fortifications and thought this would be a more interesting way to do it than giving attack bonus to defenders. Rationale is that fortification allows defending cavalry to sortie but prevents retaliation by attacking cavalry. Additionally, the free attack for cavalry is almost overpowered. The fortification is a cheap way to nullify it. I'm not as worried about the defending cavalry because their defending strength is lower to begin with.
This is typical of AA in many WWII maps. I've debated this, but I already have strategic bombing relatively weak with territory turn limits (max 5 dmg) and I didn't want to make it totally useless.
Chance rolls for triggers can't truly be hidden. But as Irinam pointed out for me, players can disable them under Game > User Notifications > Show Trigger Chance. I've added mention of this to the Tips section of the game notes.
Thanks for the helpful feedback!
Version 0.9.9 released
Download link in original post updated.
The Problem of Dumb Luck
I've had feedback from several people that they're getting repeat events. These are supposed to be random, so repeats are off-putting on principle. But a couple events are particularly devastating, and if they repeat they might derail a game.
I've seen repeats myself, and for a while I thought the "chance" option for triggers wasn't producing truly random results. I've done a bit of testing, and, while it may not be truly random, I'm convinced it's close enough for practical purposes.
Events are generated by placing (or not placing) 4 different "binary switches," with a 3 in 6 chance of placing each. There are 16 possible combinations of the presence and absence of these markers, so there are 16 possible events. An event is triggered in every round beginning with the second round (some events only take effect if certain other conditions are met, otherwise it's as if no event was triggered).
I ran 10 different one-player games for 17 rounds, tracking all 160 resulting events. Results:
Nothing jumps out at me as inexplicable by random variation. There were only 5 repeats, which isn't noteworthy. No readily discernible patterns.
However. If you get unlucky and have two devastating events in a row, they're likely to stick out in your mind a lot more than the various other random events, and perhaps generate a perception that things aren't really random. At least, I suspect this was the case for me before I actually logged a bunch of events.
OK, It's Random. But It Still Hurts!
The problem remains that if you get two big negative events in a row, your game might be derailed. For example, in game 6 of the above table, I was playing Keoland. My first event, in round 2, was a peasant revolt, preventing me from gaining PUs and purchasing or placing units. Pretty devastating, especially in round 2. Then the same event struck in round 3. Ouch. Round 4 was better: I got free dragonslayers. But round 5: a flood, preventing me from making combat movements. The next couple rounds were ok, but round 8 was another flood. From there on it was mostly positive, but that's a really rough start for Keoland. (Save game: Keoland_bad_luck.tsvg)
This type of thing shouldn't be happening very often, but it's possible. Part of the concept of Greyhawk is that bad things happen, even to good players. As a map it's not exactly a low-luck kind of concept. (Neither is real life.) So I could just leave it as it is. Game over. You lose. Try again. If a bad event really cheeses you off there's always edit mode or load a recent save. At least against Hard AI I've always been able to recover when repeat disasters have happened to me. Has it truly ended anyone's game? Or just been super disruptive to their plans?
A Gentler Kind of Random
Or, rather than leave it as is, I could try to prevent repeat disasters. Doing so would be complicated. There are at least three approaches: (1) I could do it by adding invisible units as markers whose presence prevents the same disaster for the next round. (2) I could add "chanceIncrementOnFailure" and "chanceDecrementOnSuccess" options to the triggers, making repeats less likely. (3) I could add "uses" options limiting the number of times a particularly nasty (and also a particularly positive?) event can occur.
Option 1 gets messy. I use that kind of technique for other things on the map, but I don't want to use it when I can avoid it. It would also involve creating 10 new units and at least a couple dozen new conditions for triggers. Not my preferred approach.
Option 2 would be much simpler. But it wouldn't totally prevent the problem, and it would disrupt the binary randomness, with complicated side effects regarding which other events would then be more or less likely.
Option 3 would not necessarily prevent repeats unless it was uses=1. Perhaps that's appropriate for the really bad events. But if I do too much of this, as a game progresses the likelihood of having no event in any particular round will increase. Is that bad? In the later stages would a player want events to add spice? Or in the later stages are things settled enough that events are just nuisances and less of them would save time?
Right now I'm leaning toward doing a little bit of option 3, but not a lot. Does anyone have advice/opinions on this problem? Or see other solutions? Or (more likely) has nobody actually read this giant ugly long post?
Hey punguitch, thanks for your dedication!
If you count the events in total, this comes out:
Event 1 11 x 7%
Event 2 10 x 6%
Event 3 16 x 10%
Event 4 14 x 9%
Event 5 12 x 8%
Event 6 8 x 5%
Event 7 9 x 6%
Event 8 8 x 5%
Event 9 12 x 8%
Event 10 9 x 6%
Event 11 7 x 4%
Event 12 14 x 9%
Event 13 9 x 6%
Event 14 6 x 4%
Event 15 9 x 6%
Event 16 6 x 4%
Any mathematician here?
Now I see three other possible approaches:
(4) Reduce the impact of those two extreme negative events:
- Flood: Combat movement only reduced to one. It still hurts, but it's no longer devastating.
- Peasant Revolt: No Buy Phase, BUT only a part of the PUs lost.
The other events are often "worth" only 10 PU (good year, bad year, two free bowman) so part of my frustration was that those two events did hurt me so much AND so often...
(5) If one of these two events would happen, you check the round and let it only happen in uneven (even?)rounds
(6) Go from 4 triggers - 16 events to 5 triggers - 25 events
So each event would happen less frequent...
Keep up the good work!
If it were truly random, the expected frequency of each event, out of 160 instances, would be 10. Running a Chi Square test on the observed frequencies gives a p-value of 0.60, which is far above 0.05 or even 0.10 -- in other words, there is no evidence that the observed frequencies are the product of anything but random variation. (I'm rusty in my stats methods, so please anyone correct me if I'm applying the wrong test or something.)
Thanks for helping think of some more possible approaches.
- Flood: I could make flood reduce movement to 1 instead of zero. But I think that changes the event from hugely significant all the way to "meh." It's worth considering.
- Revolt: This event works by changing the required capitals from zero to two - and since it's not possible to have two capitals in this map, the player therefore cannot produce PUs that round, or purchase or place units. The PU income is all or nothing. I tried to mitigate it somewhat by giving a flat 10 PUs. As you point out, later in the game the amount of lost PUs can increase far beyond what it is at the start, so the flat 10 PUs becomes less of a cushion. Ideally I'd tie it to the amount of income you're losing, or even the number of territories you hold. But it can only be a flat number, or tied to the round number--which doesn't work because the round number doesn't always correlate to the size of your income. I could just increase the 10 to something higher, but then it might give you more income than you'd have without the revolt if you're empire is currently small.
- Bottom line: I could soften the flood, but I don't see a good way to soften the revolt.
Only let the uber-events be possible in every-other round. Good idea. Or flood only possible on even rounds, and revolt only possible every three rounds. This would certainly prevent immediate repeats. I think this and (3) are the frontrunners so far.
Going from 4 to 5 triggers actually increases it from 16 to 32. Every additional trigger doubles it. Certainly a possibility, and it would reduce the chance of repeats--but not entirely prevent them. It would also take a good amount of work and imagination. I don't want too many events to feel repetitive (free units, bonus PUs, etc.). Alternatively, rather than create 16 more events to have 32, I could repeat some of the less significant events in the new set of 16, so that they'd still have a 1/16 chance, while something like revolt would have a 1/32 chance. Then it would require fewer new events.
However, I'm disinclined to go this route because I have in the back of my mind that in a year or two I can freshen up the game simply by creating new events and magic items. So in a sense, I'd like to reserve the "5th event marker" for that purpose.
So at this point I'm thinking either option (3) or (5).
What would be easier to implemtent? (3) or (5)?
I think that (3) would not be necessary if (5) is in place.
In round 17 most games should be in the endgame,
so in an ideal game, each event would have happend once for each player.
If the uber-events were only possible in every-other round, there are 8 possible chances for them.
Each time there ist a 14 in 16 chance that another is happening, right?
(I'm quite rusty in my stats methods, too...last time i needed them was 15 years ago)
So i make ist about (0,875^8=) 34% that NONE is happening.
Is it possible to re-run the event-selection if the first chosen event may not happen?
Or possibly... just have the "Good Year" event every time, the original event ist not allowed?
3 is easier to implement, but I think I'm going to go with 5.
Not exactly, but in some cases I can set up an alternate event in case the selected event can't take effect for some reason. I do this more often in the magic system, for example, you can only win the Hand of Vecna magic item once, after which getting the same "rolls" for magic would award you the Eye of Vecna, after which getting the same "rolls" a third time would just give you a PU award.
Version 1.0 Released
While I hold no illusions that it's perfect, and plan to continue development, eventually doubling the number of possible events and magic treasure, I believe Greyhawk Wars is ready to go public. Version 1.0 is now posted (top of this thread).
Thanks to everyone for your help and suggestions. Keep the feedback coming.
Excerpted Changelog for Version 1.0
So your v1.0 map is not dependent on the newest Hard A to work properly? It works with the released version of this AI in 220.127.116.11? Nice to see your map released!
Yes, it works just fine with the AI packaged in 18.104.22.168. The more recent AIs are better, especially with the ships and dragons, but it's fine either way.
After taking a few months off, I've been working on Greyhawk again, with the help of some new playtesters. I'd love for more people to try out the current development version, which can be downloaded here:
Greyhawk Wars 22.214.171.124: https://www.sendspace.com/file/6e0g76
It has a lot of quality-of-life fixes and tweaks that smooth gameplay. Other major changes make fortifications and bowmen more interesting and worthwhile.
What's next? I'm considering doubling the number of random events and magical treasure. If so, I'll be asking for ideas.
I've played tons of Dungeons and Dragons (and do the DDO game online for it) and have some friends that have the Greyhawk modules we used to play so I'll let them know about this
Cool. I grew up with Greyhawk, and it was always the "real" DnD for me. Feel free to send feedback my way, or I can PBEM if wanted.
I love DDO. In fact, it was sucking too much of my life. I took a break from it a year ago, and that's when I came back to working on this for TripleA. I always played on Orien, as Fwelcyr and Bartylomaos. If life ever settles down I might allow myself to get back into it.
Hehe. What you don't know is how much I love DDO to where I only ever played 1 character on the game for 5 years now. I play a Sorcerer named Scoutarcher and I have done the Regeneration thing (1st life, then Hero, then Legend) and I'm at lvl 16 as Legend and then will finally have done all levels of this Sorcerer class and it will be cool and then I'll figure out what I want to do next. I play that game off and on though and not into it as some hardcore players obviously.I play on Sarlona but that server seems to be dieing but the game is epic and I miss the old paper and pencil game and intend to get together for it again eventually but thanks for your mod here and I will let people know about it
In reply to this post by panguitch
Thank you very much for your work panguitch. I played the board game Greyhawk Wars a long time ago and only recently stumbled accross your triplea version. The result is nothing short of amazing. I have been playing for days.
I would gladly try out the current development version but the download link for Greyhawk Wars 126.96.36.199 (https://www.sendspace.com/file/6e0g76) informs me that the file requested is no longer available.
Thanks Ranfeld, happy that you're enjoying it.
And thanks for pointing out the link wasn't working. I needed to update the version anyway.
Version, 188.8.131.52 is available here: https://www.sendspace.com/file/im6tw5
Note: to play this version you will also need to download the latest development version of the TripleA engine: https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/releases
In this engine version you need to place Greyhawk Wars in the downloadedMaps folder rather than the maps folder of older versions.
Changes include bug fixes, quality of life improvements, new magic items, random events, and the AI mimics diplomacy actions.
Let me know if you have any trouble or if you have feedback. Enjoy!
In reply to this post by panguitch
I really like this map, and was trying to have a friend download it to play online, but we are not able to access to it any more. All the files hosted online seems to have been deleted...
Thanks. I've updated the links.
The current version, 1.0, is available for download in-game, or at https://sourceforge.net/projects/tripleamaps/files/maps/Greyhawk_Wars.zip/download
The pre-release of 1.0.9 is available at https://www.sendspace.com/file/oli87s
To coincide with the release of the TripleA 1.9 engine, Greyhawk Wars version 1.1 is now live.
Download here: https://www.sendspace.com/file/cc2d9m
Some of the most recent changes:
Many thanks to simon33-2 who helped me figure out why Greyhawk wasn't downloading correctly using the Download Maps function in-game.
It now works normally and you can download the latest version, 1.1, in-game.
|Free forum by Nabble||Edit this page|