@Ramon said: Is there a mechanic or attachment that allows a 0 attack unit to destroy a 0 defense construction? The "trench", a 0 defense construction unit, could give the "conscript", a 0 attack unit, a plus 1 attack using support attachments. The problem with this is that the support should be applied only when the "trench" is defending and only the "conscript" is attacking. <attachment name="supportAttachment_Trench" attachTo="trench" javaClass="UnitSupportAttachment" type="unitType"> <option name="faction" value="enemy"/> <option name="unitType" value="conscript"/> <option name="side" value="defence"/> <option name="dice" value="strength"/> <option name="bonus" value="1"/> <option name="number" value="1"/> <option name="bonusType" value="Trench"/> <option name="players" value="$All-Players$"/> </attachment> To do this a plus and minus support attachment would have to be created for every attacking/defending land unit to create a counter to the "trench". <attachment name="supportAttachment_InfantryAttack" attachTo="infantry" javaClass="UnitSupportAttachment" type="unitType"> <option name="faction" value="allied"/> <option name="unitType" value="conscript"/> <option name="side" value="offence"/> <option name="dice" value="strength"/> <option name="bonus" value="1"/> <option name="number" value="-1"/> <!-- All positive supports are "Trench" --> <option name="bonusType" value="Trench"/> <option name="players" value="$All-Players$"/> </attachment> <attachment name="supportAttachment_InfantryAttackDebuf" attachTo="infantry" javaClass="UnitSupportAttachment" type="unitType"> <option name="faction" value="allied"/> <option name="unitType" value="conscript"/> <option name="side" value="offence"/> <option name="dice" value="strength"/> <option name="bonus" value="-1"/> <option name="number" value="-1"/> <!-- All negative supports are "Debuf" --> <option name="bonusType" value="Debuf"/> <option name="players" value="$All-Players$"/> </attachment> <attachment name="supportAttachment_InfantryDefend" attachTo="infantry" javaClass="UnitSupportAttachment" type="unitType"> <option name="faction" value="enemy"/> <option name="unitType" value="conscript"/> <option name="side" value="defence"/> <option name="dice" value="strength"/> <option name="bonus" value="1"/> <option name="number" value="-1"/> <!-- All positive supports are "Trench" --> <option name="bonusType" value="Trench"/> <option name="players" value="$All-Players$"/> </attachment> <attachment name="supportAttachment_InfantryDefendDebuf" attachTo="infantry" javaClass="UnitSupportAttachment" type="unitType"> <option name="faction" value="enemy"/> <option name="unitType" value="conscript"/> <option name="side" value="defence"/> <option name="dice" value="strength"/> <option name="bonus" value="-1"/> <option name="number" value="-1"/> <!-- All negative supports are "Debuf" --> <option name="bonusType" value="Debuf"/> <option name="players" value="$All-Players$"/> </attachment> It can get slightly complicated. Cheers...

@GREGOREK said: Is a Frontier change the only way to change the cost of a unit? Define the unit multiple times with different names per cost, then use trigger to change the frontier or productionRule. Yes. Cheers...

@RogerCooper Not for me, refresh your browser, but probably clear your cookies and it should work.

@Panther Thanks!

@VictoryFirst heh heh exit code 1

@Galloca You may want to checkout my thread, https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/889/roger-s-scenario-thread/983. I discuss mods that I play vs the AI.

@RogerCooper I think the option you are looking for is "maxConstructionsPerTypePerTerr" as there no "maxConstructionsPerType". Cheers...

@wc_sumpton said: Have you tried switching around the connections. @victoryfirst this makes sense to me, so I'd try it, or look at how they're listed which would be the same thing. Idk though. I'd also try it because that's what wc suggested lol but Infantry usually show first in the purchase window in most games and they are usually listed first in UnitList and Unitattachment so maybe some sort of similiar thing is going on with the connections

@drumstick919 @lafayette i’m wondering if this might have something to do with the new skin engine?

@schulz I mean, is there any difference between going with 48px and then zooming in on the map vs going with 54px and then zooming out? Because zoomed-out 54px looks better than zoomed-in 48px? Politicians answer. My logic goes like this, 2 & 4K screens have lots of pixels and as tech advances they will have more, this means that the standard 48x48px unit gets smaller and smaller on these screens, so now we need to draw the biggest unit icons we can and this is 54px high, width can be lots, lets say up to 96px wide. Another current hard parameter is 200% zoom. . How good is the AI in this map? I will make an outrageous claim and say 1941 Global Command Decision is the best AI you will play against. but I would say that wouldn't I. This map is written for solo play, Black_Elk & I spent ages play testing against the AI. The forum for GCD has 1.8 million views, so players must think its worth looking at. Also I like to think I know how the AI works, if that's possible, see here https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/3743/how-to-make-a-map-ai-friendly . handling of upkeep Resources are calculated at the being of the players turn, thanks to wc_sumpton. This means losses and gains of TT/SZ and no of units is all done at the start of the players turn. . handling of terrain & weather It all appears to work as intended, play it and judge for yourself. . diplomacy Has not changed, its all still random, so 1941 GCD does not have any politics, its all scripted. However for FFA maps 1888A has "get impending winners", a set of triggers that forces the AI players to take a step closer to war/fighting the impending winners.

@RogerCooper said: I am not sure that this is true. I recently played the mod https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/WWIIv3_1941_UK_Factory in which the British starts with an unplaced factory. The AI places it in Persia. This is done through the bid process. Zero out the British bid and the factory will never be placed by the British AI player. The engine does violate the rules for placing factories. Cheers...

@wc_sumpton @beelee @cernel @thedog As of 2.7.15606, capital centering should work again. Please retest if you can find the time.

@lafayette My changes for the following are still not refected; Uploaded a much smaller preview.png to 1888A_steam_and_steel, 2MB to 721KB, it is still not listed. shogun_advanced renamed Preview.png to preview.png where no image was shown before, hopefully that displays the image as expected. Please check and advise.

@Ted-Self Check out https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/Axis_%26_Allies_Wikipedia for a list of every mod (except a rew recent mods). For ahistorical mods see https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Hypothetical (although that includes a lot of maps I thought looked interesting) and https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Fictional

@McMoney To credit wc_sumpton for his genius help, here is how. Download The Pact of Steel 2 (PoS2) seen as The Pact of Stee Open its xml look at the end of the xml to see how its done. [image: 7e74acde-165d-476b-a7c3-d0c430bd036e-image.jpeg]