Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005 From: Honolulu, Hawaii Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Froonp quote:
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets Rob finished a couple of variations for weather at sea. The reasoning here is that while there are 5 types of weather on land there are effectively only 3 types of weather at sea: Fine, Rough Seas (Rain & Snow) and Typhoons (Storm and Blizzard). To communicate that fact clearly the program shows 3 variations of all sea hexes. On land, the 4 inclement weather states are shown as overlays. Here the Norwegian Sea has Rough Seas (Rain) while the North Sea has fine weather. Well, I don't think I like that. First, because Snow & Rain are not exactly the same in game terms at sea. Rain allows invasions, Snow forbids them. You can say that the invasions are on the coastal hexes, where the "real" weather can be seen, but not showing the difference at sea between rain & snow can be missleading for the player who wants to invade. Second, because the rain graphic show here is not very beautifull to me. It seems like a new terrain, not a weather effect. Third because I liked the rain / snow / storm / blizzard effects, even at sea. I know I was one of those who proposed the idea, but now that I see it, I am not convicted. Why not cumulating the weather effect as it was with this new sea state ? Fourth, because having 3 weather types at sea seems a too strong departure from WiF and its 5 weather types, even if some seems the same at sea. This said, the typhoon graphic should have more than one pattern, so that the lightning bolt is not the same everywhere. Yes, I believe you first proposed this. But I am quite happy with them. 1 - No, they are the same at sea. It is the weather in the coastal hex alone that determines if an invasion is possible. Unless I am reading this rule wrong, the weather in the sea area could be Blizzard and an invasion would still be possible if the weather in the coastal hex is Fine or Rain. Indeed, showing the weather in the sea area could be misleading, since it is irrelevant for invasions. 2 - I doubt that it will be mistaken for a different terrain type. For one thing, it would only appear if the player has turned on displaying the weather. As a side note, a long time ago Rob and I considered using something similar to the rough seas bitmap for all sea terrain, but opted instead to stick with something similar to what is on the paper map. 3 - I find the weather overlays at sea to be too 'busy' and prefer the more muted version of the Rough Seas bitmap. When I got the variations from Rob, I first looked at combining the two (variation + overlay) but it was way too frantic/complex. 4 - This is not a departure from WIF but rather a clarification. You could rewrite RAW by inserting the terms Rough Seas and Typhoon where weather at sea is Rain/Snow and Storm/Blizzard and it would have no effect on what the rules mean. 5 - I thought about varying the typhoon graphic because the lightning bolt comes across as repetitous. But I am not so sure. Changing it could make it look like a different terrain/weather effect. Other opinions? This is easy to modify so we can afford to get it right.
_____________________________
Steve Perfection is an elusive goal.
|