Straights, but not narrows

WiSK said:

Can you summarise the arguments for those of us who don't want to trawl through that thread? So far I understood only that people "dislike PTI" and that the passage should stay open "because it was possible (to move through the province)". Surely there have been some stronger arguments?

Click to expand...

Well you are asking the wrong person, since I was very much in favor of the PTI.

Mostly it was the PTI was being removed every else on the map so introducing it in Scandinavia was wrong. Also there was something about PTI not representing places where movement isn't possible, but rather places that wasn't known. And then of course the two argument you have already stated.

Straits

Well now that the discussion on the Sweden-Finland strait appears to have led nowhere, can we discuss the other straits in the game? In reviewing this thread I have gleaned the following suggestions:

Smyrna <-> Macedonia: toss: the reason it's in is so the Otto's don't lose 10% of their economy in Europe until Thrace falls. We can use other methods to help the Ottos. It's in geographically inaccurate. It should go.
The consensus is divided on this, my own personal recomendation is that we need to keep it for gameplay reasons, While Byzantium exists or is at war with the Ottomans the Ottomans will get beat out of Europe. If this could be resolved I would prefer it was removed for accuracy reasons.

Smyrna <-> Ionia: toss: While some Aegean islands are easy to reach from Anatolia, Ionia represents the islands of South of Euboia, i.e., the Duchy of Naxos. They were not easily reachable from Anatolia.
This is the same as the above strait. Because the Ottomans conquered Ionia in the mid 16th century, if The AI-Ottomans could still do it with it removed then I would say remove it.
-UPON further review I would have to say get rid of this strait, the only one that should exist is from Hellas<->Ionia.

Albania/Hellas <-> Corfu: add: The Ottomans reached Corfu by building a pontoon bridge. If you can build a pontoon bridge to reach a place, it's close enough to have straights.
Consensus is slightly favored towards implementing this strait. IT was not conquered by the Ottomans until 1797 and it was attacked by them several times, So I wonder if to make it harder to take it needs to not have a strait. Perhaps we could give it a lvl 2 or 3 starting fortress to go with the strait ?
-UPON further review I would say this Strait is not needed and doesn't make sense.

Kent <-> Calais: toss: The English Channel is one of history's great barriers to conquest, having last successfully been breached in 1066 or thereabouts. Adding a strait obviates the entire purpose the channel has historically served. Lose it.
Consensus favors getting rid of this strait and I agree.

Sicily<->Italian mainland: add:
Consensus is divided, and I think it would help Aragon too much, but it would also make more sense for the later Kingdom of Two Sicilies.

Granad<->North AFrica: Toss:
Consensus favors getting rid of this strait, and I agree.

Bahrain<->Damman and Fars: Add: Bahrain should be connected by straights to both sides of the Persian Gulf. When the Safavids took it from the Portugese, the Safavids had no navy. They used small boats to move
their troops over the water.
Only one mention of it, The Safavid did taek it from the Portugese without the use of a real Navy, I just wonder the effects of opening up the arabian Pennisula to the interior of modern-day Iran.

So looking at the above list it looks like we can get rid of the two straits in England and Spain respectively. Both of these were implemented for Multiplayer considerations and hurt the history of the game.

I would also propose to get rid of:
Strathclyde<->Ulster Strait Toss: I am constantly seeing Scotland mixed up in Ireland because of this strait. I dont think there is anything special about the geography at those two points either to give them a strait, it was purely done for MP considerations. If that spot deserves a strait then Wales <-> Meath and Cornwall<->Leinster does as well.

LAte,
Jester

Jester said:

Well now that the discussion on the Sweden-Finland strait appears to have led nowhere, can we discuss the other straits in the game? In reviewing this thread I have gleaned the following suggestions:

Smyrna <-> Macedonia: toss: the reason it's in is so the Otto's don't lose 10% of their economy in Europe until Thrace falls. We can use other methods to help the Ottos. It's in geographically inaccurate. It should go.
The consensus is divided on this, my own personal recomendation is that we need to keep it for gameplay reasons, While Byzantium exists or is at war with the Ottomans the Ottomans will get beat out of Europe. If this could be resolved I would prefer it was removed for accuracy reasons.

Smyrna <-> Ionia: toss: While some Aegean islands are easy to reach from Anatolia, Ionia represents the islands of South of Euboia, i.e., the Duchy of Naxos. They were not easily reachable from Anatolia.
This is the same as the above strait. Because the Ottomans conquered Ionia in the mid 16th century, if The AI-Ottomans could still do it with it removed then I would say remove it.

Albania/Hellas <-> Corfu: add: The Ottomans reached Corfu by building a pontoon bridge. If you can build a pontoon bridge to reach a place, it's close enough to have straights.
Consensus is slightly favored towards implementing this strait. IT was not conquered by the Ottomans until 1797 and it was attacked by them several times, So I wonder if to make it harder to take it needs to not have a strait. Perhaps we could give it a lvl 2 or 3 starting fortress to go with the strait ?

Kent <-> Calais: toss: The English Channel is one of history's great barriers to conquest, having last successfully been breached in 1066 or thereabouts. Adding a strait obviates the entire purpose the channel has historically served. Lose it.
Consensus favors getting rid of this strait and I agree.

Sicily<->Italian mainland: add:
Consensus is divided, and I think it would help Aragon too much, but it would also make more sense for the later Kingdom of Two Sicilies.

Granad<->North AFrica: Toss:
Consensus favors getting rid of this strait, and I agree.

Bahrain<->Damman and Fars: Add: Bahrain should be connected by straights to both sides of the Persian Gulf. When the Safavids took it from the Portugese, the Safavids had no navy. They used small boats to move
their troops over the water.
Only one mention of it, The Safavid did taek it from the Portugese without the use of a real Navy, I just wonder the effects of opening up the arabian Pennisula to the interior of modern-day Iran.

So looking at the above list it looks like we can get rid of the two straits in England and Spain respectively. Both of these were implemented for Multiplayer considerations and hurt the history of the game.

I would also propose to get rid of:
Strathclyde<->Ulster Strait Toss: I am constantly seeing Scotland mixed up in Ireland because of this strait. I dont think there is anything special about the geography at those two points either to give them a strait, it was purely done for MP considerations. If that spot deserves a strait then Wales <-> Meath and Cornwall<->Leinster does as well.

LAte,
Jester

Click to expand...

Just to clarify.
hellas to corfu - OE never took Corfu , France took it in 1797 when they conquered Venice.
There was never a pontoon bridge and if there was , members where asked to provide reference . result NIL given.
Result - I do not agree with this.

In regards to pontoons, there was one from hellas to negroponte. and this should be the only strait onto this island that should be passable. NOT the Smrnya to Negroponte.


In regards to the rest, I am in agreement be it because I have read about it or not.

Jester said:

Sicily<->Italian mainland: add:
Consensus is divided, and I think it would help Aragon too much, but it would also make more sense for the later Kingdom of Two Sicilies.

Click to expand...

That's the only one i'm concerned about. Sure it would help KoTS, but it would certainly help anyone else. Is it really justifiable to give a straight there when you are removing the one linking NA to Granada?

Jinnai said:

That's the only one i'm concerned about. Sure it would help KoTS, but it would certainly help anyone else. Is it really justifiable to give a straight there when you are removing the one linking NA to Granada?

Click to expand...

Geographically? NO, it doesnt make sense to remove the gibraltar-NA strait and not this one, BUT for gameplay and historical reasons I could understand why one is needed for Sicily. Sicily has always been tied to Italy politically, and this would reinforce that. Sicily has alwasy been the key to Italy(Patton movie reference) and a strait would show this, it would also help with manpower right?
Has anyone been observing what this stait causes for gameplay? That should really ultimatley be the deciding factor.

LAte,
Jester

Jester said:

Has anyone been observing what this stait causes for gameplay? That should really ultimatley be the deciding factor.

Click to expand...

I just wanted to add that I agree. In the case of EVERY strait the deciding factor should be how it works out in terms of gameplay. I don't have any experiences with a Sicily strait I'm afraid.

687;686;sea;1020;Shikoku-Kansai remove - It may be narrow enough for a strait, but this brings it much more into play than it should be historically. If people still want a strait to Shikoku then it should be moved to 687;685;sea;1020;Shikoku-Kanto where its more historic that most of the corssings occured.
688;686;sea;1020;Kyushu-Kansai add - This should be neglibale to gameplay except add some attrition and defense bonus when crossing as this crosses two land provinves which already can be crossed. When the map is redrawn, it will be redrawn properly with a seprate island.

Straight Modifications for 1.38

I would like to get a proposal ready for submittal for version 1.38, that I am in the process of putting together.

How does the following list sound, based upon what I have read in this thread and have seen in the experimental hands off games I have been running?:

Smyrna <-> Macedonia: toss: the reason it's in is so the Otto's don't lose 10% of their economy in Europe until Thrace falls. We can use other methods to help the Ottos. It's in geographically inaccurate. It should go.
The consensus is divided on this, my own personal recomendation based upon how I have seen the Ottoman empire performing without it is to toss it. The Ottoman Empire seems to do just as well without it, and it makes it more historical. Remember that the OE has military access thru Byzantium a tthe beginning and so is able to move troops fairly easily into Europe

Smyrna <-> Ionia: toss: While some Aegean islands are easy to reach from Anatolia, Ionia represents the islands of South of Euboia, i.e., the Duchy of Naxos. They were not easily reachable from Anatolia.
This is the same as the above strait. Because the Ottomans conquered Ionia in the mid 16th century. The AI-Ottomans seem to still be able to conquer Ionia they just come from the other side thru the Hellas<->Ionia strait.

Kent <-> Calais: toss: The English Channel is one of history's great barriers to conquest, having last successfully been breached in 1066 or thereabouts. Adding a strait obviates the entire purpose the channel has historically served. Lose it. Consensus favors getting rid of this strait and I agree.

Granada<->North AFrica: Toss:
Consensus favors getting rid of this strait, and I agree.

Strathclyde<->Ulster Strait Toss: I am constantly seeing Scotland mixed up in Ireland because of this strait. I dont think there is anything special about the geography at those two points either to give them a strait, it was purely done for MP considerations. If that spot deserves a strait then Wales <-> Meath and Cornwall<->Leinster does as well.

Shikoku<->Kansai: replace with Shikoku<->Kanto: It may be narrow enough for a strait, but this brings it much more into play than it should be historically. If people still want a strait to Shikoku then it should be moved to ;Shikoku-Kanto where its more historic that most of the corssings occured.

Kyushu<->Kansai: add - This should be neglible to gameplay except to add some attrition and defense bonus when crossing as this crosses two land provinves which already can be crossed. When the map is redrawn, it will be redrawn properly with a seprate island.

Experimental Straits that we should put into 1.38, with the caveat that they are in on an experimental basis to get review from the multitude of users that can provide some solid feedback on if they are helping the game along historically or not.

Sicily<->Italian mainland: add:
Consensus is divided, and I think it would help Aragon too much, but it would also make more sense for the later Kingdom of Two Sicilies. Experiments using this strait have been inconclusive and I would like it to be tesed by othes.

Bahrain<->Damman and Fars: Add: Bahrain should be connected by straights to both sides of the Persian Gulf. When the Safavids took it from the Portugese, the Safavids had no navy. They used small boats to move
their troops over the water. Only one mention of it, The Safavid did take it from the Portugese without the use of a real Navy, I just wonder the effects of opening up the arabian Pennisula to the interior of modern-day Iran. Experiments using this strait have also been conclusive and I would like it to be tested by others as well.

Lets talk about these and get this hashed out for those that are interested so I can put this into the proposal thread sooner rather than later.

LAte,
Jester

What about two the Sund straits? It really breaks Danish defense from Germans and Sweden much...

The strait between Sicily and Apulia should be removed!
Sicily always had autonomy thoughts and showed them many times in history, that is also why we talk about Kingdom of Two Sicilies and not about Kingdom of Naples.
In fact, there were two autonomous territories with two capital cities: Palermo and Naples.

Examples: War of Vespri, War of Spanish Succession, Kingdom of Naples under Murat...

I would like to add the Svealand <-> Finland strait to the list of experimental straits. The hope is that is will limit fighting and unhistorical army movements in the far north. If this doesn't work out we have to introduce PTI to block Swedish access to Finland instead. Which would require alterations to MKJ's current map, and therefor be nice to know ASAP.

As to removing the Sund strait I'm sceptical. But it would increase the naval importance for Denmark. Primarily because their income is now very much dependent on their naval slider. They will suffer from no land connection to everywhere. The distance from Fyn to Jylland and from Sjælland to Skåne is however very small and has been crossed on foot during very cold winters.

On thing we could consider though is not making a Fyn <-> Sjælland strait when we switch to MKJ's map. The distance here is bigger, and it would prevent Germans from occuping Sjælland which is in my experience the biggest problem. And Sweden couldn't occupy the majority of Denmark without a fleet. Then only af German-Swedish alliance would pose a severe threat, which is quite realistic.

Can we add a strait between Smaland and Gotland? I know the geography isn't really in favour here, but the gameplay would improve a lot in terms of Sweden taking Gotland at least sometimes. Currently, they'll want to take all of Norway and Jutland before they bother to land there.

almoravid said:

Can we add a strait between Smaland and Gotland? I know the geography isn't really in favour here, but the gameplay would improve a lot in terms of Sweden taking Gotland at least sometimes. Currently, they'll want to take all of Norway and Jutland before they bother to land there.

Click to expand...

No one took Gotland without a proper fleet, even galleys were not very useful to get there. The Baltic is not a calm sea, that's why Sweden and Denmark had comparably large warships early on, and Sweden only built a galley fleet for archipelago defense against Russia via Finland.

Jester said:

Smyrna <-> Macedonia: toss: the reason it's in is so the Otto's don't lose 10% of their economy in Europe until Thrace falls. We can use other methods to help the Ottos. It's in geographically inaccurate. It should go.
The consensus is divided on this, my own personal recomendation based upon how I have seen the Ottoman empire performing without it is to toss it. The Ottoman Empire seems to do just as well without it, and it makes it more historical. Remember that the OE has military access thru Byzantium a tthe beginning and so is able to move troops fairly easily into Europe

Smyrna <-> Ionia: toss: While some Aegean islands are easy to reach from Anatolia, Ionia represents the islands of South of Euboia, i.e., the Duchy of Naxos. They were not easily reachable from Anatolia.
This is the same as the above strait. Because the Ottomans conquered Ionia in the mid 16th century. The AI-Ottomans seem to still be able to conquer Ionia they just come from the other side thru the Hellas<->Ionia strait.

Click to expand...

I'm not against removing them, unless OE will be much worse off. Likely it will manage, it did so before these straights were added.

Jester said:

Kent <-> Calais: toss: The English Channel is one of history's great barriers to conquest, having last successfully been breached in 1066 or thereabouts. Adding a strait obviates the entire purpose the channel has historically served. Lose it. Consensus favors getting rid of this strait and I agree.

Granada<->North AFrica: Toss:
Consensus favors getting rid of this strait, and I agree.

Strathclyde<->Ulster Strait Toss: I am constantly seeing Scotland mixed up in Ireland because of this strait. I dont think there is anything special about the geography at those two points either to give them a strait, it was purely done for MP considerations. If that spot deserves a strait then Wales <-> Meath and Cornwall<->Leinster does as well.

Click to expand...

Remove all three IMO. The Granada-NA straight gives MP from Africa, a very bad idea.

Shikoku<->Kansai: replace with Shikoku<->Kanto: It may be narrow enough for a strait, but this brings it much more into play than it should be historically. If people still want a strait to Shikoku then it should be moved to ;Shikoku-Kanto where its more historic that most of the corssings occured.

Kyushu<->Kansai: add - This should be neglible to gameplay except to add some attrition and defense bonus when crossing as this crosses two land provinves which already can be crossed. When the map is redrawn, it will be redrawn properly with a seprate island.

Click to expand...

No opinion.

Experimental Straits that we should put into 1.38, with the caveat that they are in on an experimental basis to get review from the multitude of users that can provide some solid feedback on if they are helping the game along historically or not.

Sicily<->Italian mainland: add:
Consensus is divided, and I think it would help Aragon too much, but it would also make more sense for the later Kingdom of Two Sicilies. Experiments using this strait have been inconclusive and I would like it to be tesed by othes.

Bahrain<->Damman and Fars: Add: Bahrain should be connected by straights to both sides of the Persian Gulf. When the Safavids took it from the Portugese, the Safavids had no navy. They used small boats to move
their troops over the water. Only one mention of it, The Safavid did take it from the Portugese without the use of a real Navy, I just wonder the effects of opening up the arabian Pennisula to the interior of modern-day Iran. Experiments using this strait have also been conclusive and I would like it to be tested by others as well.

Click to expand...

I don't think we should include experiments in AGCEEP, and tests should be done outside the mod. Not that these will hurt. For the reason you mention I don't think Fars-Bahrein is a good idea, compared to the limited historical gains.

OK, I have tossed out all the "experimental" straits. experiments should not go into a submission. Here is what I am looking at submitting.

Smyrna <-> Macedonia: toss: the reason it's in is so the Otto's don't lose 10% of their economy in Europe until Thrace falls. We can use other methods to help the Ottos. It's in geographically inaccurate. It should go.
The consensus is divided on this, my own personal recomendation based upon how I have seen the Ottoman empire performing without it is to toss it. The Ottoman Empire seems to do just as well without it, and it makes it more historical. Remember that the OE has military access thru Byzantium at the beginning and so is able to move troops fairly easily into Europe

Smyrna <-> Ionia: toss: While some Aegean islands are easy to reach from Anatolia, Ionia represents the islands of South of Euboia, i.e., the Duchy of Naxos. They were not easily reachable from Anatolia.
This is the same as the above strait. Because the Ottomans conquered Ionia in the mid 16th century. The AI-Ottomans seem to still be able to conquer Ionia they just come from the other side thru the Hellas<->Ionia strait.

Kent <-> Calais: toss: The English Channel is one of history's great barriers to conquest, having last successfully been breached in 1066 or thereabouts. Adding a strait obviates the entire purpose the channel has historically served. Lose it. Consensus favors getting rid of this strait and I agree.

Granada<->North AFrica: Toss:
Consensus favors getting rid of this strait, and I agree.

Strathclyde<->Ulster Strait Toss: I am constantly seeing Scotland mixed up in Ireland because of this strait. I dont think there is anything special about the geography at those two points either to give them a strait, it was purely done for MP considerations. If that spot deserves a strait then Wales <-> Meath and Cornwall<->Leinster does as well.

Shikoku<->Kansai: replace with Shikoku<->Kanto: It may be narrow enough for a strait, but this brings it much more into play than it should be historically. If people still want a strait to Shikoku then it should be moved to ;Shikoku-Kanto where its more historic that most of the corssings occured.

Kyushu<->Kansai: add - This should be neglible to gameplay except to add some attrition and defense bonus when crossing as this crosses two land provinves which already can be crossed. When the map is redrawn, it will be redrawn properly with a seprate island.

New straits:

Already added in Deluxe map:
New:

For visualisation on the map, white arrows are used.

Sample for Kyzylkum-Uzbek:

As a consequence, I'm not sure Deluxe map is really useful now.

YodaMaster said:

As a consequence, I'm not sure Deluxe map is really useful now.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm curious still as to what the hacking of the map gave...I mean there must have been a reason.

The one thing the deluxe map has is the province name swap for Ufa and Samara.