To refine the map, I've analysed how many hexes it has of each type. I have drawn up a table that shows how many hexes have dot towns with 6 playable hexsides, or cities with 5 playable hexsides, and so forth. For hexes with fewer than five hexsides, I've noted the different configurations (e.g. K, X or Y shapes). This shows me that I have a few hexes that don't fit the more general pattern, which suggests that I might change those hexes. For example, one city hex has just 2 playable hexsides that are adjacent and I don't want to provide a tile with that shape, so I might make it a pre-printed hex. In other cases I can add track in otherwise unplayable hexes, in order to increase the playable hexsides of adjacent hexes. None of this is rocket science but the table is very useful in suggesting which hexes might need work.
I've also realised that I have large numbers of dot towns. In some cases, this could lead to boring track lays. For example, where a row of coastal hexes each contains a dot town, they would all upgrade to green "K" tiles with only one permitted orientation. I am considering adding some extra track to link such hexes along the coast, so that the number of playable hexsides is increased and so more options are available when laying tiles.
I'm pleased to be at this stage; I think I am close to having a playable map. I'm sure it will continue to change but it's taken a long time just to get this far.
Friday 30 October 2009
Friday 23 October 2009
The joy of skew
Having made to decision to excise the south-east, I've gone back to Corel Draw and fiddled about with the map some more. I've found that by skewing the outline of the coast and slightly changing the rotation of the hex grid, I can align a row of hexes neatly along the eastern coast of Britain, from Ipswich to Dundee. Then at right angles, the bottom of the map will run from Southampton neatly across to Southend. With a little tinkering of the half hexes on the southern edge, I have a reasonably neat looking map - better than I had before. I'll have to fit in off-board areas for Norwich and Aberdeen, but they should be possible.
On a separate note, fitting the hexes around the Severn estuary has proven a challenge. I used to have the line running from London through Bristol and into Cardiff, but historically the Severn tunnel wasn't build until quite late in the game. So instead I'm forcing track to be laid via Gloucester, and this is where the hex grid has made things tricky. I think I've handled it, by adding some mountain hexsides, including one that isn't really a mountain but blocks the geographically non-existent direct route from Worcester to Cardiff, forcing track to run via Hereford or Newport. I may have to adjust this against the tile mix, but I think it will work out.
On a separate note, fitting the hexes around the Severn estuary has proven a challenge. I used to have the line running from London through Bristol and into Cardiff, but historically the Severn tunnel wasn't build until quite late in the game. So instead I'm forcing track to be laid via Gloucester, and this is where the hex grid has made things tricky. I think I've handled it, by adding some mountain hexsides, including one that isn't really a mountain but blocks the geographically non-existent direct route from Worcester to Cardiff, forcing track to run via Hereford or Newport. I may have to adjust this against the tile mix, but I think it will work out.
Wednesday 21 October 2009
Scotland under Steam?
In my reading about the history of railways in Great Britain, I’ve taken a particular interest in Scotland. This is partly because I’ve lived in Edinburgh for most of the last 25 years, and partly because it is one area where the design of 1825 takes major comprises with history in order to make a playable game. I’ve already made an 1825 variant for the Scottish board and recently I had some interesting e-mail discussions with Stuart Dagger on the subject. Then Geoff C designed an 1825 extension board for the north of Scotland and uploaded it to the 18xx yahoo group. So clearly there is some interest here.
From what I’ve read, it looks like Scotland should make a good 18xx game. Although two companies came to dominate the country, several reasonably-sized companies were formed along the way:
From what I’ve read, it looks like Scotland should make a good 18xx game. Although two companies came to dominate the country, several reasonably-sized companies were formed along the way:
- Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway: 1838-1865
- Glasgow and South Western Railway: 1838 onwards (starting as the Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway)
- North-British Railway: 1844 onwards (originally running from Edinburgh to Berwick)
- Caledonian Railway: 1844 onwards (running from Glasgow to Carlisle), or possibly 1838 onwards, starting as the Glasgow, Paisley & Greenock Railway.
- Scottish Central Railway: 1845-1865
- Scottish North Eastern Railway: 1845-1866 (The 1845 dates refers to the formation of two constituent companies, the Scottish Midland Junction Railway and the Aberdeen Railway)
- Great North of Scotland Railway: 1846 onwards
- Highland Railway: 1854 onwards, starting as the Inverness and Nairn Railway.
Sunday 18 October 2009
Cutting the regions
When I first planned this game, one criterion was that is should cover the whole of the UK, excepting only those extremities where hardly any lines were built. So I was happy to have off-board areas for Cornwall, West Wales and North Scotland. I still looked at including regional companies such as the Cambrian, Highland and Great North of Scotland. It soon became apparent that those regional lines were just too insignificant on the scale of this game and I dropped them.
Now I'm going a step further. I intend to drop south-east England below London and with it the LBSC, the South-East Railway and the London, Chatham and Dover Railway. The map just doesn't have the space for these to be interesting companies to run. I had thought of including them as simple investment options, but the game has plenty of companies already and can do without them.
In Scotland, I shall also drop the GSWR, because its network was similarly constrained. I might also drop the GER in East Anglia, because that region also doesn't allow much development. On the other hand, historically the GER did at one stage compete with the GNR for a route north. The GNR won, but it might be nice to leave the possibility of an alternative outcome in the game.
This leaves me with the following companies:
One way I might alter this is to vary the starting companies, e.g. by picking a set of starting companies from a larger initial pool. In this case, I might also look at some alternatives, such as the West Midlands Railway or the Scottish North Eastern Railway, which historically were quickly absorbed into one of the above companies. For now, I'm going to start with the above list and see how I get on.
Now I'm going a step further. I intend to drop south-east England below London and with it the LBSC, the South-East Railway and the London, Chatham and Dover Railway. The map just doesn't have the space for these to be interesting companies to run. I had thought of including them as simple investment options, but the game has plenty of companies already and can do without them.
In Scotland, I shall also drop the GSWR, because its network was similarly constrained. I might also drop the GER in East Anglia, because that region also doesn't allow much development. On the other hand, historically the GER did at one stage compete with the GNR for a route north. The GNR won, but it might be nice to leave the possibility of an alternative outcome in the game.
This leaves me with the following companies:
- LNWR (London and North Western Railway)
- GWR (Great Western Railway)
- LSWR (London and South Western Railway)
- MR (Midland Railway)
- GNR (Great Northern Railway)
- GER (Great Eastern Railway)
- LYR (Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway)
- MSLR (Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway, later renamed the Great Central Railway)
- NER (North-Eastern Railway)
- CR (Caledonian Railway)
- NBR (North British Railway)
One way I might alter this is to vary the starting companies, e.g. by picking a set of starting companies from a larger initial pool. In this case, I might also look at some alternatives, such as the West Midlands Railway or the Scottish North Eastern Railway, which historically were quickly absorbed into one of the above companies. For now, I'm going to start with the above list and see how I get on.
Sunday 11 October 2009
Railway Towns
In 1825, several major companies have their home bases in low-value cities. The LNWR begins in Wolverton and Crewe, while the GWR begins in Swindon. In Unit 2, the GCR begins in Barnsley and the GNR begins in Doncaster. All of these cities have low, fixed values and fixed track layouts.
I was wondering whether this could be extended as a general principle. Perhaps every company could start in a small town. One of these “railway towns” could use the ordinary small town tiles but with the addition of a company marker, which would stop other companies from running routes through that hex. This would make the company “own” that piece of line. As an extension, we could let companies start in any dot town; the presence of the marker indicating that it has become a “railway town”. This would give more variation to the start of the game, rather than requiring companies to start in specific hexes.
Finding start hexes for some companies could be a challenge. In the south, the LBSC might have to start at Redhill, the SECR at Ashford, the LSWR at Woking and the GER at Colchester. In Scotland, the GSWR could start at Ayr, but I’m stretching to find start towns for the Caledonian and the NBR. But it might be doable.
I’ve been moving away from this idea recently. It would be yet another change from standard 18xx and I’m not convinced that it gives the best results for the LNWR, let alone the other companies. So for now, this is an idea that I’ll put on the back burner.
I was wondering whether this could be extended as a general principle. Perhaps every company could start in a small town. One of these “railway towns” could use the ordinary small town tiles but with the addition of a company marker, which would stop other companies from running routes through that hex. This would make the company “own” that piece of line. As an extension, we could let companies start in any dot town; the presence of the marker indicating that it has become a “railway town”. This would give more variation to the start of the game, rather than requiring companies to start in specific hexes.
Finding start hexes for some companies could be a challenge. In the south, the LBSC might have to start at Redhill, the SECR at Ashford, the LSWR at Woking and the GER at Colchester. In Scotland, the GSWR could start at Ayr, but I’m stretching to find start towns for the Caledonian and the NBR. But it might be doable.
I’ve been moving away from this idea recently. It would be yet another change from standard 18xx and I’m not convinced that it gives the best results for the LNWR, let alone the other companies. So for now, this is an idea that I’ll put on the back burner.
Thursday 1 October 2009
Time line
I've been a bit quiet lately. This is partly because I did some more work on my 1825 web site, played another test of Ian D Wilson's 1812 prototype, and have had a few other things on the go as well. I have still found some time for Britain Under Steam. Some of this has been spent on research; I'm reading Christian Wolmar's book Fire and Steam, and I've found a copy of Snell's Britain's Railways Under Steam to read after that. It's also worth mentioning that Wikipedia has a large amount of information about the history of early British railway companies.
I've been putting together a timeline that shows key events such as the formations of important companies, completion of certain railway lines, company mergers and so forth. I was helped immensely by Lou Jerkich's Historical Order variant for 1825, in which he collected much of this information already. To start my timeline, I took the background information from Lou's variant, put all the events into historical order, and then added other bits and pieces as I found them.
This is making a number of small effects on the game design. I've rethought the way I plan to start companies and I will come back to this soon, casting my eyes over the timeline as a whole.
Every so often I note something that leads to a tweak on the board; no major redesigns, just a tidying up or an improvement in one area or another. I've had another thought about how to represent difficult terrain, too. So all in all, this background reading has been worthwhile.
I've been putting together a timeline that shows key events such as the formations of important companies, completion of certain railway lines, company mergers and so forth. I was helped immensely by Lou Jerkich's Historical Order variant for 1825, in which he collected much of this information already. To start my timeline, I took the background information from Lou's variant, put all the events into historical order, and then added other bits and pieces as I found them.
This is making a number of small effects on the game design. I've rethought the way I plan to start companies and I will come back to this soon, casting my eyes over the timeline as a whole.
Every so often I note something that leads to a tweak on the board; no major redesigns, just a tidying up or an improvement in one area or another. I've had another thought about how to represent difficult terrain, too. So all in all, this background reading has been worthwhile.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
