Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Hands in the Sea» Forums » General

Subject: Why is it acceptable to not show connections? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't understand the mindset where it's okay to have a wargame map where you can't see where you can move without looking at some other component (e.g. cards). This was the case in A Few Acres of Snow, and was a deal breaker for me there. Is the same thing going on here? You have to know every card in order to make reasonable decisions?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Berger
United States
Littleton
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jim, putting all of the sea connections on the map would have overcrowded the map, in my opinion anyway.

That said, if someone wants to put together a prototype just to see what it might look like, they should give it a shot and post it. I have a feeling the logo will need to be moved back to center so that you can more easily show the connections to the locations in southern Italy.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Judd Vance
United States
Wichita
Kansas
flag msg tools
Every Man a (K-State) Wildcat!
badge
"Just get that sucka to the designated place at the designated time and I will gladly designate his ass...for dismemberment!" - Sho Nuff.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
I don't understand the mindset where it's okay to have a wargame map where you can't see where you can move without looking at some other component (e.g. cards). This was the case in A Few Acres of Snow, and was a deal breaker for me there. Is the same thing going on here? You have to know every card in order to make reasonable decisions?


You can clearly see all of the land connections and that is where most of the action occurs.

Drawing the connections on the map would be a mess because not all connections work two ways. For instance, the Rhegium card connects to 3 locations (Catana, Syracuse, and Tarentum), but 7 different cards connect to it (those 3 plus Camarina, Thermae, Tyndaris, and Velia).

I just uploaded a chart that shows the locations with every card that connects to it. I'll provide the link once the mods approve and post it.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
airjudden wrote:
Drawing the connections on the map would be a mess because not all connections work two ways. For instance, the Rhegium card connects to 3 locations (Catana, Syracuse, and Tarentum), but 7 different cards connect to it (those 3 plus Camarina, Thermae, Tyndaris, and Velia).

That was my frustration with AFAoS. I need to be able to make spatial plans by looking at the board, rather than by abstraction.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Judd Vance
United States
Wichita
Kansas
flag msg tools
Every Man a (K-State) Wildcat!
badge
"Just get that sucka to the designated place at the designated time and I will gladly designate his ass...for dismemberment!" - Sho Nuff.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The rule of thumb is that a connection will have a sea connection from locations that are 2 spaces away and none from an adjacent space (that will be a cart connection). The notable exception is that the Agrigentum to Syracuse (and vise-versa) sea connection was severed. This happened after I (as Carthage) got a lucky card draw and managed to attack neutral Syracuse first. That is opposite of history, so that connection was removed to prevent that (Doing so, creates a balance issue). Instead of fiddly rules saying something like "Rome must attack Syracuse first," he designed the connection so that unless Rome is trying to intentionally lose the game, the history will be obeyed.

The other notable 2-step connection that was severed was Oristano to Aleria. Again, this was to keep Carthage from getting a lucky draw and settling it first, which could really screw up game balance. Carthage CAN settle it first, and I have seen it done, but it's going to take a minimum of 2 turns to do it. Aleria--> Oristano remains because Carthage starts with Caralis, so if Carthage doesn't settle it, it is not because of a faulty card draw, but because the Carthaginian player screwed up.

As far as the cards connecting the land masses (Italy and North Africa's connections to Sicily & Corsica/Sardinia), you will memorize these really quickly, because the connecting locations are early targets that the players will want to settle (ex: Agrigentum, Aleria, Syracuse).

I know Acres was crazy, but this one is pretty logical. And if nothing else, just keep my help sheet handy when you play.

File just got uploaded:

https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/136732/sea-connections-ch...
6 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Clarke
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Loving Hardcore History with Dan Carlin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So for the 4 non coastal locations...no available sea connections, sure.

Carthage gets added for game balance, so both capitals are inaccessible by sea.

Why were Neapolis and Thapsus added?

Neapolis I can see possibly being a game balance issue for some reason, but Thapsus? Why not a sea connection from Clupea?

I assume that all other one way connections that are not intuitive are for balance issues? Like Thapsus to Heraclea? (That one really surprised me. Though I'm sure there's more on the map.)


I'd love a player aid map of all the sea connections, too.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Judd Vance
United States
Wichita
Kansas
flag msg tools
Every Man a (K-State) Wildcat!
badge
"Just get that sucka to the designated place at the designated time and I will gladly designate his ass...for dismemberment!" - Sho Nuff.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Until I made this player aid, I didn't realize that Thapsus and Neapolis had no connections by sea. I've played this thing a zillion times and never noticed it.

Why? Neither are threatened. Thapsus as a worthless target. Rome would never want it. Clupea is a prime target and conquering it (and controlling the sea, which is pretty much needed if you are going to mount any worthwhile invasion of Africa) would knock Hadrumetum and Thapsus out of supply.

Neapolis is about the safest location on the board. If you are going to conquer Rome, you are not going up the Italian peninsula. It takes too long and you will not control the sea for that long. The faster route to Rome is through Pisa (and that will fail, also). If you conquered Messina, you would turn south and go for Syracuse. (Dan did this to me). If you take over Sicily, you automatically win the game. That is much easier than turning north and going for Rome.

Of all the games we played, we only managed one successful invasion into Italy and one into Africa. Numerous failures, but only one success.



3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Clarke
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Loving Hardcore History with Dan Carlin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I understand how the lack of connections makes no gameplay difference...but that works both ways...if the locations in question did have their "logical" connections on the cards, it wouldn't affect game balance either.

I would assume that during the design process all sea connections were, at first, in place...if a location was "2 away" it was connected by sea. Obviously some connections were taken away for balance, but others, as you've pointed out, wouldn't make any difference one way or the other. Just curious.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.