Hi Everyone

I'm near completion of the UK power Grid map, but I'd like it to be glanced over by better gamers than myself.

I've posted a rough version on the Geek images page for Power Grid, but I've tinkered since that one was posted.

I'd like to post the full board (same dimensions as the USA and Germany maps) but I'm asking for comments and advice.

Would people be willing to look at the rough map posted and comment here. If you want the latest low rez map-version them drop me a GeekMail.

CHRIS

With luck I should be able to post high res versions of the new board in 4 sections - each the same dimensions as the standard board.

The connexion costs feel arbitrary. Why would Norwich connect at 3, 5, 7, and 15? There are many more examples... I may be wrong, but most of the time, Friese's maps feel right, with connexion costs following terrain and distance. You might want to work on this.

keep it coming

You should have a look at the France map. London being only a single connection point doesn't feel quite right - regarding the size of the city compared to the others.

Agreed with this.
Compliments for the graphics, it's looking great!
Have you actually playtested the map?
What's making France and Italy so interesting compared to the original maps is that the character of play really changes, it's not just a diffent map, it's demanding a different strategy.

Good luck with this one!

First strike against it: no Sheffield!

If these numbers playtested well, I suppose I could live with that, but some of them look questionable in terms of geographic accuracy. For example:

Connections to Stornoway look too cheap.
Why is Liverpool-Chester 0, but Chester-Manchester is 16?

Good luck with the board.

Good work.

The only thing of note to me is why no direct connection between Liverpool and Manchester? Although it has nothing to do with power lines, there are lots of people that commute between the two cities on a daily basis so I kind of expected a direct link.

Also, maybe lower connection costs in the North of England. The cost of living is higher in the south (east) maybe this could be reflected.

James

Ilfracombe to Pembroke is a longer distance over water than to Swansea
but costs less?

The different sizes of cost circles look a bit odd to me

As a Scot it pains me to suggest it, but maybe a different projection
which makes the large and mostly empty Scotland a little smaller so
the larger population centres can be a little more spread out?

How about including Ireland so there are more connections to Scotland and Wales via it?

Are you thinking of any special UK rules like those for the other expansion maps?

One thing you want to try to maintain is the 'Triangle Inequality'. In other words, the cost of any single link between two cities should always be less than the cost of connecting the same two cities via an intermediary.

Simple example: Cambridge-to-Ipswitch costs 13, but Cambridge-to-Norwich (5) and Norwich-to-Ipswitch (7) costs only 12.

I see a few other examples of this, including the very top of the map.

Also, it seems that the average link cost is somewhat higher in this map than, say, Italy or the US. (This is just a note, though; it may just play harder.)

Finally, I am curious if you added any rules changes. France has cheaper nukes, and Italy has cheaper garbage (and more expensive coal and oil). Do you have any such plans.

Great start, though!

The use of 'yellow' connections, usually used to signify sections of expensive connections, seems to be inconsistent.

To expand on my quandry, I've designed it (pinched a bit of the Modulus bits for the side panels - why reinvent the wheel) but I'm now struggling with game balance.

I love Power Grid but have not played a million games like everyone else here (don't try and deny it!). I am therefore only on the edge of 'getting it' in terms of tactics and the finer art of board balance.

And yes I'm sorry there's no Sheffield..I was even forced to use ILFRACOMBE for gods sake!!!!! can you beleive it...so yes, no support for the home town as that area was getting very busy.....slap me later!

Connection to Chester from liverpool was made free as all boards have about three such and I needed the space but it needs to be balanced in that area..the UK is crap for packing connections in - too long and thin - how the hell did they do Italy!

Cost of living in areas of the UK - like it, there are some gaps that I left for thoughts on game play and having to 'work around' areas, but I may look at that again as the costs/logic are not passing the critique, so I may just connect everything (I agree it makes sense to connect liverpool to Manchester rather than Chester - I'll fix that). I have tinkered since the post which is why I want feedback to get it right before I finally release the monster.

I don't have a copy of the france/Italy map, anyone get me a crude scan or a low rez version to study, so I can read the connection costs off. Not bothered about quality, I just want to read the connnections.

Not thought about doing Ireland (though it is part of the UK) but it would be better as an easily connectable zone, but space on the map is already tight. I can't shrink it down any further without the pieces not fitting on the cities. The small cost circles were the only way to get it to fit, and they do look better in higher res.

I love scotland (I run the study trip on Arran for my sixth form Biology students) but I couldn't really justify shrinking it, I think it would alter the overall UK look when there are solutions elsewhere...just have to enjoy the space and the silence!

As for special rules, I like the sound, but I need to get the board right first. Any suggestions?

Due to alot of link changes to get it to fit I think I lost the cost balance. My homework is to study the distribution on Germany/USA (hopefully France/Italy if someone can help!) and get a better idea. the triangle inequality is important so as to remove sneaky cheap rat runs. There are ALOT of yellow links and I need to rethink (help help) ALOT!!

This is a lot to ask, but would people suggest/argue connection costs on a zone by zone rota (and you'll be first to get a full high res copy of the map and credits), as you're all proving I may be able to do the graphics (thanks for all kind comments) but I'm clueless at balance so far.

You're all a gift, so far this is perfect...MORE MORE MORE

CHRIS

As for the links, I remember hearing in an interview with the designer that he basically just used a grid and counted the squares between cities. Of course, if that link goes through rivers, mountains, etc. the costs of those links need to be higher.

So, there may be cheaper links to some araes in the map, but that's just how it is set up. All of the information is open to the players, and given at the start of the game, so if there are cheaper links, then you must find a way to exploit those before other players are.

For additional rules, I think that you should research the real-life energy production issues of the UK and try and mimic them in the map as best as you can.

It looks good so far.

The France and Italy maps are now available on BSW, so you can check them out there. One interesting thing about the Italy map is the towns are 3 boxes in a horizontal row, rather than a circle, to make packing them in easier.

About cost of living - you don't have to use the links.

Every city has "5-10-15" on it. You could maybe fiddle with that. "10-15-20" for cities in expersive areas, "1-6-11" for cheap areas?

Even go crazy, make a city that is "15-10-5" if you want, so it's expensive in step 1 but cheap if you move in during step 3. :-)

Anyway, some PG players may call this heresy to fiddle with city costs, but if you're making the map, you should get to call the rules!

Now I tell you this is on the edge thinking...heresey, but a damn fine idea. I think I'll stick with the UK as is but the Papua New Guinea map may have that added!

CHRIS

Drat, that's not a bad idea, and probably better than the idea I was toying with in my design of an Australia map.

Can I ask, Goldenturkey, what did you use to design your page, and to what dimensions? Will it print the same size as the Germany/USA map board?

I'm not quite sure what you're asking, here.
You want us to discuss the actual connection cost from each city to every other?

The strongest part about this is the way you want the game to 'feel' when you play. (Yeah, to a power grid fanatic, they do play differently enough!)
For example, Rome has high cost resources, low cost connections, with some exceptions. The costs balance themself out enough that the power plants are generally useful enough at most occasions. But it always feels like you are pinching your pennies in resources.
France is a difficult push and shove in the north, fighting for position in and around Paris, with resources being somewhat cheaper, because of nuclear accessibility. In this map, location is more vital for board position.

The map AS IS, will be a slow progress game, with connection costs being high, and this will mean that power plants are in abundance, so high power availability, and then resource costs will drop to mostly being around 1-3 for the main resources. If city connection progresses too quickly, power plants will be discarded more frequently (lack of purchase funds), or less cities will be purchased but every player will be able to power all their cities. The game could end 'prematurely' with step 3 coming out before step 2 if blocking techniques are utilised.

The cost of connections.. I see three 0, a 3, and a couple 5's. These will be highly fought for, so blue will be popular, in particular Norwich.
From Norwich, taking Kings Lynn, Cambridge, and Ipswich, then moving to Nottingham would be a likely plan, and thus, these locations will be contested.

Another highly contested ground will be the two free cost connections being close. In one sense, it would almost be worth buying the 3 plant for 3, and paying 40 electros to set up in three of those. With the remaining 7 electros you would buy 2 oil for your production generating 22 electros. Then with superior board position, you could sit on your income for two turns, buying another cheap power plant next turn.
Of course, this would have problems of its own (low income, requiring advances in power plants, high resource cost, etc.) but is this something you wish available to players? If not, you'll need to reconsider the position of the free connections.

Consider the cost of getting blocked in. With 22 electros after turn 1, will a player be able to buy a plant and leap to build a second city? How often? How often will it be impeded?
At first glance I can't see any problem spots for this, but it would require a few plays to assess the situation properly.

If someone purchase the seven or eight power plant on turn one, will they be able to purchase two cities and a connection to utilise it? Is this something you wish to happen? If they get the 7 or 8, they aren't going first or second, so the two free connection locations will be gone. They also require resources. It usually costs around 17 electro to do this with the 8 plant, from memory, leaving 33. That's a 13 connection, so it's possible I think. Does this restrict opening plants?

One thing I DO like is the connection between Glasgow and Bangor.
I don't know much about the UK, geographically, so I don't know if there's any geographic (or even political) reason for this connection, but it allows you to select red as a colour group without selecting green.

Can I find six feasible beginning locations? I think so.
Norwick, Chester/Liverpool, Birmingham/Coventry, Fracombe, Gateshead/Newcastle, and... well, I'd hate to be player 6, even if you were using all colours. I'd also hate to be the player that player 6 started near! Perhaps somewhere in Scotland (Stormway, Fort William, Glasgow, are on par, and the connection between these and Edinburgh are ok).
However, starting with 5 colours will make a cramped game. Still, that's how it feels in London, I'm told!
I am just curious why it costs so much to connect to London from all directions. I would imagine that is where you WANT the game to centralise. I would skip it.

Wow Damien, you have a very scary knowledge of how Power Grid works...verging on the awesome in fact!

Your suggestions are excellent and I will be summating everything said so far and studying the 4 other PGrid maps and then apply them to the UK one, so thanks a million.

As for what I used to make it, most of the images were created, stolen, copied using PaintShopPro (may as well be Photoshop) and then compiled in an 'object oriented' package called Xara X, which allows free movement of separate items on a multilayered page. Everything can be moved, stretched rotated and allows massive freedom to copy paste resize and link objects. Its also got some funky fill, shade and cut effects which remain editable at all times.

As for sizing, I'm working on the image at about A3 at present, but then I'll rescale it in Xara (with no pixelation or clarity loss) to twice that and then slice it into the 4 board portions, exactly the same sizes as the proper boards. Then its a hunt for cardboard and then assembly of a proper play testable board.

Email me if you want to discuss grahpic elements or software!

CHRIS

Amazingly by making the cities wider than they are tall.



Fuzzy but readable:

http://boardgamegeek.com/fullimage/97918
http://boardgamegeek.com/fullimage/97917



Not really so important. I think there should be some odd ball costs.

I think your numbers are about 15 to 20% too high.

Good work, Chris; I started something myself a while back you can see here:

http://fellonmyhead.blogspot.com/2006/08/power-hungry.html

But don't worry I won't be stepping on your toes as by the looks of things we're working towards very different maps (albeit that much of the location is the same).

If I were you I would continue to work towards balancing the links so there are no cheaper long routes; despite what Randall says oddball costs for routes should not exist on the map (it causes too much AP if players have to figure out the best way to connect every turn). I feel much the same about different costs for different cities. Sure, you could have one or two exceptions and it wouldn't be so bad but too many will introduce AP and big downtime.

Also, I don't think the use of three cities for Paris on the French map would make any sense for the UK or the British Isles. I feel this mainly because the France map imbalances link costs between North and South by having longer, more expensive links in the South and this will be difficult to replicate in a UK map (and would create a lot of additional work just to slip in a double or triple sized city at one point of the map). Having said that, there ought to be some imbalance between regions - you just don't want to have all that extra work just to expand London.

Damien makes a good analysis above, but one thing I wouldn't worry about too much is blockable connections. Unless you attach an unfeasibly high price to a remote link it shouldn't be too great a problem to overcome.

I'm looking forward to your completed map; it will probably be played by our group long before I finish the British Isles map.

I thought that was my most important point There would be nothing worse than going first, and getting stuck with one city, never being able to expand until step 2. You'd have to keep purchasing power plants just to stay in the game.

However, as I said above, I don't think this has shown to be a problem.
I think Chris has done a pretty good job in making a balanced board with a feeling of congestion

Thanks Damien

BUT I agree the costs are high, that there should be more balance on the triangles and that there should be a least 4 zones that allow some degree of easy spread (some players start close together then spread in opposing directions).

I think I'd like the map to be a race from cheap starting points that might nake the players have to place by each other, thus increasing the bervous tension. By lowering costs by about 20% I think we might get away without 'many' players strugggling to exapnd in turn 2!

Further shuffling and then playtesting will resolve!

How would people prefer this posting when done?

Ideally the board (full size) will need compiling from 8 A4 pages (one panel is bigger than a sheet of A4)so 8 printable sheets with indications for edge matching? Or do people want a MEGA FILE that they can split up?

I know I'll get more geek gold for the 8 post! (hehe)

CHRIS

1 big file is better (imo), because many image packages will let you split the file.

Well it's done!

After looking over all 4 available PowerGrid maps and looking at costs and distribution, plus taking into consideration everyones comments, the map (to my general satisfaction) is done. The graphics aren't as pretty as the upcoming Canada map (see images) as I'm just not that good.

The final image is going to be massive, so I'm going to post 4 files (each a quarter of the map - and overlarge for A4) each exactly the same size as each board segment.

Anyone wanting to see the final proof to help do a last minute check please post or email me and I'll send one out!

Once again thanks for your comments and help.

I also have a list of extra ideas for future maps, and I think the UK "B-side" will be Ireland!

CHRIS