Wow, I had this completely wrong then.
I should have just looked at the XML I guess. First time looking through a complete map XML... lol
I now see that Supply Ships count, as does LB Army Brussel, but the rest of de Parma DOES NOT. Ships with shields count (I see now that Diana is named in the legend - should have noticed that).
(I did get the +2 de Parma and +1 de Parma F & R bonuses as well as the LB Army Brussel +1. I was only looking for what conditions triggered the same nation
So here's what confused me...
Why make a special mention of "Land Base Armies" to include ONLY LB Army Brussel in a 9 ship
Personally I wouldn't include that one Land Base. There are more Spanish ships than British anyway. If you include it, shouldn't you include the British LB's? IF you include LB's the legend could read "Land Bases count as part of the same nation bonus". But it's a "ships of the same nation" bonus, so why include a Land Base anyway (or armies, for that matter)??
Your solution works for clarity - it's what I initially assumed the legend to indicate. It gave me a small additional reason to go for the de Parma
By the way, this emphasizes the value of dropping Sao Martinho or Triumph starting positions. IF de Parma armies count toward the same nation bonus, then with all of de Parma and 1 Spanish starting position (say Sao Martinho, which would be logical) you have an extra +1. So if you dropped Sao Martinho and took the whole de Parma region you would get a total of +5.
than the beacons bonus with fewer territs to conquer. (9 vs 12 although with a n3 on Army Kales)
But wait, that seems like double-counting the de Parma region, since you get +2 for holding it and once you hold it you also most likely score the +1 Spanish nation bonus.
In my opinion adding the de Parma armies to the same nation bonus doesn't
balance the beacons bonus because one player/team can easily drop BOTH and then it's a double advantage to them.
I have less of a problem with the de Parma region than with the beacons mechanic. It feels
less protected in my experience.
The one-way beacon chain is more of a problem because it gives protection (can't attack in the opposite direction) and access for attacking out on the other end of the map.
cairnswk wrote:i've played games where this bonus it totally ignored
True, I have as well. But I've also played games where once the treasuries are cleared this is the next logical bonus opportunity.
The fundamental problem is that the beacons and de Parma become an opportunity
ONLY for those who drop on them. They are unique among the map's bonuses. It's not like they are just 2 more bonuses out there which any of the players can chose from. Sure, in many scenarios they will be ignored. But if they were totally irrelevant, why have them anyway?
They provide a unique opportunity to obtain an extra uncontested bonus and the beacons have other additional advantages.
cairnswk wrote:By providing two way attack at those points, simply means that land gets occupied as a result of holding that beacon which goes against the initial concept of lighting the beacon from the land.
One-way attack allows land to get occupied from the beacons as things stand - being able to attack to/from the beacons to the land at several points isn't the issue. The issue is it's an unfair advantage to whoever comes from the left side. If you're trying to counter someone coming up the beacon chain you are blind (with fog) and can only defend. You can cut the chain, but can't counter-attack. You also have to fight through neutrals to get to the beacons, while Penzance starts right on one.
I appreciate the desire to reflect the historical function of the beacons, but I really think gameplay needs to trump the historical scenario here. Just my opinion!
I think the graphics and layout can communicate the historical function of the beacons, while 2-way attacks would change the gameplay to something more interesting and fair.
All metaphors break down. The beacons only gave a warning, they didn't carry troops to attack London. They also had a one-time use.
So I don't see any problem in the storyline with breaking things up a little.
To summarize I recommend:
1. Drop LB Army Brussel from the same nation bonus and eliminate the reference to it in the legend. It's a ships bonus. Alternatively include all LB's OR all armies.
2. Give the beacon chain two-way attacks and maybe put n6's on the two end beacons. This puts Penzance and London on equal footing with the other LB's for access to the beacon chain and protection from it.
Two way beacon attacks would still provide a gameplay dynamic similar to their historical function in that whoever uses the beacons could gain the advantage of surprise over their enemies. Actually as things stand this is exactly what they offer the person who starts on Penzance - they just don't let anyone else use it quite as effectively.
P.S. Merry Christmas!