• Revisiting an old project

    161
    1
    3 Votes
    161 Posts
    145k Views
    redrumR
    So there doesn't appear to be an appetite to rebalance this map based on the territory differences between RTW and 270BC. So I've taken the improved unit images and dice images and merged them into standard 270BC: https://github.com/triplea-maps/270bc/pull/4 I will also be reviewing the changes in 270BC variants to see if any balances adjustments should be added from those. New official map thread: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/1448/270bc-official-thread
  • This topic is deleted!

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    7 Views
    No one has replied
  • Unit costs of World at War

    Moved
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    657 Views
    C
    @Schulz Moving to Maps & Mods.
  • D-Day Version 3

    1
    3 Votes
    1 Posts
    486 Views
    No one has replied
  • did anybody fix that bug on the game of thrones map?

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    730 Views
    C
    @runman Sadly, I don't think anyone fixed anything. It's many years that several people talk about the Game of Thrones map, but nothing has ever come out of it (I may be interested in playing that map if well remade). If you are interested in learning mapmaking and fixing it yourself, you can do it (whatever changes are probably going to be accepted, I assume, the map being just largely broken).
  • Historical Statistics

    25
    1
    2 Votes
    25 Posts
    10k Views
    RogerCooperR
    I have added total mobilized: [image: 1552950679041-35360048-954c-449f-984e-7a611e94440c-image.png] Country Manpower on Entry into War End of War Peak Number Total Mobilized Albania 13,000 13,000 13,000 Australia 91,700 575,100 575,100 993,000 Belgium 600,000 650,000 650,000 900,000 Bulgaria 160,000 450,000 450,000 1,011,000 Canada 63,100 759,800 759,800 1,100,000 China 2,500,000 5,000,000 5,700,000 14,000,000 Denmark 6,600 6,600 6,600 Finland 127,800 270,000 270,000 270,000 France 900,000 437,000 2,680,000 2,680,000 Germany 3,180,000 7,800,000 9,500,000 17,900,000 Greece 430,000 540,000 540,000 Hungary 80,000 210,000 210,000 210,000 India 197,000 2,159,700 2,159,700 2,581,800 Italy 1,899,600 259,100 2,563,000 2,563,000 Japan 1,700,000 7,200,000 7,200,000 9,100,000 Netherlands 270,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 New Zealand 13,800 192,800 192,800 192,800 Norway 25,000 25,000 90,000 Poland 1,200,000 250,000 250,000 2,400,000 Rumania 686,000 370,000 1,225,000 1,225,000 South Africa 19,000 198,000 250,000 UK 681,000 4,683,000 4,683,000 5,896,000 USA 5,413,000 11,877,000 11,877,000 16,354,000 USSR 9,000,000 12,400,000 13,200,000 13,200,000 Yugoslavia 150,000 800,000 800,000 1,500,000
  • World at war : variant v3 (Victory Conditions)

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    533 Views
    No one has replied
  • Feudal Lords

    6
    5 Votes
    6 Posts
    2k Views
    C
    @redrum Wow that is seriously Ethnic oriented. There is that single "Slavs" players that groups together Pomerania, Bohemia, Polonia, almost all Russia, Serbia and Bulgaria. Tho, in this case, they got the name "Britons" wrong, as those are, rather, the "Anglo-Saxons" migrants, since also "Brittany" ("Little Britain") I see it is not part of the "Britons"...
  • No retreat LL games? Especially NML/NWO

    22
    2 Votes
    22 Posts
    7k Views
    O
    Have you ever beaten the Union militarily? So who made the map? Also wondering if there is any negative consequence for having negative manpower?
  • Total World War: December 1941 (BETA) 2.8.0.5

    472
    2
    2 Votes
    472 Posts
    776k Views
    redrumR
    @LovePlayingAAA Good catch, it appears we missed a few updates on some of the HeavyDestroyers and will fix that in the next minor version. ImprovedDestroyers and AdvancedDestroyer techs still exist and have been updated to make different improvements for destroyers now. This post outlines the sub/destroyer changes: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/493/total-world-war-december-1941-beta-2-8-0-5/392 (there were a few adjustments to that original vision). The notes haven't been updated yet for 3.0 but are in-progress and hopefully be added shortly. Please use the new TWW 3.0 for discussing the new version: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/1181/total-world-war-december-1941-3-0-0-0-now-available
  • Unit Browser Instructions

    17
    2 Votes
    17 Posts
    7k Views
    MahksM
    UBr Update: WARNING using this update will require scenarios to be reloaded. Added sorting options. Added a list of game properties used in the scenario. Better handling of complex support attachments. Fixed off-line issues. Production frontiers are now dealt with as groups in the unit list, rather than having them as separate items in the empire list. This allows one to view and filter the frontiers so one can compare. Initial placement units are placed in a group as well as sometimes they are not in a production frontier. Newest version : UBr Link 1.002.003
  • Iron Blitz (with Classic Map)

    7
    1 Votes
    7 Posts
    2k Views
    L
    not sure if i should start a new thread but ever since i update to 1.10.13285 the game cannot parse: age of tribes classical civil war eastern campaign 1914 blood and steel thegreatwar-ultimate
  • Star Trek Dilithium War - Official Thread

    17
    3
    5 Votes
    17 Posts
    6k Views
    HeppsH
    @Frostion Just the new pizza delivery feature!
  • Update for Domination 1914 No Man's Land

    Moved
    31
    0 Votes
    31 Posts
    10k Views
    SchulzS
    Did you guys get permission from sieg for adding additional sea zone into Pacific during WaW update process? If not then wouldn't be possible to divide Belarus and Arabia in the update like you had done similar thing in WaW?
  • Upgraded V3 41-42 Version

    Moved
    3
    1 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    B
    @Panther Thanks : )
  • Big World v3 issues with balancing - unbalanced

    Moved
    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    3k Views
    C
    Not sure why this was moved in tournaments, but moving it to Maps & Mods, if that's fine.
  • The Rising Sun

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    2k Views
    Z
    zod's explanations don't account for it at all though. his stuff applies to ALL sieg maps, by his own statement. While the situation we have here is TRS receives very little play, while NWO and WAW receive a good amount. In order to be an explanation it needs to account for that discrepancy. which means it needs to point to something that differentiates TRS from the other Sieg maps.
  • WWII Revised - Facelift

    55
    0 Votes
    55 Posts
    26k Views
    General_ZodG
    @hepps Yeah, I saw a nice bf109 model with that paint scheme. I'm glad someone noticed it. As the infantry goes, he is glistening in the sun and sleeves rolled up ready to fight. The tiger is much nicer than original too, added the german cross and high lighted some areas so the tank pops a little. These were little experiments to see what it takes to improve units. It's quite difficult to work on tiny scales where a few pixels is all I have to work with. But I learned a lot. Too bad we don't have a vectored graphics for TripleA, then can do all kinds of stuff on any scale.
  • Domination 1914 - Meat Grinder

    40
    1 Votes
    40 Posts
    14k Views
    SchulzS
    Hello scallen1 I am huge fan of this game and I had several attemps to improve the current dom 1914 for years but I did generally failed. Then I really realize what dom players (or TripleA players) want to see and what they don't want to see in the game. You can improve any game greatly but in term of the taste of people that's another story. These are general opinions of most dom 1914 players (or big map players) (including me) Historical accuracy: It is not as important as you think coz nobody really care. Also making these map historical would make the game significantly more unbaşanced. Declaration of war: Another bad idea. Every nations definitely should always start in the first round. These triggers slow downs speed of game. Increasing the importance of techs: Not good idea because some players can prefer playing it without techs and the current tech rolling system is already very dicey. Boosting these techs makes the game more aleatory. Different units/costs for different nations: People usually don't like it. They like great variations of units but generally better to give every nations to the same units. Too many country: Again, it just slow down games, they don't provide more strategic options. I would liek to see to share more my opinions if you are interested in. Thanks.
  • Map question like global with more territories

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    2k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @redrum The most areas on a world map is the World at War Map. However it does not use the AAG40 rules.There is no map that uses the AAG40 rules with more map areas. However, it would not be hard to change an existing large map such as World At War,or Ultimate World/Global War to AAG40, by cutting & pasting the xml file. Note that v3/AA50 rules differ only in small ways from AAG40 rules. You could probably play Ultimate World or Global War without making changes.

Recent Posts

  • Thanks Dog. I understand. and thanks for your reply.

    Regarding the forts, would it be possible for game start forts not to require upkeep but only new build forts require upkeep instead-So like a different kind of starting fort?

    What I like most about this game are the local battles that occur due to the giant map.
    Did the game ever have forested areas in Belarus region with partisans popping up?

    I play iron war and oil and snow maps too.
    The iron resource make the game and fight for it give the game that extra strategic edge, and the oil too. because it powers most units..
    Also the partisans popping up occasionally are a bit of a hindrance when sometimes your units are stuck fighting them whilst they could be moving somewhere else where they are more needed.

    Thanks

    read more

  • @captain0
    Thanks for engaging.

    The upkeep works well and it is a shame to have a 2 fort limit but I guess that is because of AI.

    This could be increased but it might feel too much like WW1.
    When new players come accross Bunkers, they struggled to take them, so I never thought to increase them in number. With the current stacking of other units and of 2 bunkers, it feels about right to give the Atlantic wall feel/vibe and Russian attempt at defence in depth and 1 Bunker in the Pacific gives the dug in Jap feel.

    .

    static fort upkeep be halved?

    Upkeep is in whole numbers only, 0 to say 9, so no .5 allowed.
    To get the equivilent of .5 you would have to double all PU purchase costs including upkeep to 2, except Bunkers they would be 1. This might mess with the current balance and it might put off human players that are so used to A&A PU costs. The Bunker upkeep cost of 1 also deters the human player from spamming them.

    .

    I set Russia and Japan as allied for a historic game and change that when war in Europe finishes,

    Yes the current NAP is weak, why would Russia declare war on Japan when it is losing to Germany. A reworking is on my TODO list 🙂

    .

    I believe historically the Finns were averse to advancing further than the Vyborg territory that they gave up in the Winter war..
    The Finnish commander Mannerheim had Soviet roots and Finnish people were not hugely anti Russian in general.

    We wanted to keep the minor powers to a minimum, although realistic they slow the turn speed down, so a compromise, no Finns, just more Germans.

    I hope others chime in with thoughts to your questions.

    read more

  • Thanks Dog.

    The terrain inclusions are great.
    The AI put 30 infantry into pripyet marshes and with the terrain bonuses they will be 'hard as hell' to knock out.

    I feel like some territories should be a little more fortified and/ or difficult to take i.e. cities could favour defenders more when they are outnumbered.

    The upkeep works well and it is a shame to have a 2 fort limit but I guess that is because of AI.
    You can edit them on I know,
    I don't know if other people would like it but perhaps the fort allowance per territory could be increased and the static fort upkeep be halved?

    Another thing that would be great is that transport planes could airlift HQ units to evacuate them from say, Africa when the Italian navy is knocked out.

    I set Russia and Japan as allied for a historic game and change that when war in Europe finishes,

    On my first game AI Germany took Lenningrad on first turn.
    I was a bit surprised at the effectiveness of the AI at that point.

    I believe historically the Finns were averse to advancing further than the Vyborg territory that they gave up in the Winter war..
    The Finnish commander Mannerheim had Soviet roots and Finnish people were not hugely anti Russian in general.

    Lastly whilst playing the AI some countries are close to maximum upkeep on round one.
    So a solution is to edit and remove the forts you don't need and convert the value into units.
    All my opinion of course but what do other people think?

    read more

  • @beelee said:

    Didn't want to hijack Ramon's thread what is the downside, if any, from having this enabled ? Turns out it wasn't on.

    "Transport Casualties Restricted"

    It can throw errors if units that do transport, have "transportCapacity" greater then 0, have attack or defense values greater then 0. These units will need "isCombatTransport" set.

    Cheers...

    read more