• AA-fire/casualty selection issues in Revised (and other versions)

    Moved
    131
    0 Votes
    131 Posts
    94k Views
    C
    @bayder said in AA-fire/casualty selection issues in Revised (and other versions): There is still zero reason for the rules to indicate that AA fire should occur in the Combat Move phase. The rules could easily state that AA fire occurs in Conduct Combat and Noncombat Move phases only. If this had been done, then there would be no questions regarding this rule. What I understand is that here you believe that Revised OOB and LHTR work the same way, for flyovers during the Combat Move phase, as there would be no difference between saying that they are resolved at the end of the Combat Move phase or saying that they are resolved during the Conduct Combat phase, but the second formulation being clearer. What I understand, instead, is that, by moving the AA fly over resolution from Combat Move to Conduct Combat, LHTR makes a practically relevant behaviour change, as in Revised OOB you would know the results of all Combat Move fly-overs before resolving any battles, as they already happened in a previous phase, while in Revised LHTR you know then only for the units involved in the current battle, and all the already resolved ones. For example: I have a fighter that flies over an AA gun in a territory "A", then flies over an AA gun in a territory "B", then end movement in a territory "C" (to take part in a battle in there). I also have another fighter that flies over an AA gun in a territory "A" (the same territory that the other fighter is flying over too), then flies over an AA gun in a territory "D", then end movement in a territory "E" (to take part in a battle in there). In Revised OOB, you would resolve the fly overs for: The first fighter in "A" The first fighter in "B" The second fighter in "A" The second fighter in "D" In only one of the following only two possible orders, at your discretion: 1A, 1B, 2A, 2D 2A, 2D, 1A, 1B Then, after resolving all fly overs, you would resolve the battles (with all other units involved in the same battle), comprising, at this point, any battle AA fire, if an AA gun is present in the embattled territory, for: The first fighter in "C", if surviving the fly overs The second fighter in "E", if surviving the fly overs Assuming both fly overs miss, then, during Conduct Combat, either first resolving the "C" battle or first the "E" one, then the other one, at your discretion, no matter if you previously resolved the fly overs for the first fighter (that is now in "C") or the second one (that is now in "E") (of course, if the a fighter is shot down during fly over and was the only attacking unit, then there is no battle, instead). Consequently, in case all fly overs miss, considering Combat Move and Conduct Combat together, you would have all and only the following possible resolution sequences, across the two phases: 1A, 1B, 2A, 2D, C, E 2A, 2D, 1A, 1B, C, E 1A, 1B, 2A, 2D, E, C 2A, 2D, 1A, 1B, E, C (where, for example, "1A, 1B, 2A, 2D, C, E" literally means "at the end of combat move, resolving the flyover in A for the first fighter, then resolving the fly over in B for the first fighter, then resolving the fly over in A for the second fighter, then resolving the fly over in D for the second fighter, then, during Conduct Combat, resolving the battle in C, then resolving the battle in E") In Revised LHTR, instead, during the Conduct Combat phase, fly-overs are all integrated as part of the specific battles where the flying over units are heading to, so you only decide whether first to make the battle in "C" or first to make the battle in "E", and, in this case, you cannot even decide in what order to resolve the fly overs, for each battle, since having only 1 fighter involved in any, for each one, thus being restricted to resolving all fly overs, by their zones movement sequence for the same unit, before resolving the battle that unit may be part of (if surviving all fly overs). Meaning you can only resolve all fly overs and all battles as "1 then 2" or "2 then 1", where 1 and 2 are the following sequences: 1- Making the battle in "C", you first resolve the fly over for the first fighter in "A", then (if surviving) resolve the fly over for the first fighter in "B", then resolve the rest of the battle in "C", with the first fighter participating, and possibly being hit by an AA gun in the embattled territory, if surviving both fly overs. 2- Making the battle in "E", you first resolve the fly over for the second fighter in "A", then (if surviving) resolve the fly over for the second fighter in "D", then resolve the rest of the battle in "E", with the first fighter participating, and possibly being hit by an AA gun in the embattled territory, if surviving both fly overs. Meaning that you have only the option of resolving them in any one of only the following two sequences: 1A, 1B, C, 2A, 2D, E 2A, 2D, E, 1A, 1B, C (where, for example, "1A, 1B, C, 2A, 2D, E" literally means "resolving the flyover in A for the first fighter, then resolving the fly over in B for the first fighter, then resolving the battle in C, then resolving the fly over in A for the second fighter, then resolving the fly over in D for the second fighter, then resolving the battle in E") The substantial difference being that, as said, in Revised OOB you know all fly over results, for Combat Movement, before resolving any battles, but you never know battle outcomes before resolving any fly overs, while in Revised LHTR, you cannot know all fly over results before resolving any battles (unless only one battle has any fly overs and you resolve that battle first, but, even in this case, the flyovers are technically part of the battle itself, not happening before it), but you may have or decide to resolve battles before fly overs, which is going to be actually inevitable if you have more than one battle with fly overs or if the battle with the fly overs is also an amphibious assault from an hostile sea zone, meaning, in the example, that, if you decide first to resolve the battle in "C", you have to do so without knowing the fly over results for the second fighter, until after that battle is over, while, if you decide first to resolve the battle in "E", you have to do so without knowing the fly over results for the first fighter, until after that battle is over. However, I have to say I'm not sure of what I'm saying, so please @Panther check this all out, and let me know if my understanding is fully correct. Of course, other than what above, if all correct, the only other difference for Revised OOB, over Revised LHTR, is that, in Revised OOB, you practically have the exactly same fly over resolutions for Non Combat Move, as well, to be resolved the exactly same way as the ones happening during Combat Move, except only that you must resolve those of air units coming back from battles before plotting any other, or rather actual, non combat movements, thus any other fly overs, this being factually realized by having the fly overs for air units that participated in battles happening during the Conduct Combat phase (but, in practice, they are all non combat movements too, merely anticipated during the Conduct Combat phase), but only after all battles have been resolved. In practice, the whole system is exactly like having two Non Combat Move phases, after Conduct Combat, that work under exactly the same rules except only that, in the first one, you can only move air units that took part in battles (and must move them, if having any possible landing spots, possibly plotting carrier movements happening in the next phase), while, in the second one, you can move anything else, and having the fly overs resolved at the end of each of these two Non Combat Move phases, under the same dynamics as when resolving them at the end of the Combat Move phase.
  • Where can I get the old World at War Map?

    Moved
    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    833 Views
    C
    Moved to Player Help.
  • How to earn reputation?

    6
    5 Votes
    6 Posts
    2k Views
    M
    @redrum thanks It's very handy, when you have a crucial comment to go along with your summary post, that needs to be read before people play on
  • MARTI issues

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    889 Views
    bayderB
    I uninstalled and reinstalled/updated Java and it seems to be working now...
  • This topic is deleted!

    1
    2 Votes
    1 Posts
    228 Views
    No one has replied
  • delete saved games

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    504 Views
    T
    Oh, OK, figured it out now. Thank you!
  • Error message

    15
    0 Votes
    15 Posts
    2k Views
    redrumR
    @Genuinely-Angry You might want to try removing the map and redownloading it.
  • Since I’m not banned

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    1k Views
    PantherP
    @seancb I see you are able to login at axisandallies.org/forums with your IPv4 address that fails here, right now. Is that correct? (cc @RoiEX )
  • Game file names

    Moved
    15
    0 Votes
    15 Posts
    3k Views
    PantherP
    @redrum Ah yes, sure... I have only local games in my folders, that is why I missed that... :thumbs_up: then
  • HP All in One Desktop will not let me Play 1.9 TripleA

    Locked
    12
    0 Votes
    12 Posts
    2k Views
    PantherP
    @Brent-Stoudt Yes, indeed this outdated SSL/Java issue has caused trouble for many users. Now enjoy gaming
  • This topic is deleted!

    4
    1 Votes
    4 Posts
    4k Views
  • cannot completely uninstall so i can reinstall

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    712 Views
    RoiEXR
    Well you could try a couple of things. The simplest thing you could try is to just download a recent version of TripleA, install it and see if that enables you to either replace the old installation or allow you to uninstall it. If that doesn't work, you could try to manually download java, install it, press Windows Key + Pause Key, open the advanced Tab, click on "Environment Variables", click on the lower "New" button. The you get a dialog with 2 text fields. Put EXE4J_JAVA_Home in the upper one, and the path to your newly installed java in the other one. Note that it probably needs to end with /bin so it looks roughly like this C:\Program Files\Java\jre1.8.0_152\bin
  • This topic is deleted!

    Locked
    1
    1 Votes
    1 Posts
    109 Views
    No one has replied
  • Transport killed my bomber?

    2
    1
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    433 Views
    B
    You're playing a game that allows transports to shoot back. Some games do and some don't
  • Air-born Infantry vs Air-born Ranger Technolgy

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    520 Views
    B
    @Stohrm Hi Stohrm. You can mod that as a "Map Option" if you want to.
  • Anyone had any trouble running the current stable on Catalina?

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    752 Views
    ubernautU
    for anyone wondering about this i had no issues with the upgrade. i did not have to re-install java so it might be trickier if you are under a fresh install.
  • Test

    1
    1 Votes
    1 Posts
    348 Views
    No one has replied
  • Just wanna play 1942 with no mods

    3
    1 Votes
    3 Posts
    555 Views
    B
    @BlackOpsBen Hi Ben welcome to the site. As cernel says, triplea won't do everything 100% rule compliant, but it is real close and by using edit and player enforcing rules triplea doesn't support, it's even closer. 42 on steam doesn't follow all the rules either, although it is still early in it's development and continues to improve: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/33990/wrote-up-a-document-regarding-changes-between-1942-online-and-board-game https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/category/68/axis-allies-1942-online?page=2
  • Local games look blurry and you can't scroll

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    563 Views
    LaFayetteL
    @The-Bible Would you mind installing the current TripleA prerelease and checking if you still see the problem? With luck the issue is already fixed https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/releases/tag/2.0.16438
  • Vertical Scrolling

    10
    0 Votes
    10 Posts
    1k Views
    B
    @RoiEX ah thank you. I see why it would be written like that then. I was just comparing it to how I work on the xml.

Recent Posts

  • @Zealossus Good luck with the mod.

    read more

  • @Zealossus

    To leave the apostrophe in the name, replace it with an underscore in the objectives file. Thus "Fading Light of V'landriel" becomes "Fading_Light_of_V_landriel".

    Also, adding an empty <technology></technology> section will remove the "Technology" tab.

    Cheers...

    read more

  • @Zealossus
    Bravo, on your mod!
    It looks good.

    You were so close to getting it to work
    299a5476-c9f2-4731-8a37-a88b1aa83984-image.jpeg

    .
    From what I remember, as Im not a fan of Objectives, as the AI does not understand them.

    .
    In the xml, removed the apostrophe

    <info name="Fading Light of Vlandriel" version="1.0"/>

    .
    In map.yml removed the apostrophe and put quotes around the map name

    - {game_name: "Fading Light of Vlandriel", file_name: fadinglightofvlandriel.xml}

    .
    In objectives.properties note the # comments, xml info name with _ replacing spaces

    # Fading Light of Vlandriel # xml info name with _ replacing spaces Objectives.Panel.Name=Objectives Fading_Light_of_Vlandriel.TABLEGROUP.01;Imperium=objectiveAttachment_Imperium_1_Control_Altairis Fading_Light_of_Vlandriel.Imperium;objectiveAttachment_Imperium_1_Control_Altairis=<b>10 PUs</b> if the Imperium captures the Reformist capital of Altairis. Fading_Light_of_Vlandriel.TABLEGROUP.02;Reformists=objectiveAttachment_Reformists_1_Control_Ylleria Fading_Light_of_Vlandriel.Reformists;objectiveAttachment_Reformists_1_Control_Ylleria=<b>10 PUs</b> if the Reformists capture the Imperialist capital of Ylleria.
    read more

  • Hello,

    A friend of mine has created a mod of a fantasy world of their creation. We are trying to figure out how to see the "Objectives" Tab and add objectives to it. I've spend an exorbitant amount of time trying to figure it out and I am dumb. The mod is fully functional and we are testing the "balance" in various game runs, but we just can't wrap our heads around Objectives currently. I will say I haven't tested to see if they even work, but without the Objectives tab there's no way for the players to see it visually so I wanted that fixed first. I've looked on the forums here and seen about naming conventions with the map.yml file matching mapName in the game xml file. I've tested both with and without underscores in the name within the objective properties file to no avail. I sourced from other mods to see what their code says and nothing seems to line up simply. I even went from the current stable 2.5 version to the current 2.7 version as of today, 5/5/26. I just can't figure it out. I'm uploading the current iteration of the mod that functions, including the nonfunctioning objectives properties file and objectives in the game xml file.

    Friend's Mod

    Any help or advice is greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

    read more