• Balancing Scenarios in TripleA

    3
    2 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @rogercooper V5 (2nd edition) should have been 32% for the allies (it is very unbalanced). Axis & Allies Europe (the old version) needs 19% for the allies
  • napoleon ffa

    Moved
    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    923 Views
    S
    @board-3659 im not sure about a direct link but you can enter a bot in the lobby and click "download maps" and scan down the list till you get to "Napoleon Empires 5 Player FFA".
  • Imperialism 1974 Board Game

    9
    2 Votes
    9 Posts
    3k Views
    M
    There have been a few improvements to the map and to the engine to make this map work better. A few issues with the map itself were fixed, it got a facelift, and some changes in the 2.6 prereleases have taught the AI how to use consumable units, which made AIs be able to play effectively on the main continent (but not yet explore with ships). There have been some other non-AI fixes in the 2.6 prereleases fixing some UI glitches the map experiences with 2.5. I also added the mountain territory effect, but unfortunately we can only use it for territories that are all-mountain, since TripleA doesn't yet support directional territory effects. Would be interested to hear if people had a chance to try it and have feedback. Cheers!
  • Cold War map

    34
    0 Votes
    34 Posts
    11k Views
    M
    I've finally gotten around to improving the map image for the "Cold war" map. The changes have been submitted.
  • A Path Beyond - 1v1 Scenario

    14
    2 Votes
    14 Posts
    2k Views
    TheDogT
    @island You might consider adding some victory conditions.
  • Iron War - Official Thread

    662
    0 Votes
    662 Posts
    1m Views
    M
    Sorry - yet another question - I see that the attack on Pearl Harbour is not possible. Is that deliberate, since the game is deemed to start in 1940?
  • NATO Russia 2022 OFFICIAL THREAD

    3
    1 Votes
    3 Posts
    941 Views
    L
    @chrishomko always looking forward to new maps. good luck!
  • Feudal Japan

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    668 Views
    S
    @mattbarnes i always had trouble using that option but last i heard it works just only transports specific units.
  • Ukraine Russia 2022 Map

    17
    1 Votes
    17 Posts
    4k Views
    chrishomkoC
    Map rename to state proper goals. Moving this discussion to NATO Russia 2022 thread.
  • Invasion USA - Main Thread

    7
    2 Votes
    7 Posts
    3k Views
    Z
    @strategery I remember looking at the map a few months ago; I suspect there are some bugs as a result of the map not having been updated since 2018-ish and changes in the triplea engine since then. Or maybe the bugs were present at the time and simply weren't noticed due to the map not being played much. I've never seen people play the map in the lobby, so I'm not sure how much actual play it sees.
  • Making RISK within TripleA - Help Requested

    38
    1 Votes
    38 Posts
    10k Views
    SlendyMcTendiesS
    @lafayette Hmm. Ok. I already have an automated "Victory" system which seems to accomplish the same thing. I'll probably write a surrender system into the game. I have a few ideas on how it could be accomplished.
  • WW1 in 1939

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    2k Views
    board 3659B
    @schulz thanks, I'll play until 10-20 times (which isn't too hard) and then give some thoughts
  • WW2 RISK of Defeat (BETA)

    1
    1 Votes
    1 Posts
    497 Views
    No one has replied
  • Global Dominance

    512
    3 Votes
    512 Posts
    989k Views
    ghostroninG
    @hepps @redrum Time for my 2 year check-in hehehe:) I know I know, your planning GD and P&P to perfection, but they're coming still:)
  • Axis & Allies Wiki

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    2k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @schulz said in Axis & Allies Wiki: @rogercooper You could add https://triplea-game.org/map/aggression-1942/ as well. Looks interesting.
  • Red Sun Over China (RSOC) - Official Thread

    119
    2 Votes
    119 Posts
    76k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @cernel I got the map working by commenting out all the train stuff. I didn't bother trying to merge the code in RSOC with Warlords. Maybe, as a quick fix, I will give all train stations, a bonus of 1 for land movement.
  • Churchill's 1939 (thread 2)

    15
    0 Votes
    15 Posts
    4k Views
    B
    @joseph-prince In case you're unaware of them, here are a couple 39 mods that may give you some ideas: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/32236/oztea-s-1939-global-setup?page=1 https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/30608/global-europe-pacific-1939-for-1940-2nd-editon?page=1 @RogerCooper yea it'd work ok aginst the neutral TTys if the human was russian, but JPN/russia where one is the AI probably wouldn't. AI doesn't do good on the Global map anyway. PTV be the same I'd imagine
  • Global 40 House Rules

    32
    4 Votes
    32 Posts
    19k Views
    B
    Change Log: 2.71 1/28/22 Fix all "figher_LR" Units to work correctly when "longRangeAir" and "jetPower" Tech activated. Fix "battelship and carrier hull" Units to work correctly. yea took a while to fix your dudes @board-3659 . Be best if you do those yourself. Had to fix Long Range Fighter too ( Barons Unit ). Major burn and had to rename and xml it too lol. But anyway , it was 8 units per player for fix for yours. Took a couple hours. Be best for you to do the maintenance on them At least someone is playing it lol
  • Civil War: A House Divided

    13
    0 Votes
    13 Posts
    5k Views
    A
    Hate to necro a dead post like this but im gonna anyway. Im working on creating a physical boardgame version of this for myself and was wondering if there was like a large/printable pdf of the map someone could send my way? Thanks
  • Is it possible to win as the Borg?

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    726 Views
    S
    @danawriter yes it is. I’m in the process of it now. While I can beat six Hard AI, I don’t think this would work against humans.

Recent Posts

  • @Vendetta said:

    Hopefully, once you’re far enough along in development, you can share a play by play of a test game as a demonstration.

    Very curious too

    read more

  • @ubernaut said:

    @malmessi no reason to be playing 2.8 imo

    I am playing 3.0
    But still checking old 2.8 pdf manual and I was looking for a place to find all the changes joined together, the online game help is perfect

    read more

  • @alkexr hi gent, I’d like to report 2 issues
    1: Saruman’s mountain troops are unable to pass through friendly mountainous territory to launch an attack. Is this intended behavior? same thing happens in mordor's turn when a non-mountainer tried to move and attack gondor.
    2: i think the acient tower and acient walls and fortress are goood in old versions, why are u removing them?

    btw, i'd like to join the map test if u agree.
    thanks

    read more

  • Some updates to the map.

    image.jpeg

    The above is the start of round 1.

    I've been doing some play testing. Play testing is revealing that some of the stuff is working as I'd wanted. That makes me very happy. But it's also revealing a lot of stuff which needs to be corrected. Like, a lot of stuff.

    In my test game, Germany pushed east into the Soviet Union. At first there was good German progress. But the USSR starts the game with two or three turns worth of MPs, and it has the largest MP income of anyone in the game. It used that massive stockpile of MPs to buy huge amounts of conscripts. Conscripts cost MPs only. No PUs. This allowed the Soviets to come up with a stack which could stand up to the German onslaught. The Soviets have a good PU income, so they're able to combine non-infantry units with their conscripts.

    Something similar happened in China. Good initial progress by Japan. However, China also has access to lots of MPs, and also used that to buy conscripts. China doesn't have a lot of PU income, but what it did have it used to purchase good defensive units like heavy guns. The result was good initial Japanese progress into China, followed by a slowdown due to China's stack getting big.

    Germany and Japan used dive bombers to strafe Soviet and Chinese soldiers, respectively. However, dive bombers start the game with a range of only 3. It is necessary to research "extended range" tech to get that range up to 4. At a range of 3, you're only able to hit targets at the very edge of the front. If there was no big stack at the edge of the front, Axis dive bombers could not be used to full effect. The conscripts grew in number, quickly, without being trimmed back very much by dive bombers. Lesson: it might be a very good idea for Germany and Japan to set Piston technology as a primary research priority, at least until they get extended range.

    Another problem: Japan does not go to war against the U.S., U.S.S.R., or the U.K. until round 3. In the meantime, Britain built a factory in Singapore, and another in the East Indies. Trenches and heavy guns for those factories. Those things were supposed to be easy money for Japan. Instead they were turning into British bases for its upcoming war against Japan.

    Germany and the USSR each built a specialized production center (SPC) on round 3. The Soviet Union had unlocked KV-2 tech, and was looking forward to receiving its one heavy tank per turn. Germany hadn't yet unlocked Panther tech, which meant that Germany's SPC would have produced nothing for at least a little while. A player error on my part for building Germany's SPC too early. But also a GUI problem, because the game should warn you if you're about to build an SPC which won't become useful until later.

    read more