• 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

  • It can also be something less than its entire European production: I don't have much knowledge about how much the Germans were making in "real" terms after capturing the Free Zone as compared to before or whether or not they would have gotten more if they just conquered all European France instead of leaving French civil control and agreeing on a constant payment. Considering that the payments were reduced at some point (already happened if I understand the game starts right at the start of Barbarossa), it would make sense that Vichy France gives something less than its total European production (so long as this does not induce Germany to attack the Free Zone too early).

    read more

  • @KurtGodel7 said:

    Anyone can attack Vichy French territory at any time, with no diplomatic repercussions whatever.

    Pointing out that whatever rule for Vichy France is going to be not very realistic or very complex or both (so please nobody comes at me for not being "fully realistic"), I think it would be somewhat more realistic that there are no diplomatic repercussions for the Allies and the Japanese, whereas the Germans and the Italians attacking any part of Vichy France would cause all Vichy France to activate as a full fledged Allied power.

    I also think that income giving can be simplified to Vichy France giving all its European production to Germany and nothing of the rest. There were some important shipments from North Africa, but, as a matter of agreements, losing any part of the empire would not have lowered the agreed payments due to Germany.

    read more

  • @Vendetta said:

    @KurtGodel7 Much better on the maps now. The Gibraltar box looks exactly how I pictured. That could also be a good way to depict other small enclaves like Singapore, Hong Kong, etc at their proper size if you choose.

    With regard to coloring Vichy, I understand the logic of simplicity there. But it still looks wrong visually just because France was an actual wartime belligerent and its territories were major historical theaters of operations, so it feels off to see them in the same colors as Spain or Portugal (and also makes it look like they’re all owned by the same power).

    I guess part of what’s off-putting about it is that Flames & Steel has generally added more detail and depth versus the base G40 scenario, while this is one of the few cases where it feels like it’s consciously downgrading from the original.

    Okay, here is the direction I'm leaning.

    Vichy France will get its own color. Of the income from Vichy French territories, half (rounded down) goes to Germany. The other half disappears. Income from Vichy French territory in Indochina goes to Japan, again reduced by 50% and rounded down. Anyone can attack Vichy French territory at any time, with no diplomatic repercussions whatever. This adds 10 PUs to Germany and 3 PUs to Japan, at least at the start of the game. As Vichy French territory gets conquered this will decrease over time.

    I've consumed 90% of my weekly usage despite being only halfway through my usage week. So the implementation of Vichy France may need to wait a few days.

    read more

  • @KurtGodel7 said:

    As far as I can tell, you are not actually arguing that a space limitation for Gibraltar makes the game more fun, or adds strategic depth. The sole argument in favor of this which you have made is that a space limitation increases realism.

    Correct. The increase in realism starting from infinite stack limit would be huge even if we have no idea about what a land unit is but could be made substantially greater by trying to define at least how many men an infantry unit is supposed to be on average around the map. (This concept is just the same as when deciding how many infantry units can be loaded into a transport (1, 2, 3...?) and how many aircraft can land on a carrier: it is not mean to be full realism, just reducing the relative irrealism range.)

    If deciding how many infantry units can load onto a transport is based on absolutely nothing, also a stacking limit for Gibraltar can be based on absolutely nothing: in both cases, it would be (or at least feel) more realistic than the limit being infinite.

    On the other hand, as @vendetta says, I can see that having stacking limits in a few cases for some reasons but not in many other cases for many other reasons can be seen as insufficient, so it would look arguably better not having stacking limits at all.

    read more