• Trying to make War of the Roses Revamp

    36
    0 Votes
    36 Posts
    9k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @ted-self Uploaded to Github, https://github.com/triplea-maps/War_of_the_Roses_Revamp
  • 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
    3
    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
    2
    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

Recent Posts

  • @KurtGodel7 said:

    I wouldn’t split it into Bohemia and Moravia; that’s a gameplay change for a naming problem.

    I totally agree not drawing territories to accommodate names, but both in case of Bohemia - Moravia (I would leave a space before and after the hyphen.) as well as in the case of Austria I would strongly consider splitting the territories in two east/west both on the account of the relative dimensions as well as on the account of their rough geography (mountains, forests...) which should not make them the easiest routes available and overall would favour front multiplication.

    read more

  • @KurtGodel7 said:

    Neumark: I’d still keep it. The territory east of Berlin, bordering Pomerania, Silesia and Wartheland, is the old Neumark (Brandenburg east of the Oder). “Southern Pomerania” would name the wrong province. Cernel’s reply doesn’t actually argue this one, so I wouldn’t read it as a strong objection.

    LOL This is actually the one I've the strongest objection against (though Ruhr is a close second). It is just that it would take quite a lot of time arguing over the various things, so I just didn't do it.

    @kurtgodel7 But I'm enjoying the conversation with Claude (I would hate it if I did not know it was AI.), so I might make a full list of counter-arguments (LMAO) if you want to use your allowance to then see what Claude has to counter-counter-argue about it. You tell me.

    read more

  • How strong did you make all the neutral forces on your setup?

    read more

  • I'd had to take a break from Claude due to being too close to my weekly usage limit. Now that weekly usage is reset, here are Claude's comments on some of the map names:

    Hesse → Rhineland: yes. I’ve changed my mind here. Vendetta’s point holds. On your map, “Hesse” borders Belgium, Holland and Lorraine, and the real Hesse touched none of them. The land along that border was the Rhineland (Rhine Province, Saar, Palatinate). My earlier objection was that Cologne sits in your Ruhr territory, but that matters less than the name contradicting the geography a player sees. I’d keep Ruhr as it is: it’s the name everyone knows for that industrial area, and it’s what players will be bombing.

    Bohemia: I’d use “Bohemia-Moravia”. Cernel is right that it was one name, and Vendetta is right that label space matters. But Bohemia is one of the largest territories in that part of the map, so the 15-character name fits without crowding (about 150 pixels in a territory roughly 270 wide). If it ever has to be one word, “Bohemia” is a defensible shorthand. I wouldn’t split it into Bohemia and Moravia; that’s a gameplay change for a naming problem.

    Württemberg vs Baden: keep Württemberg, low stakes. Both are defensible, as Cernel says. Stuttgart, the region’s main city, is in Württemberg. “Baden-Württemberg” is too long and dates from 1952. If you want Alsace implied, Baden is fine, but on your map Alsace sits inside French Lorraine anyway.

    Silesia and Upper Silesia: the split is deliberate, and it’s yours to defend. You drew the Silesia/Cracow line along the 1922 partition so that the Polish-majority part pays Germany no manpower. That’s why Upper Silesia looks cut in half. Cernel’s connection argument is true for 1941 administrative borders (the annexed Żywiec area did touch Slovakia), not for the population line you chose. The German part of Upper Silesia bordered Moravia, and your Silesia does border Bohemia(-Moravia). I’d keep both the name Silesia and the line, and explain the manpower reason in the thread. Splitting Silesia into Lower (west) and Upper (east) is fine if you want more territories there, but it isn’t needed. It also doesn’t fix Schulz’s Berlin-to-Krakow distance complaint, which is a geometry issue, not a naming one.

    Neumark: I’d still keep it. The territory east of Berlin, bordering Pomerania, Silesia and Wartheland, is the old Neumark (Brandenburg east of the Oder). “Southern Pomerania” would name the wrong province. Cernel’s reply doesn’t actually argue this one, so I wouldn’t read it as a strong objection.

    Budapest → Hungary: yes. It’s a one-territory country, like Austria and Switzerland.

    Ruthenia as a 1-PU territory: worth doing, mildly. It’s historically real (Czechoslovak until 1939, Hungarian in 1941, Soviet after). It also fits your population rule neatly: Rusyn-majority, so it gives Hungary/Germany no manpower. Gameplay-wise, it puts a step between Hungary and Lwow, which is the route the Hungarian army actually took in 1941. The cost is one more small territory. It would mean redrawing tiles like France did, but it’s a small job.

    read more