Modification of southern Dwilight sea zones

[fodder]

have you actually tried travelling with a unit?

look at the map, what's the best way of going from Rines to Jidington or some such down south?

by sea. You save a lot of equipment damage that way. also quicker

how do you go from Rines to Jidington? Do you go like an idiot and sail north around melegra, east or then south?

or do you embark from Avengmil to eastern drift, then sail south, saving you, I don't know, 3 days or some such?

as i said, there's absolutely no reason to equate harbours with cities. harbours aren't that expensive and there's no reason to stick 1 in 1 city and nowhere else when you can put them in multiple regions. having a harbour in 1 place doesn't make it more expensive elsewhere.

why does it matter that d'hara is split into 4 pieces? why on earth would you need to go to all 4 pieces regularly? and if you need to go to all of them so regularly, then having more harbours make even more sense. heck, since raviel can reach all 4 pieces in 1 hop. all the more reasons to stick harbours there.

just because port raviel is called port raviel doesn't mean raviel can't be used as a port. there's no reason not to have the whole island as a giant port. just adapt, not that hard.

[Chenier]

have you actually tried travelling with a unit?

look at the map, what's the best way of going from Rines to Jidington or some such down south?

by sea. You save a lot of equipment damage that way. also quicker

how do you go from Rines to Jidington? Do you go like an idiot and sail north around melegra, east or then south?

or do you embark from Avengmil to eastern drift, then sail south, saving you, I don't know, 3 days or some such?

as i said, there's absolutely no reason to equate harbours with cities. harbours aren't that expensive and there's no reason to stick 1 in 1 city and nowhere else when you can put them in multiple regions. having a harbour in 1 place doesn't make it more expensive elsewhere.

why does it matter that d'hara is split into 4 pieces? why on earth would you need to go to all 4 pieces regularly? and if you need to go to all of them so regularly, then having more harbours make even more sense. heck, since raviel can reach all 4 pieces in 1 hop. all the more reasons to stick harbours there.

just because port raviel is called port raviel doesn't mean raviel can't be used as a port. there's no reason not to have the whole island as a giant port. just adapt, not that hard.

Riombara never had sea routes. You just gained a whole bunch of shortcuts you didn't have access to a few months ago, you've got absolutely nothing to complain about. All of your long travel times have been cut.

D'Hara relies on sea routes. All of our sea routes will eventually disappear to be replaced by the new sea travel. All of this will always take a lot more time and gold than the old sea routes. In addition, it will also cost infrastructure. But to top it all off, the sea zones are drawn in such a way that exaggerates the travel times, therefore making the travel time increases even worse than they should be.

Rio only gained shortcuts. Shortcuts which were drawn in a way that minimizes distortions and therefore travel times. You don't actually need to embark at any time whatsoever to get anywhere. You have one convenient embarkment zone you really need to invest in.

Rio's situation is absolutely nothing like D'Hara's.

[Tom]

Do keep in mind that it cuts both ways. Your travel times to the outside world are also your enemies travel times to your homeland. Just saying, not that you complain later.

[Chenier]

Do keep in mind that it cuts both ways. Your travel times to the outside world are also your enemies travel times to your homeland. Just saying, not that you complain later.

99% of the travel being done to and from the isles will be by D'Harans. 99% of that 1% will likely be done by allies. Enemies are the least of my concerns.

In any case, I'm not asking "please give us shortcuts and make travel times shorter than one would expect them to be!" I'm willing to accept that the mechanics for sea travel will change for something which, overall, is better. I'm also able to accept that this will have, as a consequence, longer and more expensive travel times for D'Harans.

Because they make things more realistic, and are the same for everyone.

What bothers me is the shape of the sea zones in the central sea. Because they create distortions that are way larger than other probable sea routes (city to city travels, which will represent the bulk of all travel, with city to/from non-city taking almost all of the rest, leaving non-city to non-city travel with a marginal share of all sea travels). All I'm asking for is that the travel times per linear mile for Paisly/Port Raviel, Port Raviel/Port Nebel, and Qubel Lighthouse/Sallowtown be roughly the same as the travel times per linear miles for Candiels/Tower Fatmilak, Madina/Fissoa, Itau/Echiur, Dongheiwai/Flowrestown, Flowrestown/Poryatown, Askileon/Giask, Mimer/Libidizedd, Mimer/Eidulb, Libidizedd/Eidulb... All of these travel paths use sea zones with centroids about on the linear path between the two cities. Some of the other unmentioned connections have small distortions (which I'd love to see fixed if such was possible and I'm willing to draw proposals for such), but none anywhere as bad as D'Hara's distortions.

Travel times will necessarily increase. Travel costs will necessarily increase. I'm fine with that, they are the same for everyone, and will offer new mechanics and possibilities in compensation. And most of all, it's more realistic, and we'll finally be able to build that fleet we always imagined having. However, it's still a burden, it could at least be as imposing per distance traveled as others, even if it'll always be a lot more in total. (D'Harans will sail more than anyone, and almost only D'Harans will use these weird sea zones).

As I said, I'm offering to redraw it all for you. With a spreadsheet to give a report of the travel distortions in the new divisions. And I'd only add one more sea zone (splitting up Shattered Shores), though changes could also be done in the southern sea zones without creating any significant distortions should the total number of sea zones need to be the same (though I'm guessing remapping the connections would make the previous option easier).

[fodder]

complain? i didn't complain at all about riombara. why would i complain? i just gained a bunch of quick routes for my old characters. bargain.

bear in mind that d'hara just gained a big load of shorter routes and you complain 1 is made longer... by 1 turn on land?

or do you prefer zones being altered to having to sail 2 or 3 zones to go from port raviel to sallowtown, like it used to require? (port raviel->port nebel->walk to qubel lighthouse->sallowtown) after all, it's only fair to alter the whole lot if you want the old routes equivalents back.

[Penchant]

complain? i didn't complain at all about riombara. why would i complain? i just gained a bunch of quick routes for my old characters. bargain.

bear in mind that d'hara just gained a big load of shorter routes and you complain 1 is made longer... by 1 turn on land?

or do you prefer zones being altered to having to sail 2 or 3 zones to go from port raviel to sallowtown, like it used to require? (port raviel->port nebel->walk to qubel lighthouse->sallowtown) after all, it's only fair to alter the whole lot if you want the old routes equivalents back.

Now you are losing productive thoughts. Port raviel to Sallowtown never was a route so your claim does not apply as he talking strictly the old sea routes, not how they were used  when combined. As to your complain comment at the beginning, that is precisely what he said , though he may have implied you were complaining due to the way you talked traveling through the sea zones partially sounded like complaining, nonetheless arguing will not help this so try to stay away from comments solely to argue something. ( Yes, this is a bit hypocritical to my last statement, but can't be said otherwise.)

[Eldargard]

Personally, I like the look of Chénier's changes.

[Chenier]

complain? i didn't complain at all about riombara. why would i complain? i just gained a bunch of quick routes for my old characters. bargain.

bear in mind that d'hara just gained a big load of shorter routes and you complain 1 is made longer... by 1 turn on land?

or do you prefer zones being altered to having to sail 2 or 3 zones to go from port raviel to sallowtown, like it used to require? (port raviel->port nebel->walk to qubel lighthouse->sallowtown) after all, it's only fair to alter the whole lot if you want the old routes equivalents back.

I prefer a realistic travel time for the distance to be traveled, by the reduction of distortions due to unintuitive zone cut-ups.

There's a bunch of reasons to go from island to island, continent to continent. There's ambassador work, courtier work, trading, preaching, police work, civil work, investments, guild funding, RP meetings, etc, etc.

I don't mind the fact that taking a hop through a townsland to get from Port Raviel to Sallowtown might make the trip somewhat shorter.  I just want the sea-only travel from city to city not to be needlessly long due to distortions.

Because correct me if I'm wrong, but sailing times are based off the distance between centroids, right?

What  bothers me is distortions in such a high-traffic area. I'm not a huge fan of Dancing Tides either, but I honestly don't expect as much North->South traffic to be had there as in the central sea.

[egamma]

What if we added one or two sea zones? That should shrink the areas involved, and make the region centers closer together, reducing travel times.

[Tom]

Because correct me if I'm wrong, but sailing times are based off the distance between centroids, right?

Only between sea zones. If landing or embarking are involved, it's not that easy.

So if you embark in X to A and travel to B and then to C and then land in Y (with X,Y land regions and A,B,C sea zones), then:

• travel between X and A is embarking time, geography has no effect
• travel from A to B depends on X and is not between centroids (but towards B's center)
• travel from B to C is between centroids
• travel from C to Y is landing time, geography does have an effect, in this case it is calculated from C's center.(*)

(*) however, if you do a trip like X to A to Y, it will NOT be calculated from A's center, but based on X

What if we added one or two sea zones? That should shrink the areas involved, and make the region centers closer together, reducing travel times.

No, please. The number of sea zones is intentionally kept small, and their sizes intentionally several times of land regions. You would have to make an exceptionally convincing case for me to consider adding any zones, much more convincing that shifting a few borders around.

[Solari]

I like the thrust of the proposal, but can examples be provided that do not seem to be so clearly to the immediate advantage of D'Hara?

[Penchant]

I like the thrust of the proposal, but can examples be provided that do not seem to be so clearly to the immediate advantage of D'Hara?

Cheniers point is, this isn't an advantage for D'hara but a disadvantage no one else has.

[Solari]

Cheniers point is, this isn't an advantage for D'hara but a disadvantage no one else has.

There are several other natural advantages that D'Hara enjoys. A reasonable person could argue that it should be slightly less convenient for an island nation of four/five cities to travel about. It doesn't make much sense if you're thinking "simulator", but BM isn't much of a simulator.

[Chenier]

Only between sea zones. If landing or embarking are involved, it's not that easy.

So if you embark in X to A and travel to B and then to C and then land in Y (with X,Y land regions and A,B,C sea zones), then:

• travel between X and A is embarking time, geography has no effect
• travel from A to B depends on X and is not between centroids (but towards B's center)
• travel from B to C is between centroids
• travel from C to Y is landing time, geography does have an effect, in this case it is calculated from C's center.(*)

(*) however, if you do a trip like X to A to Y, it will NOT be calculated from A's center, but based on X

No, please. The number of sea zones is intentionally kept small, and their sizes intentionally several times of land regions. You would have to make an exceptionally convincing case for me to consider adding any zones, much more convincing that shifting a few borders around.

Thank you for this explanation. I'll look over this and recalculate assumed distortions, to see if effective distortions are smaller, equal, or greater than believed. Off the top of my head, I can't say for sure right now.

Cheniers point is, this isn't an advantage for D'hara but a disadvantage no one else has.

This. At least, not at a level anywhere near D'Hara's. I'm quite willing to help minimize distortions everywhere, though.

[Eldargard]

I like the thrust of the proposal, but can examples be provided that do not seem to be so clearly to the immediate advantage of D'Hara?

To be fair, any advantage D'Hara gains is a disadvantage as well. As been pointed out, streamlining traffic out also streamlines traffic in.