1. Home
  2. Maps & Mods
Log in to post
Load new posts
  • S

    Map closest to Axis and Allies Anniversary Edition?

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    789 Views
    ubernautU
    @SkyGawker v3
  • T

    TripleA - a request from a player to a designer

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    734 Views
    C
    @The_Good_Captain said in TripleA - a request from a player to a designer: First, in both '41 and '42 versions of Anniversary, the official errata optional rule regarding SZ 16 (the Dardanelles rule) was omitted. The problem here is that the TripleA program doesn't allow for having a direct setting that enables/disables a canal. This could be hacked in a number of ways, but probably should rather be a feature request for the program to support such a possibility, before changing any maps (so, one would need first to find a developer to add the feature to the program, another developer to review such feature, then someone willingly to modify the map's games, and, finally, an administrator accepting the changes (all this besides any considerations about copyrights over the existent map, whose creators are likely not all active any longer)). Meanwhile, you can use my "WWIIv3 1941 Tech Advance" variant. Just be sure to customize it back to standard WWIIv3 rules, before enabling the "Canal Turkey" option. Second, I know this is a map in development but the destroyer units in Europe '99 (“Europe - Alpha” map as its called in TripleA) This (as well as "Pacific") is more like a map abandoned during development. It may be more than 10 years nobody is working on it.
  • General_ZodG

    "Bad-Ass" 4 Nation FFA

    58
    1 Votes
    58 Posts
    24k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @RogerCooper This scenario has been fixed can be downloaded
  • H

    Amsterdam_met_de_bois

    Moved
    19
    5 Votes
    19 Posts
    3k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @Hidde2k You need to change the B in the version number to 2.
  • Marc SarziM

    Diplomacy like modification?

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    978 Views
    RoiEXR
    @Cernel Not necessary. Providing the link like you just did is absolutely fine. @Marc-Sarzi Yeah it's a real bummer that simultaneous movement is not possible. You can do a lot with the xml, but there are just some core concepts that can't be changed. As developers we're in a long process of modernising the code and TripleA itself in multiple areas, but core gameplay is simply not a priority. There are tons of more pressing problems to solve and simultaneous movement isn't just something one can implement in an afternoon. TripleA is open source after all, so if you're ambitious enough, at least in theory, you could contribute for this to eventually become a reality.
  • RogerCooperR

    Axis & Allies Zombies (AA42-2)

    20
    2 Votes
    20 Posts
    4k Views
    C
    @Cernel For example, if I'm making a game that is not exactly "chess", I would call it "chess" if the ultimate aim is for it to be exactly like "chess", and maybe this is just impossible, due to the limitation of the program. On the other hand, I would not call it "chess" if it is a game inspired to "chess" but deliberately made different in some ways.
  • C

    Adding a map to the repository in one category or another one

    1
    3 Votes
    1 Posts
    554 Views
    No one has replied
  • Fabio MostiF

    best WW2 map?

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    4k Views
    K
    The best WWII maps are New World Order (European theater), Rising Sun (Pacific), and World at War (the whole world). They are all part of the same series. I'll focus on New World Order, as this is the one with which I'm most familiar. The attached picture shows New World Order at the start of a game. Germany is supposed to expand quickly, conquering Paris on G3, and conquering most or all of neutral Poland by G3 as well. Early in the game Italy is supposed to conquer southern France, the Balkans, central and western North Africa, and potentially Greece. It's also supposed to expand into eastern Spain. Britain is supposed to expand in the Middle East, conquering neutral Iran, Iraq, and possibly neutral Turkey. There are no diplomatic or other penalties whatsoever for attacking neutrals. Axis nations are Germany, Italy, Finnland, and Romania. Allied nations are U.S.S.R., France, Colonial France, Britain, and the U.S. Contested areas are Scandinavia (if UK or US go north) France (if UK or US go middle), Spain (if Britain or US go south) or northern Africa. Over in the east, Turkey can be contested between Britain and Italy. If Britain wins that struggle it will seek to advance into Greece and the Balkans. If Italy wins it will seek to take Iran/Iraq from Britain, perhaps even conquering Britain's factory in Cairo and driving Britain out of the east Mediterranean entirely. Sometimes Allies will go Kill Italy First, in which case Axis will often respond with Kill Soviet Union First. In this map Italy is at least as important to the Axis as the Soviet Union is to the Allies. To give you a feel for the scale of this map, it's perfectly normal for Germany to have an income of 130 and Italy to have an income of 80, and for Allied incomes to balance out Axis. Starting on round 4 you will be able to build special, more technologically advanced units: harder hitting, long ranged bombers for Britain and the U.S., Katyushka for the Soviet Union, jets for Axis, big armor and bunkers and super subs for everyone. This map includes some land and air unit types not seen in Larry Harris maps. [image: alt text] [image: alt text]
  • felizardoF

    Existing A.I options and A.I modding

    7
    1 Votes
    7 Posts
    1k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @felizardo You should also check out the Fast AI. It plays almost as well and it usually much faster.
  • S

    Steampunk 1915

    10
    1 Votes
    10 Posts
    2k Views
    S
    @RogerCooper Hi Roger, Actual Cernel answered my question for me. I had inadvertently left some of the original authors units in the unit folder. That is why they were appearing in "unit help". I think my version is ready to go.
  • FrostionF

    Dragon War - Official Thread

    103
    0 Votes
    103 Posts
    63k Views
    FrostionF
    @Michael-Hoover Very well spotted! () This is now fixed if you remove and redownload the map. There were actually 3 dragon notification mix-ups that I had to fix.
  • J

    TWW 2.7.7.2 or earlier versions

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    384 Views
    No one has replied
  • Hal LinH

    Total World War Diplomacy?

    9
    0 Votes
    9 Posts
    2k Views
    Hal LinH
    Oh, that fixed it! I feel dumb now haha
  • wc_sumptonW

    Game of Thrones & A Song of Ice and Fire - Official Thread

    96
    4 Votes
    96 Posts
    55k Views
    Greg AndersonG
    Sorry for not posting in a while. I'm currently quite busy. I'll post again when I finish the units, as there are a few things to iron out.
  • S

    Star Trek Dilithium mod

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    580 Views
    No one has replied
  • Michael HooverM

    Missing Connection in Dragon War

    4
    2 Votes
    4 Posts
    1k Views
    FrostionF
    Thanks @Michael-Hoover for the notification. I appreciate that you came here to the forum and not just fixed your own local copy Yes, there was a flaw in the XML. Actually there were two connections in the XML between the two territories. But this was not the problem. There has recently been an implementation of “Air connections” to the map as an alternative to bridge connections. (Credit to @Cernel :thumbs_up:) The two territories had gotten an air connection (even though it shouldn’t) and this was preventing normal unit movement. You probably flew over the connection but could not walk over it with another unit. It should be fixed now when v1.2.8 Dragon War is downloadable/updateable. I hope you return and notify if you find other flaws. :winking_face:
  • RogerCooperR

    Broken Mods in Scenario Repository

    2
    1 Votes
    2 Posts
    587 Views
    LaFayetteL
    The hope was that we'd have an army of map owners/makers taking care of the maps in repositories. In practice the maps in repository tend to be a last step and a bit of 'fire and forget'. That is not the case for all maps, there are some certainly being actively maintained, though that can't be said for the bulk as we have over a hundred and just a few people maintaining the whole project (code, servers, maps). If you have fixes, it would be great to see them get uploaded, let us know where you are running into trouble and/or what you are trying. Any scenarios you have that can be uploaded are certainly very welcome additions.
  • Michael HooverM

    1940 map with 1942 rules?

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    2k Views
    Michael HooverM
    Thanks for the ideas I'll check that out!
  • RogerCooperR

    Correcting the Pacific Mod

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    509 Views
    No one has replied
  • N

    Ancient Empires: 222 BC

    265
    5 Votes
    265 Posts
    246k Views
    HeppsH
    @Name Just checking in to ensure you're ok.

Recent Posts

  • SchulzS
    Schulz
    The setup is meant to be balanced around dice. Collect income before the rounds. V3 sub, air, and carrier rules. May '42 setup. No building new factories and no using captured ones. The Axis starts with extra factories in Hungary, Yugoslavia, and Taiwan to compensate for this. No China. No Japanese-Soviet front. No tech. No national objectives. Ships move at 3 (though I'm thinking about making only transports move at 3). Fighters can scramble to nearby sea zones from anywhere. They can escort or intercept bombing missions. Fighters also have a +1 attack bonus against surface ships (yeah, they are supposed to be that good). Britain and the USA can't land on Soviet territory that hasn't been taken by the Axis. Factories have their own AA guns. Standard infantry costs 6 IPCs with 1/2/1 stats, whereas they are replaced by "conscripts" for the Soviets and Japan, which cost 4 IPCs with 0/1/1 stats. Factories can be bombed up to their territory value. Capture 2 enemy capitals to win. Germany is twice as strong as the Soviets income-wise; Germany + Italy is stronger than the Soviets + British; and the US is twice as strong as Japan. The setup is far from being finished, unfortunately.

    board_small - Copy.png

    costs.png

    read more
  • V
    Vendetta

    @KurtGodel7 Do you have the full tech trees written up yet or are they still work in progress?

    read more
  • K
    KurtGodel7

    @Cernel said:

    @KurtGodel7 said:

    @Cernel said:

    @KurtGodel7 said:

    Also, some planes were harder to shoot down than others, and this is reflected in me giving some airplanes more hitpoints than others.

    I guess your are not doing it, but it would be good if you split the heavy bombers available since start game at least into two different units, one mainly representing the Avro Lancaster and the other one mainly representing the B-17 (and the B-24 too if you don't want to split in 3) (I'm not talking about other future/tech ones like the B-29). The B-17 should have more hit-points and more defensive power than the Avro Lancaster, but the Avro Lancaster should have a slightly bigger bombing power (not much). This can be balanced by making the Avro Lancaster cheaper (whether or not this is the case) or just letting the United States have an advantage in heavy bombers over Britain.

    The initial strategic bomber is the same for all nations. The final version is different for each. (This includes America Pacific vs. America Atlantic.)

    America Pacific's final strategic bomber is the Liberator. America Atlantic's is the Flying Fortress. And Britain's is the Avro Lancaster. Of the three, the Avro Lancaster has the hardest hitting power, due to the "Tall Boy and Grand Slam" tech. Uniquely among the three, it can benefit from Window tech, which adds -1 to the interception value of enemy air. The Flying Fortress has the most ability to defend itself against interception. The Liberator has a longer range than a Flying Fortress. Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union each also get their own final version of strategic bombers, though their final versions are below those of the U.K. and U.S. Japan's version is a little better than Germany's version or the Soviet Union's version.

    Wait. I saw that you had the "Superfortress" as "Strategic Bombers" tech. That would be the B-29. How is the "Flying Fortress" the final strategic bomber? That is the B-17, right?

    Ok for the Avro Lancaster and the B-24 I guess, but the B-17 in mid-to-late 1941 should be already available for purchase. I mean, I certainly agree with the United States starting with zero of them (since they were very few before Pearl Harbour) but with the ability to purchase them (unless maybe you have a progressive tech and the B-17 is like at 95% development completion or something).

    I guess you are taking into account the possibility of USA Pacific sending B-24 to fight in Atlantic, right? They have been quite important in the Mid-Atlantic gap and very important in bombing Germany.

    Some thoughts on this.

    For America Pacific, the final strategic bombing tech is the Superfortress. A Superfortress is a special unit: an SPC produces one every two turns. For normal bombers--i.e., those which can be purchased with PUs--the final bomber is the Liberator for America Pacific and the Flying Fortress for America Atlantic.

    Some of my techs have anachronistic names. Japan needs to research "Kate" tech, even though it already had Kates as of June 1941. The U.S.S.R. needs to research "KV-2" tech, even though it had KV-2s in June 1941. I hate wasting opportunities to give players tech to research. In any case, and in answer to your question, both halves of America are able to build strategic bombers at the start of the game. But those strategic bombers don't get upgraded into Flying Fortresses or Liberators until the U.S. has researched tech. Another anachronism, granted.

    read more
  • C
    Cernel

    About bombers, a cool new feature would be allowing for bombers to travel longer distances at the expense of lowering their bombing/attack power. Just an idea.

    read more