|
Post by Caerleon (Tristan) on Mar 22, 2017 3:07:58 GMT
So some of the conversation about ship movement made me think we need to put ports of the map.
So I started with ones I could do (i.e. only one place it could go) or had access to the player. If people can fill in the blanks below I'll make a pretty map and add it to the collection.
Gawant - sea zone 10 or 11 Dumonia - sea zone 1, 6, 7, 8 or 10 Tir Mor - sea zone 1 or 2 Vel Abri - sea zone 8, 9 or 22 Rodogdii - sea zone 9 or 13 Nagnati - sea zone 18, 19, 20
|
|
|
Post by Mercia(andreas) on Mar 22, 2017 3:13:23 GMT
Note, Essetir have Port on the Major River leading to sea zone 2.
|
|
|
Post by Caerleon (Tristan) on Mar 22, 2017 4:08:06 GMT
Note, Essetir have Port on the Major River leading to sea zone 2. Might need to work out a different icon for river ports (maybe a barge style one).
|
|
|
Post by SouthWestern Traders on Mar 22, 2017 5:56:05 GMT
Because I have just been going with the rules as written, and it would be a substantial (if only slightly annoying) change, I'd argue that the difference between a lvl 3 and a lvl 4 province isn't the sudden existence of a single port, but rather the existence of a reliable network with which to make use of the provinces various ports.
Accordingly, Wessex and Dumonia would have a few ports on the southside, and a few ports on the northside, in my view.
If we are going with ports, all major sea zones should have ports at the least (for where ports are valid). Dumonia, for example, definitely had a port going out on the southside (where the guild was located), but probably also one going out into sea zone 8. Both sea zones are crucial enough that it would be odd to not have a port leading into those areas.
|
|
James Holt (NT)
Northern Traders
Lord of Waffles, Master of the flight of Daggers
The Iron Bank of Albion
Posts: 366
|
Post by James Holt (NT) on Mar 22, 2017 6:31:32 GMT
The rules as i read them say that provinces of size 4 or above have "a port", which i interpret as being one port in the sea zone closest to the province capital. For size 1-3 provinces, it is a separate structure that can be built with court actions. The construction rules for the port also specify that the "free" port provinces get for being size 4+ goes away unless someone actually went and paid for one.
Following those rules it should be straightforward to determine where the ports are.
|
|
|
Post by X Glendall Pendragon (Camelot) on Mar 22, 2017 9:44:43 GMT
I read the rules as SWT lays here, that the state of having a port is a property of the province, not a link between a singular sea zone and a province. Just like having a castle protects the entire region. This is helped by the fact that it seems like you can only have one port-province-building. River ports are a different story, can't even find those in the book.
|
|
|
Post by Mercia(andreas) on Mar 28, 2017 15:35:50 GMT
I read the rules as SWT lays here, that the state of having a port is a property of the province, not a link between a singular sea zone and a province. Just like having a castle protects the entire region. This is helped by the fact that it seems like you can only have one port-province-building. River ports are a different story, can't even find those in the book. Page 21. regent guide. River (major): A great river passes through the province. Ships can be built in provinces bordering major rivers. All river provinces of level 4+ are considered to have a port structure. Does not stack with Coast (major lake), but does stack with Coast (ocean). Crossing a major river is difficult unless there is a bridge structure, in which case the bridge is considered to allow uninhibited movement to friendly units.
|
|
|
Post by Caerleon (Tristan) on Mar 29, 2017 0:00:35 GMT
Part of the issue I'm having with ports is the way Linde has drawn sea zones. In the RoE game (which the rules are drawn from each coastal province had a matching sea zone. So it was never necessary to specify where the port was (as it could only be in 1 option).
With Linde's sea zone map there are multiple options, which complicate issues.
It also makes naval blockades questionable, do you only to blockade one sea zone to blockade the province, or so you need to blockade all of them.
|
|
|
Post by Mercia(andreas) on Mar 29, 2017 0:14:14 GMT
Like sieges blockades need to be complete to be more than a annoyance. But if you have 1 ship per enemy province level you could properly deal prosperity damage or suppress half the trade holdings coastal provinces and all for island provinces.
|
|
|
Post by SouthWestern Traders on Mar 29, 2017 0:18:59 GMT
Like sieges blockades need to be complete to be more than a annoyance. But if you have 1 ship per enemy province level you could properly deal prosperity damage or suppress half the trade holdings coastal provinces and all for island provinces. Unless land-based occupation will similarly only suppress half the trade holdings, I recommend that blockades continue working as the regent guide describes.
It does leave the question of "which sea zone?".
|
|
|
Post by Caerleon (Tristan) on Mar 29, 2017 0:26:04 GMT
Like sieges blockades need to be complete to be more than a annoyance. But if you have 1 ship per enemy province level you could properly deal prosperity damage or suppress half the trade holdings coastal provinces and all for island provinces. Unless land-based occupation will similarly only suppress half the trade holdings, I recommend that blockades continue working as the regent guide describes.
It does leave the question of "which sea zone?".
Which is why I favour putting ports on the map, and why I also favour allowing people to build additional ports (if they have the time and money).
If you change blockade from province (which worked in RoE because each province only had 1 sea zone) to port then the rules can roughly stay the same but it adds some choices about where to build ports (that have strategic benefit/penalty).
|
|