WW1 Map Ideas

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
206 messages Options
1 ... 67891011
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Cernel
Cernel wrote
How about using the previous one, but with something like a skull symbol?
Frostion wrote
@Cernel
I am also not 100% happy with the gas picture. If you have ideas about what the symbol for chemical gasses could be, then please share.
As I said, I think the previous image was good enough and better than the second one, but I would just have it with no simbol at all, or maybe with some letters and the word gas, like this one:



In wikipedia it seems saying that the symbols were stars for the Allies and crosses for the Germans.

However, if the matter is just having something that will hint folks that's some shit, you can just do what I said. Like Hepps posted that gas image here:

http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/Domination-1914-No-Mans-Land-tp7585693p7585712.html


And you can just stick it onto your gas thing like:


Also, in 1915 gas was just left lying on friendly ground and sent out under moderate favourable winds (sometimes backfired!). This is not very good, because soldiers can just keep calm and wait that, then, the wind brings the cloud away, and they have to resist only for a few minutes, which is not doing much (the casualties are basically only the idiots that run away, thus keeping themselves into the moving cloud and accelerating the inaliation). Gas is much better if you use it with almost no wind, and trow it at the enemy lines, so that the cloud will stay there for a long time; for this, even tho it is after 1915, you may want to make and advanced unit, representing the (post 1915) invention of the gas-launchers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livens_Projector


And, yes, I agree that representing gas with a cloud image is silly, because it would seem like you keep gassing yourself.

If you want to have only 1 gas, I suggest you not calling it mustard gas, especially in 1915; if you want to have several, I guess you should have this tech three:

chlorine_gas->phosgene_gas->mustard_gas

Tho the evolution of the ways of delivering it is maybe more important.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

crazy_german
No need for more than 1 type of gas. I think it can just be called gas

Here is a picture of the Suez Canal area, with Frostion's new art for the Ottomans against the older art for the british. I think its a big upgrade
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Cernel
As I said, I think they would benefit from having a bit stronger black outline (not much; only slightly more than as is). Also, I'm thinking slightly more contrast.

Are you sure that you don't want to differentiate between heavy cavalry and light cavalry. Especially for the Russians (cossacks), the Turks (hamidiye) and the French (spahis) there was a marked conceptual (and monetary) difference between the light / irregular cavalry and the heavy / standard kind. You could have the heavy giving support to infantry and the light being faster, or maybe giving negative support to enemy (harassment).

I mean, there is quite the difference in cost and quality between a French Cuirassier from Normandy and a French Spahis from the Mauretanian desert.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Frostion
I made some new versions, and they have 40% more black outline. Also I made a new Gas unit:



I can soon post a zip with the seven/eight unit sets, with and without shadows if someone would like to edit or make new kinds of shadows in the future. But I don’t have the time right now, so it might take some days.

We should keep in mind that when the map tiles are made, then the brightness, contrast, gamma, color and so on of the units will maybe benefit of some adjustment. I would wait with this unitl the background map graphics are done.

I ofcourse also have some "flag" graphichs ready. I don’t know if they will be used, but maybe they can be used until something better is made:

  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

crazy_german
Good color for the british units. I am planning on the initial release not having relief tiles, and hopefully fairly soon.

@Cernel
Heavy cavalry is an option, but my question is what does it do? I personally like to avoid including units with very niche applications, can you propose a stat line for 2 types of cavalry where each has a distinct useage? (also would need art, and I don't think this is a priority?)
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Cernel
In reply to this post by crazy_german
Also, as I've already said, especially in the interest of handling the islands without hacks, it should not be:

Sea Zone 170

Instead, it should be:

170 Sea Zone

"000 Sea Zone" is also clearly better than "Sea Zone 000", because, this way, they will be all listed before the territory names, instead of after those starting with "R" and before the ones starting with "T".
The only case I can think of "Sea Zone 000" being a good naming convention is if all land territories are like "Land Territory 000".

Side note, of course, if you go for cutting the sea zones to not cover the island (I hate; but sadly it is what I did to solve the NWO Baleares bug), you should do it consistently for all, not only for those that happen to be unclickable.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

crazy_german
Cernel wrote
Also, as I've already said, especially in the interest of handling the islands without hacks, it should not be:

Sea Zone 170

Instead, it should be:

170 Sea Zone

"000 Sea Zone" is also clearly better than "Sea Zone 000", because, this way, they will be all listed before the territory names, instead of after those starting with "R" and before the ones starting with "T".
The only case I can think of "Sea Zone 000" being a good naming convention is if all land territories are like "Land Territory 000".

Side note, of course, if you go for cutting the sea zones to not cover the island (I hate; but sadly it is what I did to solve the NWO Baleares bug), you should do it consistently for all, not only for those that happen to be unclickable.
I wish I knew that before

Currently most of the land territories have names such as "France 01, France 02, Germany 01, Germany 02" etc, which is one of the first things that I hope to fix
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Cernel
In reply to this post by crazy_german
Considering that there are very little info about how the other stuff work, the only difference I can say, assuming infantry at 3, is that the light cavalry should cost 4, while the heavy cavalry should cost 5 or 6.
The light cavalry should be more cost efficient, and rather the heavy cavalry should be almost obsolete; you should have quite a lot of them at start, but very rarely buy any more, while you should be inclined to buy some light cavalry, but not too much.

But heavy cavalry and light cavalry are bad names, because, by WW1, the distinction was not really the cuirassiers vs the hussars, but rather the regular cavalry vs the irregular horsemen.

I guess better names would be:

"line cavalry"

"light horsemen"

Or, going for a strictly English classification, it can be simply "cavalry" and "yeomanry" (theorically, only the regular cavalry was true cavalry; the other horsemen were considered not being cavalry).

I assume, of course, that if you go for a single "cavalry" unit, in game, that would represent all kind of horsemen, comprising the yeomanry as well, not just the formal "cavalry".

The "line cavalry" would be all the traditional cavalry, usually (but not for the English) equipped with lances, also comprising the horse artillery, while the light horse would comprise both the mounted infantry and the cossack or colonial style light cavalry.

At start war, the entire German cavalry should be all "line cavalry"; despite having retained the Napoleonic nomenclature, by WW1 they were all on big steeds and armed with heavy lances.

For England, the "line cavalry" would be the household cavalry plus the line cavalry plus the horse artillery, while the "light horses" would be the yeomanry regiments and the colonial forces.

For Russia and Turkey of course the "light horsemen" would be, respectively, the cossacks and the hamidiye; the "line cavalry" would be the rest.

The problem is that I don't know like what should be for Italy (I'm maybe guessing all "line cavalry", like the Germans).

So, I don't know, maybe better having just a single "cavalry" unit, since in WW1 the cavalry was in such a big state of flux, and so different from nation to nation, that it is very hard to say what it is heavy / line and what it is light / auxiliary.

In particular, I'm not sure if all the traditional cavalry of the French should be "line cavalry", or rather only the cuirassiers and the dragoons should be "line cavalry", while the hussars, the chasseurs a cheval and the colonials (chasseurs d'Afrique) should be "light horsemen".

For England it is fairly simple; the "line cavalry" would be the regular cavalry and the horse artillery, and the light horsemen would be the yeomanry and the colonials, but I'm really not so sure about how to draw a line for all other countries...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_yeomanry_during_the_First_World_War
In August 1914 before the start of the First World War there were fifty-five yeomanry regiments. Together with the thirty-one regular cavalry regiments and three regiments of horse part of the Special Reserve, these formed the mounted troops of the British Army.[16] However, soon after the yeomanry was greatly expanded; two new regiments the Welsh Horse and the 3rd Scottish Horse were raised and all regiments old and new formed second line regiments, raising the total to 114.[16] Twelve regiments were broken up to provide divisional reconnaissance squadrons for infantry divisions on the Western Front. Another five served alongside the regular cavalry in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Cavalry Divisions in the same theatre. The largest contingent, forty regiments, served in the Middle East, thirty-one of them in a dismounted role during the Gallipoli Campaign.

Moreover, now that I think about it, you may also want considering having cyclists? Bicycles were quite important during WW1 (but also in WW2 for the Japanese) and a distinctive element of it. They may be just infantry units, with same stats as infantry, but +1 movement and +1 cost.
They were definitely able to move much faster than normal infantry, and seeing cyclists in a WW1 map may be both fun and distinctive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_infantry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Mounted_Division#1st_Cyclist_Division
In July 1916 there was a major reorganization of 2nd Line yeomanry units in the United Kingdom. All but 12 regiments were converted to cyclists:[4] the rest were dismounted, handed over their horses to the remount depots and were issued with bicycles. The 1st Mounted Division was reorganized as the 1st Cyclist Division, now commanding the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Cyclist Brigades.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Cernel
In reply to this post by crazy_german
crazy_german wrote
I personally like to avoid including units with very niche applications
Correct. The costly kind of cavalry, however it's called, should be present in good numbers at start game, but you should almost never buy any more, buying the cheap horses, instead.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

crazy_german
Your posts have convinced me to include only 1 cavalry type. I'm not going to intentionally make a less effective version of a unit
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Cernel
How about the cyclists?



Also, if you want to have only 1 cavalry, duno if you want to call it "horsemen", instead, since "cavalry" would exclude the yeomanry and other stuff that, instead, with only 1 cavalry unit, should be for sure represented by that unit, however it's called.

Myself, I think "cavalry" is better, but it should be supposed to represent all horsemen, not only those formally classified as "cavalry". For example, in a Medieval game, I have "knights", but, despite the unit being called so, they are supposed to represent all kind of heavy cavalry, not only those formally knighted.

I'm just saying that maybe, if you have only "cavalry", you should make clear somewhere that "cavalry" is supposed to represent both cavalry and yeomanry, etc..

The main argument in favour of only 1 cavalry, as a matter of realism, is the state of flux in which cavalry was; for example, all English cavalry was lighter than all German cavalry, since the English cavalry was reformed based on the Boer War experience, while the German cavalry was very conservative and focused on the charge with heavy lances (almost all German cavalrymen had heavy lances).
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

crazy_german
I would need an image, and I still think no. When you consider railroads there isn't much need for faster infantry
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Cernel
In reply to this post by Frostion
I think this image is very good, if you want to go for representing gas as a hand granade.

However, I mostly think representing the big gas container is better than representing the gas hand grenade, for some reasons:

1) The game starts in 1915, when the toxic gas (not counting tear gas, or other non lethal) was almost only used letting it out from tanks, under hopefully favourable breeze.

2) I'm not sure, but I think that gas thanks was the main way to use gas, anyway, in 1915, tho maybe later on artillery gas grenades were preferred.

3) It seems silly to see a relatively enormously big hand grenade beside the other units.

4) I guess the gas will work like an independent suicide unit, while a hand grenade gas would more like seem an equipment for infantry units; it would seem silly if it feels like that the hand grenades are launching themselves at the enemy; for this same reason, I would prefer gas tanks over gas artillery grenades (since anyway I guess you can send them without any artillery units).

5) The hand grenades were a relatively new and uncommon weapon, in short supply, during WW1; so, it would rather make sense to also have the regular hand grenades as stand alone units, interacting with infantry (sadly, support don't work for suicide units).

6) If we don't count tear gas, I'm not sure, but I think hand grenades is one of the least important ways of delivering gas; artillery shells (that would be the normal (not hand) gas grenades) being much more important, and also tanks (again, not sure). So, if I'm right on this point, it would seem like representing something like poisonous gas by one of its most marginal applications.

7) Aside from tear gas (used since 1914) (that I'm assuming your gas is not representing, as well as not representing smoke or stinky gas), I don't actually know when the first toxic gas hand grenades were introduced; I would suggest you at least verify they were something significant in 1915, if you haven't already.

8) Gas tanks would work best as representing generically gas, in all its possible applications, as it may also hint to tanks for just storing gas, that then you can use to fill grenades etc.. It is hard to think about gas in general, which is what this unit is supposed to be, when you specifically see what it is clearly a hand grenade.

For naming a single gas unit, I suggest "poisonous_gas" or "toxic_gas" (poisonous is better, because toxic can be non lethal, and it is not very clear), but also just "gas" seems maybe better; people will call it just gas anyway, no matter how you choose to name it. The only relevant issue is that, while for us "gas" in ww1 is fairly unmistakable (tho sometimes you have to wonder if people are also adding up tear and stinky gas, which is maybe the reason why Imbaked has it in his 1914 map?), back then, and before what we call "gas" came into use, you would have understood "gas" as artificial smoke/fog or tear gas, that I guess your gas unit is not representing (since "tear gas" is non lethal, unless your gas just gives support); moreover, there is also the "stinky gas", for prank attacks.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Navalland
In reply to this post by crazy_german
I think gases should be able to effective without any unit support
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Frostion
In reply to this post by crazy_german
Here are all the units and some flags. This set has no shadows, but I will make a set with shadows when I get the time. Try them out.

Think you should make a new placement file that takes into account that the units are mostly 56x56 pixels, so that they do not overlap that much. I would really like to see a screenshot of the units on the map, even thought the graphics/tiles would finally get a new look.

Frostion-Units&Flags.zip
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

crazy_german
Yes I will certainly need to redo the place file.

I think those flags will work just fine, I'd vote no shadow
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

crazy_german
In reply to this post by Frostion
Is it possible to get the German units in a more classic grey color? I'm not a fan of that purple

Everything else looks great though. Also liked the factory and harbor you included, I think I'll split up those two buildings
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Cernel
In reply to this post by Frostion
Great units.

In particular, cavalry units have always been in short supply in TripleA; maybe there is hope that those cavalry units will incentive more WW2 games to have cavalry, as well (most images can be used to represent the WW2 cavalries (of course, not the German one)).
Especially seeing the WW2 Russians without cavalry is always lame.

But:

1) I think that Germans, Austro-Hungarians etc. is better, for the players names, than Germany, Austria-Hungary etc..

2) Again, I think that the colour you are using for Austria-Hungary would be better given to France, as sky blue was the typical colour of WW1 France (tho, your colour for AH is more like turquoise, which is close). Consequently, I would give the current colour of France over to Austria-Hungary.

3) Of course, something has to be sacrificed in favour of distinctiveness, but, as per France, I think that Germany, being the most important power, should be the one suffering the least; of course, the Germans would have to be green or grey, but seeing the Italians not green would be bad; how about a compromise like this, for a green with some red and a green with some blue:

Italians:

Germans:

I like the neutrals being grey, tho they can also be white (like in WAW).
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

crazy_german
One thing to keep in mind is that the flag images provided are displayed next to the units in the side window, and currently for Germany and Austria-Hungary it looks really werid, because teh flags and the units have totally different color pallets. I'm ok with Austria-Hungary being like this, because its an odd flag anyways. I really don't care that much about colors, but the Germans being purple is really odd to me.
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WW1 Map Ideas

Frostion
I have made a v2 of the unit set. It is made out of the content of the first zip. I would advise any other people trying to make new colors to also use the first zip as base. The v2 zip has toned down and permanently removed some color and there could be a reduced quality if one tries to just tone the color back up.

V2 German color is grey/green/dark green.

V2 Italy now has a dimmed down version of the purple, and this is because I try to make as wide a span in the visual coloring as possible. I can’t see what other color that could replace the purpol shade without also looking a lot like one of the other colors. The colors you post Cernel is very identical.

V2 Russian yellow is also dimmed down.

V2 Flags are a bit toned down in the coloring so they are not that bright.

Try these out: V2Frostion-Units&Flags.zip

1 ... 67891011