• Steampunk 1915

    6
    1 Votes
    6 Posts
    2k Views
    board 3659B
    @mattbarnes Caribbean would mean you need to take the Yucatan so you can even take 2 of the 3 Cuban Territories which allow you to try threatening the US South East. you would have to do it fast though before US builds up its navy b/c they have a huge naval advantage. Austrians can go down in Central America and usually sweep it. South America can be done once you go to Cuba and have the US pinned down to not be able to build a navy or once you take Yucatan. You go to Panama, or the Galapagos Islands (better choice) and take them. You move in position to then try to take Lima and reinforce it. If you can fight of a Martian Counter Attack, you basically build a factory to make gas and wipe out the remaining force or brute strength your way. Pacific can be done if you go south and Island Hop to some remaining German Islands. You have to reinforce Solomon Islands or get lucky that Samoa isn't taken. On Turn 2 your bring your force there and you can begin your Island Hopping ... remember reinforcements take 2 turns (going back to Mexico and back) and the US will not be threatened as a result. You can however with great routing, slow down Nemo Pirate Expansion or screw the British in defending south pacific. you can move to the North the threaten Japan if you want as well
  • World At War - Official Thread

    95
    0 Votes
    95 Posts
    66k Views
    L
    @fabulous-ferret The way it works is there’s the game engine logic (for all maps) and there’s the map files, so yes if one map has some feature, you can make any map can have that feature, by editing the map files (mainly the xml). You’d open up the two maps in a text editor and start copying stuff over. Anyone can do it, but I don’t know how difficult the diplomacy option is to implement or how tech-y you are
  • Trying to put age of tribes engine on alexander 350 world map

    147
    0 Votes
    147 Posts
    82k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @ted-self Read this https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/working-with-files/using-files/downloading-source-code-archives
  • Age of Tribes - Official Thread

    62
    0 Votes
    62 Posts
    30k Views
    Ted SelfT
    @ted-self Hi, how are you? I was wondering how you made those wooly mammoths able to be captured? I am trying to do a war of the roses scenario and I have some royal units who need to be captured.
  • 🏛 Britannia: Roman Invasion v2+ - Official Thread

    maps thedog
    10
    1 Votes
    10 Posts
    2k Views
    TheDogT
    Rounds 1-24, no TT owned, no units on the map. Then round 25, place them on the map. To me it does not sound a good idea, as players will avoid the new nations territory, knowing they will appear. The AI will not have a clue. But ...
  • Change Unit Ownership? [Re-opened]

    23
    0 Votes
    23 Posts
    7k Views
    SlendyMcTendiesS
    @wc_sumpton I'm confused about what you mean by players only being allowed "one" player attachment. You have two in your code example, yet it worked at the time. @wc_sumpton said in Change Unit Ownership? [Resolved]: @slendymctendies The following seems to work: <!-- Remove Capital Requirement --> <attachment foreach="$AllPlayers$" name="playerAttachment" attachTo="@AllPlayers@" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.PlayerAttachment" type="player"> <option name="retainCapitalNumber" value="0"/> <option name="retainCapitalProduceNumber" value="0"/> <option name="giveUnitControl" value="$AllPlayers$"/> <option name="giveUnitControlInAllTerritories" value="false"/> </attachment> <attachment foreach="$Territory$" name="triggerAttachment_Germans_SurrenderTo_Russians_@Territory@_ChangeOwnership" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player"> <option name="trigger" value="conditionAttachment_Germans_SurrenderTo_Russians"/> <option name="when" value="before:germansEndTurn"/> <option name="changeOwnership" value="@Territory@:Germans:Russians:false"/> <option name="uses" value="1"/> </attachment> <!-- change military units canBeGivenByTerritoryTo --> <attachment name="triggerAttachment_canBeGivenByTerritoryTo_GermansToRussians" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="TriggerAttachment" type="player"> <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachment_Germans_SurrenderTo_Russians"/> <option name="unitAttachmentName" value="UnitAttachment" count="unitAttachment"/> <option name="unitType" value="$AllUnits$"/> <option name="unitProperty" value="canBeGivenByTerritoryTo" count="-reset-Russians"/> <option name="when" value="after:germansPolitics"/> <option name="uses" value="1"/> </attachment> <!-- Give unit control Germans to Russians --> <attachment name="triggerAttachment_GiveUnitControl_GermansToRussians" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="TriggerAttachment" type="player"> <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachment_Germans_SurrenderTo_Russians"/> <option name="playerAttachmentName" value="PlayerAttachment" count="playerAttachment"/> <option name="playerProperty" value="giveUnitControl" count="-reset-Russians"/> <option name="when" value="after:germansPolitics"/> <option name="uses" value="1"/> </attachment> <!-- Give give captured units Germans to Russians --> <attachment name="triggerAttachment_GiveUnitControlInAllTerritories_GermansToRussians" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player"> <option name="trigger" value="conditionAttachment_Germans_SurrenderTo_Russians"/> <option name="when" value="after:germansPolitics"/> <option name="playerAttachmentName" value="PlayerAttachment" count="playerAttachment"/> <option name="playerProperty" value="giveUnitControlInAllTerritories" count="true"/> <option name="uses" value="1"/> </attachment> Cheers... So what do you mean by players only having one player attachment?
  • How are the map files kept current in TripleA after downloading?

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    981 Views
    PantherP
    @poptech Once a map has been updated on the server, you usually will notice it by the "Updates Available" register to be found when you hit "Download Maps". You can then start the update from there. This applies to current pre-release versions of TripleA. I haven't used the old stable for a while, but here IIRC the updated maps are represented by the map name showing in italics. Hit that name and a button to start the update will appear. Note that savegames always run with the map-status at the time the game has been started. In other words: Updates of maps do not affect existent games.
  • UPDATED: Alexander 350BC

    23
    0 Votes
    23 Posts
    8k Views
    NinjaWolfHybridN
    @ted-self that's great. I don't mind. Today I noticed a missing connection between South China Sea and Arafura Sea. Modern canals (Egypt, Panama) were removed from 350BC, fyi.
  • New World Order

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    898 Views
    RogerCooperR
    @mrquadratic Checkout "New World Order Variants", which has neutrality as an option. You could also place a bunch of bunkers on the frontier, and then remove them when you are ready to fight.
  • Set Territory as Unclaimed? [RESOLVED]

    1
    1 Votes
    1 Posts
    866 Views
    No one has replied
  • 0 Votes
    2 Posts
    780 Views
    wc_sumptonW
    @slendymctendies All Cheers...
  • Hi Is there a way to print out a map?

    3
    1 Votes
    3 Posts
    911 Views
    SlendyMcTendiesS
    @rufy-0 In game under the "Export" tab, you can export a full board image "Export Gameboard Picture"
  • Remove building AA? (Factory, Airfield, Harbour) [Solved]

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    1k Views
    SlendyMcTendiesS
    @wc_sumpton Yeah, I initially wanted to figure out how to remove AA when disabled, but then I figured removing the AA capabilities of buildings would incentivize purchasing AA guns to protect them. I initially tried using "isAA" = "false", but this has the side-effect of making the game think it was an actual combat unit and therefore players could use them as sacrificial pawns and immediately deny the enemy their spoils if facing an overwhelming force, which was something I definitely didn't want either. You understood the original post correctly. I just decided to take a different route a day or two after posting.
  • World At War - V2.1.1 or 3.0 ? Game Unplayable

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    915 Views
    Falkon PowersF
    @falkon-powers Disregard, game as intended, I was mistaken V2 rather than V3 ruleset. Rusty memory on this map, been a few years... cheers!
  • PvP Scenario Review Thread

    34
    3 Votes
    34 Posts
    12k Views
    TheDogT
    @mattbarnes and others Any more reviews?
  • Middle Earth, Oil Wars, Forty Thousand

    8
    3 Votes
    8 Posts
    2k Views
    NinjaWolfHybridN
    @thedog I made a new map, thanks for the encouragement. It's called Alexander350 (world conquest set in 350BC). .zip in Maps & Mods, tell me what you think. It does use modern region names (Oil Wars map), and units from Middle Earth with only minor tweaks.
  • Added Relationship Types

    4
    1 Votes
    4 Posts
    1k Views
    TheDogT
    The PoliticalStateOverview.java file has the color coding for the three relationship archeTypes, meaning this functionality could be added but of course its not accessible from the mapmaking point of view. As there is no Devs working on TripleA at the moment this will not change any time soon.
  • d12 alagaesia

    3
    1 Votes
    3 Posts
    762 Views
    C
    @thedog tooltips.properties is what I was missing. I'll have to review that map further. Looking right off, arena has a very accessible xml file. Thanks for the welcome and help!
  • v6 connection error

    1
    1 Votes
    1 Posts
    593 Views
    No one has replied
  • Stuck units due to relation types

    2
    1 Votes
    2 Posts
    860 Views
    RogerCooperR
    @beornthebold-0 This is the whole logic of being unable to move to someone's territories. It means that you can't move to someone's territories. You are not going to be able to get TripleA to move in some directions and not others. You could use triggered events to simulate the evacuation of a specific base, but it would be difficult to do this on a large scale.

Recent Posts

  • @Schulz said:

    Just because Revised and WaW failed to provide the US with a balanced strategy between two fronts doesn't mean it can't be done on other maps.

    You can still have an undivided USA and make pursuing both oceans simultaneously as viable as KGF or KJP. It's simply better to give the US player the option of how to divide their resources between the fronts.

    WaW failed to achieve this due to:

    The Hawaii factory. The USA being closer to Japan than Germany/Italy. Japan being divided while Germany is not strong enough.

    All you need is to not make the same mistakes that WaW did. A much stronger Germany will already naturally force the US player to commit at least part of their resources to Europe.

    I did not say anything because did not want to be too assertive but completely agree with @schulz here. I think that splitting the United States into Atlantic and Pacific is a very crude and historically wrong way to have this country going both oceans. It is true that in many games you see the United States unhistorically focusing almost exclusively on Atlantic or Pacific, with at most the choice to go in one direction or the other, but it would be much better to find other less forceful ways to allow that to happen. One way, for example, may be making Pacific into the better choice (by giving value to the Dutch East Indies and having the Japanese Empire being much weaker than the United States, so that the United States can handily win in Pacific using less than half of its total production) but making possible to place only very little in there through severe placement limits especially for ships. Having very low placement capabilities and even production in the West Coast is actually not necessarily unhistorical as back then the western part of the United States was a lot less populated than today both absolutely and relatively to the East Coast, so much so that most ships used in Pacific were actually launched from the East Coast. For sure, Hawaii should not be able to place anything at least at start game.

    read more

  • On another matter, the new air system seems to be working out well. Four bombers per land territory max, along with four fighters max. I was afraid this would create a GUI problem, but that has not been the case.

    The Soviets sent their dive bomber against a German army. Granted, that dive bomber got aborted, so no attack. But I think the real time for the Soviets to push back in the sky will come later in the game. The four plane limit is doing its job of giving both sides a reason to fight for control over the sky. Thanks to @vendetta for pushing me on this.

    read more

  • Some comments on strategic bomber tech:

    In a test game, Britain used most of its round 2 purchase to buy strategic bombers. These were devastating to Germany on round 3. I felt like it was too early in the game for Germany to have to deal with stuff like this. 40 PUs of damage was going too far. That's why I decided to nerf the strategic bomber.

    An entry level strategic bomber does 2 PUs of damage (down from the 5 PUs for the pre-nerf version). The entry level has 2 hitpoints instead of 3, and an air defense value of 1 instead of 2.

    Britain and the U.S. are the nations with the two best tech trees for strategic bombers tech. Britain's bombers can be upgraded to a strategic bombing value of 5, as opposed to 4 for the U.S. Also Britain can research Window, which reduces enemy interception value by 1. (Can never go below 1.) British and American bombers can each be upgraded to 3 hitpoints. American bombers can be upgraded to have better air defense than British bombers. Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union can use one star to research an entry-level strategic bomber. Then one star to upgrade it to the final version. The final version won't be as good as British or American strategic bombers. Japan's final version is a little better than the other two.

    read more

  • America Pacific research screen, round 2.

    image.jpeg

    The primary target for center 2 is fleet carrier. It hopes to build fleet carriers as its special unit. The primary target for center 1 is USA. There are good income increasing techs in that category. For secondary research, one of its centers is focusing on Advanced. It already has Advanced 1. Getting Advanced 2 will let it build both of its special production centers. The other secondary priority is piston aircraft. A lot of solid techs in that category.

    image.jpeg

    Research phase complete. Shipyards tech was chosen at random. It reduces the cost of transports and cruisers. This will be helpful for its upcoming war against Japan. The other tech chosen was wartime production: a good boost to America Pacific's income.

    Here is the research screen for America Atlantic

    image.jpeg

    One of its research centers has a primary focus of USA tech, for basically the exact same reasons as America Pacific. The other research center is focusing primarily on strategic bombing tech. It is contemplating a strategic bombing campaign against Germany. Due to a nerf, an entry level strategic bomber has 2 hitpoints and does 2 PUs of damage when strategic bombing. An air defense value of 1. The U.S. and Britain have the best available options for strategic bomber tech.

    Long-term, America Atlantic is thinking its special unit should maybe be the Superfortress. Short-term, however, the heavy tank seems like a good idea. That is why it has chosen tanks tech as a secondary focus. Its other secondary focus is advanced, so that it will be able to build the three SPCs it hopes to have.

    image.jpeg

    One star towards Pershing tank. That part went according to plan. One star towards improved subs, as a randomly chosen advance. This is not nearly as helpful to America Atlantic as it would have been to America Pacific.

    read more