Objective point scoring in ToT

[fairline]

So I've pretty much completed a ToT conversion of Harlan Thompson's classic Mongols scenario and made up a shiny new set of graphics, and I find myself left with one task to complete. Harlan used some 3-point objective cities in the FW original, and as we all know ToT only supports single-point objectives. I need to re-do the points scoring to reflect this, but I'm a little unsure as to how many points to assign for victory conditions. How have people done this in the past for FW to Mge conversions?

Should I use an arbitrary threshold of some ratio of cities captured? Any thoughts?

Tech: are you still interested in hosting this on your site? If so, did you ever find a contact e-mail address for Harlan that still works?

[curtsibling]

You could use the events flag masks to pop up events when a certain amount of cities are captured?

[Mercator]

Harlan describes in the readme that a marginal victory roughly corresponds to what the Mongols had at the height of their power.

So you could check a map of the empire and make the number of objectives needed for a marginal victory correspond with all cities within that area. That's a start at least.

[Boco]

It's a long shot, but are there any unused WoW's? If so, you could stock up selected cities with expired ones, and set WoW's as objectives.

What might be better is to do as Merc suggests, but use the nonobjective scoring model. That'd take a playtest or two to set the exact points for WoW's, casualties, etc.

[fairline]

Originally posted by Mercator
Harlan describes in the readme that a marginal victory roughly corresponds to what the Mongols had at the height of their power.

So you could check a map of the empire and make the number of objectives needed for a marginal victory correspond with all cities within that area. That's a start at least.

Good thinking. I have several maps showing the extent of the Mongol empire under Genghis and Kublai and I'm sure I can find more on the net.

[fairline]

Originally posted by Boco
It's a long shot, but are there any unused WoW's? If so, you could stock up selected cities with expired ones, and set WoW's as objectives.

What might be better is to do as Merc suggests, but use the nonobjective scoring model. That'd take a playtest or two to set the exact points for WoW's, casualties, etc.

I think he used up all the WoWs, so I'll go with Mercator's suggestion. I'd like to stick with objective scoring as I don't want to mess with the scenario too much. It would still require playtesting to ensure I don't feck things up too much though. Any takers?

[fairline]

Maybe some screenies would drum up some potential playtesters for my hamfisted scenario edits

[fairline]

blah blah

[Mercator]

If you need any help with that, I could help some as well. I know a fair bit about the Mongols myself.

Edit: *cough* I posted that without seeing your last 3 posts. I can't really do any proper playtesting...

Looks marvellous

Edit2: Though, actually, on second thought... It looks a little more modern and "westernised", especially the Mongol horses.

[Arthedain]

...

[Boco]

I'll contact you.

[fairline]

Originally posted by Mercator
If you need any help with that, I could help some as well. I know a fair bit about the Mongols myself.

Edit: *cough* I posted that without seeing your last 3 posts. I can't really do any proper playtesting...

Looks marvellous

Edit2: Though, actually, on second thought... It looks a little more modern and "westernised", especially the Mongol horses.

Thanks Mercator - if I post the maps I have for the extent of the Mongol Empire, would you be able to check them out?

Your right about the horses - they should be shaggy ponies really, but I tend to re-use the horses I draw for other stuff.... (Boco will know the origin of the Mongol horse-archer mount )

Hopefully the rest is authentic though; I'm pretty anal about meaningless uniform and armour details, so the appearance of the Mongol and Chinese clothing and armour in the first screenie is meticulously (or is that pointlessly ) researched. I've Sinicised (is that a word?) the generic units rather than Westernised them BTW. Actually that's not entirely true - the brigandine armour of some of the Chinese infantry is of Yuan rather than Song origin (still 13th C though) and the earliest cannon pics are Ming, so the artillery units are a 100 years out of whack. Anal, as I said

[Boco]

Hot diggity! Mongolian Walers!

[Sarsstock]

Well Gareth there's nothing really anyone can say after looking at those screenshots aside from the normal eye bulging, jaw dropping and boastings of "holy...." whatevers. My only comment is to renew my plea for a tutorial on how you apply light and shading so well to mimic different textures and such.

Perhaps in return I could contribute a title graphic of some kind.... Even if with school/work/the real world in general you'd be too busy for such a tutorial, I'd be glad to still help out in any way possible.

[Catfish]

Originally posted by fairline
So I've pretty much completed a ToT conversion of Harlan Thompson's classic Mongols scenario and made up a shiny new set of graphics, and I find myself left with one task to complete. Harlan used some 3-point objective cities in the FW original, and as we all know ToT only supports single-point objectives. I need to re-do the points scoring to reflect this, but I'm a little unsure as to how many points to assign for victory conditions. How have people done this in the past for FW to Mge conversions?

Should I use an arbitrary threshold of some ratio of cities captured? Any thoughts?

I ended up converting this scenario a little over a month ago. Never got round to posting here, though. I multiplied the ratio of the total number of objectives in the converted scenario (174) to the total from the original (230) by the existing victory thresholds to produce the new ones. This gave me values of 150, 90, 60 and 45 (rounded). I use this method for scenarios with relatively large numbers of objective cities and/or where the original x3 objectives are evenly distributed across the map. Further refinement of these values really requires playtesting.