See, this kind of thing will drive us crazy. With the
last post, I thought I'd forgotten to put a town in the hex adjacent to Nagykata. So I eventually added Szentmartonkata. But ...
Nagykata is indicated in a type-6 hex, which should not have a village or town at all. So, the correct solution is to move Nagykata over the crossroads to the south, get rid of Szentmartonkata and leave the type-6 hex empty.
Why do I care? It's a matter of maintaining a standard, even when I can handwave that standard whenever I want. Sooner or later, the pattern dissipates and the end result is that we might just as well have never imposed a method in the first place. We have to believe that those things we impose on themselves are broken if we don't obey the standard. This is how things of beauty slowly evolve on their own ... by not meddling.
It's just a minute or two to fix it. It's taken me longer to write about it. But this, too, is an element of mapmaking. To keep things organised and useful, the quality has to be maintained.
Here it is, fixed.
P.S.,
Added as an example for the comments:
Here's an example for Shelby. The dark green is the original 20-mile hex. Randomly, Glingeni appeared in the hex north of the Prut River. But the cobbled road (orange) was designated to go south, to the hex-side on the south side of the river. This designation is according to which adjacent hex has the most infrastructure.
Thus, the cobbled road goes to the river, stops, then picks up on the other side. Despite the apparent "connection," there no actual infrastructure for getting traveller's across. Individuals might be able to cross during the dry season, they might risk swimming across (the Prut is 220 ft. across by this point, so it looks much larger on the map than it is in reality). Or they might conceivably flag down someone on the river to pause and give them a lift. They might even move on down the shore until they find a boat, use it to cross, then head back on the other side to pick up the road again.
The road was built for an army, who would arrive at the crossing and expect to find boats ready for them. It wasn't made for trade.
With these high infrastructures, I don't think this would be a problem in this area, but a scenario nonetheless: if the system demands a road, but a significant river blocks passage (infrastructure is too low), how do you reconcile these rules without handwaving the standard?
ReplyDeleteShelby, I've twice tried to answer and I think I'm answering your question too cavalierly. Could you please repeat the question a more clearly?
ReplyDeleteHere's the situation I'm curious about:
ReplyDeleteLet's say the infrastructure is a middling number, maybe in the 30s. That will tell us there are a certain number of roads that must connect this hex to its neighbors.
However, to do so, the road must pass over/through a river of considerable size: perhaps one like the Danube here. You have rules on the wiki detailing if a river can be bridged or forded based on the size of river.
So we have two rules that appear to conflict. Rule (A) says there must be a road connecting these hexes. Rules (B) says the river is too big and the infrastructure is not high enough to provide a crossing. Which rule wins, or am I misunderstanding the rule?
I hope that is clear.
Ah, okay.
ReplyDeleteIt's possible for a road to exist but not to "cross" the river. Suppose we have a dirt road that's supposed to go from one edge of the hex to the other, but there is, as you say, a great big river between the two sides. Then the road from hex-side A travels from the edge of the hex to the river and stops at the water. Another road from hex-side B travels to the same river and also stops at the water ... possibly up or down stream, possibly straight across the first road.
This isn't a ford, because the river's too big. It's not a ferry, either, since the road isn't sufficient for a ferry. And it's not a bridge. But it is two roads meeting the river. There could be some "non-official" traffic, but it isn't daily and it's probable boats won't be available for hire. There might be a type-3 hex in the group of a 30-infrastructure (larger) hex. According to my "Hammer page on the wiki, that provides a "wharf" ... which would suggest boats for hire. But there'd be no regular service.
I have a number of instances like this already, and on the Danube. I'll go find it and add the image to the post above.
I've added more content on the post itself. Had to use Bessarabia rather than the Danube, because it's less inhabited. The hex I used has an infrastructure of 25. Anything else?
ReplyDeleteThank you for the extra detail, I think that resolves it nicely!
ReplyDeleteAs you said, things like this ADD to the possibility for game play and opportunities. Suppose the party decides to build a bridge or start a ferry service. Would it work?
ReplyDeleteThis just goes to show that your process works. Places such as this crop up all the time. An the locals don't fond it strange at all, they know how to cross the river usually.
ReplyDelete