Latest Posts

Topic: Seafaring

Nasenbaer
Avatar
Joined: 2009-02-21, 18:17
Posts: 828
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2010-06-03, 13:21

Astuur wrote: @ Nasenbaer If you have those two types -- military and merchant --- how would you know which one to send, without some sort of expedition prior to that? Would it really be so complicated to have an explorer mission team that could land without a harbor to simply gather some information?

didn't wrote anything against that idea face-wink.png - and I do not see a reason, why that could not be implemented - perhaps with a small military ship, something like a "ship scout"


Top Quote
ixprefect
Joined: 2009-02-27, 14:28
Posts: 367
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2010-06-03, 13:33

Personally, I dislike the idea of having too many different ship types. It will only end with a handful of ships hanging around close to your harbors without doing anything because you don't need them anymore.


Top Quote
Nasenbaer
Avatar
Joined: 2009-02-21, 18:17
Posts: 828
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2010-06-03, 14:14

ixprefect wrote: Personally, I dislike the idea of having too many different ship types. It will only end with a handful of ships hanging around close to your harbors without doing anything because you don't need them anymore.

That's not really a problem of ship types but of the number of ships - if the merchants are waiting for something to do, it does not depend on the size of the ship, but obviously on the case, that there are either too many ships or just nothing to do face-wink.png .

As I can read from all the posts, it seems we are all against, too cheap ships - thus, there shouldn't be too many ships anyways. Further all were for a way to attack from sea - okay we could use merchants ships for this, could be discussed. However I would prefare very expensive military type ships to make it only a last chance for players to attack a completely settled island of the enemy.

This also brings the question: what if an attack fails? Does the ship sink? Or does the attacked enemy capture the ship? ( to make it simply and to make mass attacks even more unlikely I would prefare the first)

The more i think about the expedition stuff, I would say there should be the possibility to fill an expedition ship with (either nothing, one of the following or both):

  • all stuff needed for a harbour + builder + (at least one) soldier to defend the harbour (needed!)
  • scout + food

You would than either send the ship out for a general expedition

  • the ship sails at the coast and if the island's coast is fully explored tries to find a new island to explore the coast.
  • if the ship holds a scout and has food for him, it will ask the player whether to send out the scout, once a likely place for a harbour is found.
  • if the ship holds the material for a harbour, it will ask the player whether (s)he would like to build a harbour every time a likely place is found.

Or alternatively sending out a ship for harbour creation on a prior found (on an expedition) place.

Military actions should only be possible with expensive war ships and only, if the player already located a place to attack.


Top Quote
raistware
Joined: 2009-09-07, 17:31
Posts: 71
Ranking
Likes to be here
Posted at: 2010-06-03, 17:38

I like your approach of misions Nasenbaer.

I also think that every travel should consume food, so only a healthy economy can supply a large fleet traveling through seas constantly, and not only a one time wood budget is needed to have a large fleet.

I think that only three types of ship's are needed:

  • Kayaks (or small boats) : Just to be used by carriers to connect two sea-connected flags. Just like S2.
  • Carabel (or any name for a medim ship): This only is able to make exploration, scouting and transport missions. Transport little amount of wares, ¿may be 5-8 units each travel? This ship do not consume food.
  • Cruiser (a big ship): Is able to make transportation, colonization and attack missions. Can trasport a large amount of wares each travel ¿arround 40 ware units?. Every transport mission consumes one food unit, every other mission type consumes two food units.

Kayaks are very cheap and easy to build, 2 o 3 woods could be enough.

Carabels are also cheap, ¿like 6 wood and 2 iron? Will be usefull on early game to scout own island and nearby ones. And when you have some other outpost sea connected, still is usefull transporting goods between warehouse harbours, but you will not want to build lot of them, because they have a limited mision options and very low transport rate, but free.

Cruisers are very expensive, maybe 4x cost of carabel (24 wood and 8 iron?). Ideally a player will want to get a large fleet of this, but really I think that a player only will have three or four at any time, because having more is a waste of resources, and a player should have a VERY large sea connected empire to require more ships. Also requiring that this ships consume food for every travel makes the player to create a bit healthier economy if he wants to rule the seas.

Every time you send a ship to travel arround you should get a mission "Exploration" (travel at see to discover the coast), "Scouting" (travel to a discovered coast and scout with a worker a while, then return), "Transportation" (to a discovered harbour, may be own or enemy), "Colonization" (travel to a unreclaimed land and build a harbour) or "Military" (travel to a reclaimed land and launch an attack), and then ship will be carried with proper wares to acomply his mission.

With military missions we should decide what will be done:

  • 1 ) ¿A ship is filled only by a builder, soldiers and then launched to attack? Once the ship landed, builder refit ship onto a headquarters harbour. Soldiers stay on ship, defending it, until building is finished then soldiers moves to new building and ship dissapear (it has been refitted to a building!). Then player can launch attacks from this new position.

  • 2 ) ¿A ship is filled by builder, soldiers and wares to build a military site? Once ship landed, builder consumes wares to build a military site on enemy territory. Once building is finished, soliders are moved to new building, builder get into ship and ship can return home when requested by player. Player can launch attack from this new position.

  • 3 ) ¿A ship is filled only by soldiers? Once ship landed, it acts like a military site, allowing launch of attacks. Ship must stay landed if any of his soldiers is on land, but can return to home is all soldiers are inside it and no enemy is 'on his flag'. Enemy can capture or destroy ship (let player choice what will do, or make it random, player will always choose capture a free ship).

  • ¿Is the player allowed to send reinforcements to military missions to replace dead soldiers? (Only apply for options one and two)

  • ...

Once a behavior is selected, it can be better detailed.

Edit: To make pretty text face-grin.png

Edited: 2010-06-03, 17:41

Top Quote
Nasenbaer
Avatar
Joined: 2009-02-21, 18:17
Posts: 828
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2010-06-03, 19:11

raistware wrote:

3 ) ¿A ship is filled only by soldiers? Once ship landed, it acts like a military site, allowing launch of attacks. Ship must stay landed if any of his soldiers is on land, but can return to home is all soldiers are inside it and no enemy is 'on his flag'. Enemy can capture or destroy ship (let player choice what will do, or make it random, player will always choose capture a free ship).

definitly 3) ! face-smile.png - I still prefare to destroy ships of failed missions.

Edited: 2010-06-03, 19:12

Top Quote
chuckw
Avatar
Joined: 2010-03-15, 16:23
Posts: 945
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: New York - USA
Posted at: 2010-06-04, 15:12

I agree with the destruction of the ships of failed military missions. In historic reality as you know, armies/navies would scuttle or cannibalize their own ships rather than see them fall into the hands of the enemy.

I like the proposal for three ship sizes as proposed by raistware plus the large, special-purpose military invasion transport that Nasenbaer mentioned.

I've never seen S2 and don't know how watercraft were utilised, but the small boats (kayaks) would be perfect to deal with small water obstacles like rivers or lakes, and could even be used in limited coastal and short inter-island transportation. Similarly, unless trade, colonization or military action is involved, a large ship is overkill for exploration and could limit the flexibility and speed offered by a smaller ship (caravel). Speaking of speed, the rate at which a particular craft moves across the map is a point that needs consideration. One would think, "the larger the ship, the slower it travels".

I know this forum's central theme is seafaring, but on the subject of the small boats, is there any thought about ferries that would allow transportation of people/livestock as well as wares across small/mid-sized water obstacles? A ship in this scenario again seems like overkill but not all inland and coastal water barriers can be forded for the sake of efficient transportation. Alternatively there is an opportunity for bridge-building which could conceivably include aquaducts and even sluices for logging or agricultural irrigation.

Just thinking out loud. face-grin.png

Edited: 2010-06-04, 15:38

I see little people.

Top Quote
raistware
Joined: 2009-09-07, 17:31
Posts: 71
Ranking
Likes to be here
Posted at: 2010-06-04, 16:27

On this same thread I think I have read someone that proposes that kayaks could transport people with an 'upgrade' of their flags ... or may be I see that on launchpad or other thread.

I will repeat my proposal summarized, because seems that someone has made a mistake face-wink.png :

  • Small boats: transport flag to flag wares (or workers) by one by one.
    • Someone proposed an upgrade on flags (or dock building, don't remember exactly) that allows trasportation of workers between this two Dock flags.
  • Medium boats: Available missions : explore, scout and transport.

  • Big boats: Available missions : transport, colonize and military.

Small boats act just like carriers, but they only travel on sea / rivers. Could be smart to put a maximum lenght to this roads, may be 3 o 4 tiles, and obviously flags cannot be built on water tiles.

Only medium boats are able to send exploration and scout missions, so they are allways cool to have some around. They need a harbour to be built and to load or unload cargo.

Only big boats are able to send colonization and military missions, so ther are allways usefull, but they are expensive enought to make very hard to create a large fleet without a strong economy. They need a harbour to be built and to load or unload cargo.

Just to let it clear I think that Nasenbaer proposal merged with this is like adding a Huge Boat, that only allows military missions, and remove Big boats ability to launch military ones.


On aqueducts and so, open a new thread, but currently water has nothing to do with growment of vegetables as long as I know.

Edited: 2010-06-04, 16:31

Top Quote
kraileth
Joined: 2010-03-14, 16:34
Posts: 59
Ranking
Likes to be here
Posted at: 2010-06-04, 20:04

raistware wrote: On this same thread I think I have read someone that proposes that kayaks could transport people with an 'upgrade' of their flags ... or may be I see that on launchpad or other thread.

't was me and in this thread. The idea that the small boats should be able to transport workers as well was raised before and one of the problems mentioned was that the workers would have to stop at the flag and wait for the boat to get to the flag. But I was thinking about the role of the terrain type water; what is it meant to be? Right now it is a blocker, just like lava, deep snow, etc. With boats (and later: ships) it will become crossable - at least at a short distance. This is a good thing, really. But from the point of map making, I'd rather make water "semi passable", so that you can shorten your supply lines by building water ways but only be able to transport people after you have reached the other shore by land before (and build a dock there as well). If it was allowed for workers to use the water ways just like any ware, water would not be so much different from land terrain (with only the very small difference that the route can not be too long). But having this restriction makes the whole thing more interesting and opens up more possibilities in level designing.

I also strongly support that ships of failed missions be sunk, but it seems everyone favors this method as well.

About the different size of the ships... Well, I think that it is a good idea. But didn't Nasenbaer state that things were getting to complicated already? Complexity is a good thing actually. Yet somebody will have to code it and I think it is true that there is already enough work to do with WL.

So why not think about a concept that will work in a minimalistic state while being expandable at a later time?


Top Quote
chuckw
Avatar
Joined: 2010-03-15, 16:23
Posts: 945
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: New York - USA
Posted at: 2010-06-05, 17:35

For simplicity, at least as far as seafaring goes, I propose one ship type per tribe.

  • Barbarians could have something like a Viking longboat.
  • Imperials could have a ship along the lines of a Roman galley.
  • Atlanteans have a ship already styled for the tutorial campaign that should serve them nicely. face-wink.png

All three ships could certainly be put to any of the missions, merchant and military, that have been discussed, but again these will be sea vessels not for inland lakes or rivers.

I also agree with kraileth's comment regarding small water barriers. Whether small boats (kayaks, ferries, etc.) or bridges are employed, it should be required that the player has first reached and claimed the opposite shore by another route.

A differentiation between inland lake or waterway and sea shore may somehow have to be implemented into the maps to prevent or dissuade players from ship-building on inland waterways that may be land-locked. Hmmm, maybe saltwater/fresh water terrains.


I see little people.

Top Quote
Astuur
Avatar
Joined: 2009-02-28, 10:08
Posts: 733
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Posted at: 2010-06-07, 08:39

I think, on the long run, the best solution for this would be to have 2 types of water - one impassable, and one sailable -
as 2 different terrain types for mapmakers to use. This offers the best flexibility. Some maps were created with the blocking feature of water taken for granted and rely on this.
However, from what I have learned here, it is possible, but not so easy to add another terraintype to each world.
If I interpret SirVer's and Nasenbear's post correctly, seafaring is to come rather soon, and there will not be a chance to rework things like worlds and terrain types before ((if indeed it is ever done).
We'll have to accept that some maps will not work as intended when seafaring is possible, unless they are edited -- for example to disallow harbors and so make seafaring impossible again.


Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills.
I am on Win32, have no means to compile, and rely on prefabricated distributions (Thanks to Tino).

Top Quote