@cernel "Russia" territory in vX series not only represent Moscow, it represent all the areas between Moscow and Ural Mountains v3 actually proved that Manchuria-Moscow distance can be increased but in the expense of making Japan incredibly strong to keep game balance. It actually changed nothing since it is still amost always better to go Atlantic only as USA. Plus there is still no reason to not attack Russia and Japan and take almost all Siberia. If there is a Hawaiian factory and Germany can be reasonably countered without USA (like in Big World or WaW), a Pacific war is a guarantee thing but expense of (unhistorically) lack of significant US presence in Europe. But we would still have no two ocean going USA. It is easy to make Pacific an active front, hardest thing is making the actual US approach in WWII (%80 Atlantic-%20 Pacific) is a good choice rather than going only Atlantic and Pacific. I think the issue is actually based on having naval units too expensive compared to ground units and lack of more defense oriented sea units hence making a Pacific war worthless investment as USA.

@lafayette right on yea I wanted to have a "map option" activate which rd the game would start for games that have multiple scenarios with different start dates. That way I could keep it all in 1 xml and not have to update multiple ones. Only way I know of, is to make a trigger for each instance that would need adjusting, which is a lot. I thought if it was possible to only do a couple code lines and bingo, it would be sweet lol

@thedog said in How to place units in allied or major/minor territory?: I would try creating more units, the indian units will need to end with say; Indian units Infantry_in Tanks_in factory_in These units must specify the factory they can be produced from with <option name="requiresUnits" value="factory_in/> British units Tanks_br Fighter_br factory_br These units must specify the factory they can be produced from with <option name="requiresUnits" value="factory_br"/> Then the two factories can produce only their national units. In your idea you will get units produced by the faction on its own factory located in its own territory? If "yes", then, sorry, your idea is not relevant to this topic.

@thedog Take a look at these objectives from Global <attachment name="objectiveAttachment_Italians_3_North_Africa" attachTo="Italians" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RulesAttachment" type="player"> <option name="objectiveValue" value="5"/> <option name="alliedOwnershipTerritories" value="Alexandria:Morocco:Algeria:Tunisia:Tobruk:Libya" count="6"/> </attachment> <attachment name="objectiveAttachment_Italians_4_Control_Iraq_Or_Persia_Or_Northwest_Persia" attachTo="Italians" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RulesAttachment" type="player"> <option name="objectiveValue" value="2"/> <option name="directOwnershipTerritories" value="Iraq:Persia:Northwest Persia" count="each"/> </attachment> Attachment 3 counts the number of territories held by Italy and the other Axis powers. Although this is an objective attachment, it could just as easily be a triggered victory. Attachment 4 counts only the territories held by Italy ("directOwnership").

@thedog now everything works!

@thedog lookin good

@beelee I have only comment no ..close with comment

@numetalfan No. Its just my personal modded game based on NWO 5 Nations map. But i think there are some maps out there which are using negative and positive support attachments. What do you need exactly? More details about how to structure a support attachment based rock scissor paper element into a game? Feel free to ask. I will do as much as i can to help you with anything i am able to do.

@numetalfan said in objectiveAttachment neutral countries: unfortunately it does not display the objective result for the player in the game, ... You mean it doesn't show up in the Objectives tab with the other Objectives ? If so you need to add it to the "objectives.properties" Also, when you collect income, it will mention it and record it in History

@zlefin Yes, you could create a trigger like that. You would check against "directPresence" and change control to a neutral player.

I had <option name="canBeDamaged" value="true"/> <option name="canDieFromReachingMaxDamage" value="true"/> <option name="maxDamage" value="2"/> To stop the error add the following to the same unit <option name="isConstruction" value="true"/> <option name="constructionType" value="Recruit"/> <option name="maxConstructionsPerTypePerTerr" value="1"/> <option name="constructionsPerTerrPerTypePerTurn" value="1"/>

@thedog Actually the physical map was the primary goal, I learned GIMP to make that first and then afterwards started working on the TripleA version. The TripleA map was relatively quick/simple because I'd already had the physical version of the map with all of the territory borders created using vectors. So effectively I just scaled it down and hit the trace button on the borders vectors and was done.

Found the problem. I cannot even use this with land units. Only in sea zones i can enter in noncombat move phase. Whole idea worthless. <!-- Subs Can End NonCombat Move With Enemies allows submarines to end their noncombat movement in a sea zone containing any enemy units, including enemy subs --> <property name="Subs Can End NonCombat Move With Enemies" value="true" editable="false">

@thedog Thy. And just now i found a breaking flaw in my idea. Land units cannot do this at all. Only sea units. <!-- Subs Can End NonCombat Move With Enemies allows submarines to end their noncombat movement in a sea zone containing any enemy units, including enemy subs --> <property name="Subs Can End NonCombat Move With Enemies" value="true" editable="false">

@wc_sumpton Luckily i dont have or need isDestroyer in my ancient times mod. Thy again for helping me to find a good workaround.

@TorpedoA You will need to open up a bug report, so that scramble units do regular can move checks. Cheers...

@wc_sumpton heh heh you're the one that clued me in on it when I was struggling

@thedog the placing of units without a factory is not the problem, I want to get rid of that message

@torpedoa Are you sure you want to have a 1v1 game in the first place? This seems a game that, realistically, has to be more than two-sided (and arguably it should be a FFA). It not like there is something like "Roma" and everything else is fighting against it only.

@rogercooper that's pretty interesting could really get pretty accurate with initial placements.