-
5 Votes265 Posts246k Views
-
-1 Votes3 Posts841 Views
-
0 Votes26 Posts9k Views
-
1 Votes41 Posts14k Views
-
1 Votes4 Posts2k Views
-
1 Votes1 Posts606 Views
-
1 Votes2 Posts650 Views
-
0 Votes3 Posts996 Views
-
0 Votes10 Posts3k Views
-
0 Votes22 Posts7k Views
-
3 Votes18 Posts3k Views
-
0 Votes3 Posts665 Views
-
1 Votes23 Posts9k Views
-
0 Votes5 Posts1k Views
-
3 Votes161 Posts150k Views
-
0 Votes1 Posts7 Views
-
0 Votes2 Posts719 Views
-
3 Votes1 Posts525 Views
-
0 Votes2 Posts791 Views
-
2 Votes25 Posts11k Views
Recent Posts
-
Recent modifications to this map:
Because I'm using a different version of the engine, this cannot be played on the TripleA lobby. There are other ways to achieve networked play, however, and today some changes to my version of the engine were made to achieve this. Also, I've started the grim task of getting this ready for AI play. Step 1 was to have the AI play for 15 rounds without the game generating errors or crashing. This has now been achieved. Step 2 (currently in progress) is to have the AI make decent decisions during the research phase.In the test games (AI vs. AI) Moscow fell on round 12 or so. China fell as well. Is this a game balance issue of the Axis being too strong, or is this the result of poor AI play? From the verbal description I was given of these test games, Britain launched some minor raids on the German coast, but not a large scale invasion of Western Europe. The descriptions were a bit vague as to what America Atlantic did or didn't do.
Also, Conscription 1 tech provides the USSR with 5 free infantry per turn (assuming it still holds the Soviet interior). This is doubled to 10 free infantry per turn with Conscription 2, and maxes out at 20 free infantry for Conscription 4. Those are in addition to the free infantry it gets each turn for its Propaganda techs. If the Soviet Union wasn't researching Recruitment--which I'm pretty sure it wasn't--then that's a huge wasted opportunity for it to have put up a better fight against Germany.
There could well be balance problems with this map--that wouldn't surprise me even a little--but I feel the AI needs to improve before it can accurately reveal those problems. I'm at about 50% of my weekly usage, so we'll see how much progress I'm able to make on the AI front before that usage is consumed.
-
Starting productions;
Germany: 90
Japan: 45
Italy: 25USA: 85
UK: 65
USSR: 45No Chinese front and no Soviet-Japanese War. The Western Allies and the Soviets can't land on each other's territory.
The Soviets and the Japanese get conscripts with 0/1/1 stats with a 4 IPC cost instead of infantry.
I'm still working on distributing incomes better, though. Like, the British mainland itself is currently only worth 10 IPCs, which is too low to be worth bombing compared to Germany's 30 mainland IPCs. So, Germany is prevented from using more than one bomber, which is a bit lame. Maybe the UK could be raised to 75, Germany to 95, and Italy to 30.
-
@Schulz Post the income rates for the nations in your mod too so we can get a sense of the scaling
-
I've always liked Anniversary's unit costs more than others'. I think armor and bombers are on the expensive side, costing 6 and 14 respectively. Cruisers also feel expensive at 12 IPCs, and carriers + fighters are way too good.
I also like that air units always provide more value per IPC than naval units.
My current unit costs:
Fighters have a +1 attack bonus against surface ships (not currently working due to a bug), and they can scramble to nearby sea zones too if a fight occurs there.
Bombers can inflict 5–10 damage (no more than the territory's total value) and have +1 air attack as well. Meanwhile, fighters have +1 air attack and +1 air defense.
I'm struggling to balance the cost of air units vs. transports. I want strategic bombing to be neither too inefficient nor overpowered, while still keeping it nowhere near as efficient as a land invasion.
