• Roger's Scenario Thread

    Pinned
    978
    9 Votes
    978 Posts
    2m Views
    RogerCooperR
    Name The Shogun Advanced Description Japan in the Sengoku Period on a large map https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/The_Shogun_Advanced [image: 1784343226921-05614493-26a2-456d-a926-437186a5a058-image.jpeg] Good Points A variety of clearly differentiated units Upkeep costs & build caps prevent spamming and mega stacks Historical economic values and clan locations Political rules Historical events like the introduction of muskets Bad Points Everyone starts at war with everyone else (historically the clans tending to group into eastern and western alliances) Because of the lack of alliances at start and some random placements, it can be confusing to play
  • Triplea Maps

    Pinned Moved
    1
    2 Votes
    1 Posts
    8k Views
    No one has replied
  • The Triplea Game Engine

    Pinned Moved
    1
    1 Votes
    1 Posts
    4k Views
    No one has replied
  • Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread

    583
    2
    3 Votes
    583 Posts
    1m Views
    M
    @alkexr I primarily play evil on the map. Currently, it seems to have too much of an advantage because of the multi-hit units and more units than in prior version. I suppose some balance changes are coming? Also, do ranged units still do a hit on flying units like they used to? If so, I think keeping flank is a must because that is pretty much one of the main strategies for evil to counter massed archers responding to flying nazgul/dragons. Also, having cheap goblin archers in a stack is probably one of evil's best ways to deal with eagle spam.
  • Pact of Steel 2 mods for new Version

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    12 Views
    TheDogT
    @djggml Do have a map.yml in the the_pact_of_steel folder, if not it sholuld look like this map_name: the_pact_of_steel games: - {game_name: Pact of Steel, file_name: pact_of_steel.xml} - {game_name: Pact of Steel 2, file_name: pact_of_steel_2.xml}
  • TripleA Maps List

    2
    1
    3 Votes
    2 Posts
    17 Views
    ubernautU
    @RogerCooper nice work thanks 🫡
  • World War I with more territories?

    39
    1
    1 Votes
    39 Posts
    10k Views
    SchulzS
    [image: 1784375884369-wwieurope_names-copy-resized.jpg]
  • 🏯 Shogun Advanced - Official Thread

    thedog
    18
    1
    2 Votes
    18 Posts
    5k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @TheDog I recently tried this mod and there is a lot to like about it. However, it does have one problem, at the start of everyone is at war with everyone else. This is both ahistorical and confusing to play. They should either start neutral with each other or grouped into two loose alliances, one in Eastern Japan and other in Western Japan.
  • 💥 1941 Global Command Decision - Official Thread

    maps thedog
    1k
    2
    4 Votes
    1k Posts
    2m Views
    C
    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
  • Global 40 Expansion UHD Boxes

    129
    2 Votes
    129 Posts
    46k Views
    wc_sumptonW
    @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...
  • Warcraft: Lordaeron Wars - Official Thread

    37
    8 Votes
    37 Posts
    22k Views
    Z
    @gr8gamerguy It has certainly been a long time since I worked on this project but I really want to finish it and condensed things down. With the advent of chatgpt I think ill come to finish it. (In case you ever see this message, thank you for all.the big reports)
  • Jurassic v2.0

    39
    1
    3 Votes
    39 Posts
    11k Views
    G
    UPDATED: http://john.gregorek.com/Games/Generic.zip Added caveER_png to help identify territories for removal/addition. Shifted place_txt values to represent top-left corner of unit images. Corrected polygons_txt fragments for defining territories across map borders. Not happy with glyph branding. It's optional. Still have an issue with border fragments that requires your inspection. The reliefTiles hide the map border edge well, but note the dinosaur has been beheaded. [image: 1782669793495-tripleabeheaded.png]
  • WW1 contour baseline map 4000px

    16
    2
    3 Votes
    16 Posts
    8k Views
    SchulzS
    I like maps that are aesthetically pleasing to look at. Map rotations, curves, extreme squeezings/stretches, and abnormally big Scandinavia, Eastern Europe, or Africa are just not good. Standard maps aren't suitable either because they make Europe too small. It’s better to use an equirectangular projection, get rid of all the unpleasant stuff I listed, and subtly shrink non-European territories.[image: 1782041112853-wwi_more-territories-resized.png]
  • world_war_ii_v5_1942 is incorrectly linked and installed

    15
    1 Votes
    15 Posts
    5k Views
    PantherP
    I can confirm that it downloads fine now. That already was a good example for the workflow. Thank you
  • Power of Politics 1914 : A WWI scenario

    264
    3
    6 Votes
    264 Posts
    276k Views
    ubernautU
    @RogerCooper @thedog i was thinking i might try to recruit @wc_sumpton to help us but the basic problem is the version that we have does not appear to be very far along compared to some of the posts so it’s kind of hard to tell what they were thinking with the map also some of the territories are sort of microscopic i think there might be a problem with unit stacking as it stands as well
  • Churchills 1939

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    532 Views
    No one has replied
  • Proposed Map: Domination 1941

    498
    2 Votes
    498 Posts
    740k Views
    TheDogT
    @Schulz Been a while. If you want to use this threads map you are welcome to use it. It is used in 1941 Global Command Decision, but be aware it has nearly 800 locations so is probably best for solo play.
  • Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread

    253
    1
    5 Votes
    253 Posts
    247k Views
    SchulzS
    @RogerCooper I think the ahistorical presence of the Bolsheviks in Siberia makes the game more interesting and provides more options to both sides. I haven't played against the AI in a long time. All I remember is that the AI is worse at handling naval stuff, not necessarily specific to the Americans on this map. There used to be a tech that gave transports +2 movement, but it was nerfed to +1. Not sure if that would make any difference to the American AI's behavior.
  • War Plan Red-Orange

    10
    2
    4 Votes
    10 Posts
    3k Views
    M
    Another update, version 0.3.0! [image: 1780437482711-0.3.0-jpg-smaller.jpg] The technology system has been reworked, every country now has a unique ladder of techs to climb and you unlock tech with tech tokens. Plus, the Portuguese and the Dutch have been added! Download it here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EowcYb0cA0qfcVIqZaasKfUgzp_aBd9G?usp=drive_link Download instructions: Download the “war_plan_red_orange” folder contained in the link Add this to C:/Users/(your username)/triplea/downloadedMaps Once you hit “select maps” in TripleA, the file should automatically be unzipped and it should just work. If you are still running into issues, please report them to me! Also, we have a Discord server now! https://discord.gg/78EEWmuK7C
  • World War II V6 - Balanced

    1
    1 Votes
    1 Posts
    560 Views
    No one has replied

Recent Posts

  • @alkexr I primarily play evil on the map. Currently, it seems to have too much of an advantage because of the multi-hit units and more units than in prior version. I suppose some balance changes are coming?

    Also, do ranged units still do a hit on flying units like they used to? If so, I think keeping flank is a must because that is pretty much one of the main strategies for evil to counter massed archers responding to flying nazgul/dragons. Also, having cheap goblin archers in a stack is probably one of evil's best ways to deal with eagle spam.

    read more

  • Hi @alkexr, thanks for the update!

    Hope things are going well for you and you can spend a bit of time on the map 🙂

    One question on the removal of mechanical variety. You are planning to remove flanking vs ranged but you want to introduce/keep/adapt charge vs. spearwall. This seems a little weird to me. I think I understand where you are coming from but charge is very similar to flanking in that it's mechanically different but not strategically (in your sense of the word).

    "Ambush" seems like an interesting idea to add a strategic option. It seems to be delivering what you want to achieve. "Scouting" on the other hand has the problem that there is no upside to it. It is purely a reaction while ambush has no downside. (And please don't buff the elven rangers even more by giving them another ability, they are already arguably the best unit in your map.)

    Retreating heroes might work well. I don't think it will make bringing a mage or a balrog the right move but it can make it less of a bad investement (in particular if the balrog can finally affect the foes it will actually be fighting). If dragons can retreat like submarines, though, they will be way too strong/unkillable imho.

    The changes to charge seem a mixed bag. I might be thin ice to comment without having seen/tested the prototyp but ithe new charge seems overly complicated for a mechanic that was very weak and easy to counter in the past (the targeted attack against them meant "charge" was a liability and it was better not to build chargers at all in many circumstances). The new charge is a lot stronger just by not making formation/spearwall a targeted attack (excellent change) but the rest seems very hard to keep in mind/consider when doing some rough calculations. It just does not seem to add much in terms of depth to balance it out.

    Siege was/is an excellent ability from a mechanical point of view imho. I would not make it weaker in caves and so on. It just adds complexity without much benefit. It seems this is targeting very niche scenarios or no scenarios at all.

    I hope you had a chance to look at my explanation on how to simplify the user interface/nomenclature for terrain effect and "tactic" modifiers without loosing any functionality. Some house keeping would really help on that front.

    read more

  • @djggml
    Do have a map.yml in the the_pact_of_steel folder, if not it sholuld look like this

    map_name: the_pact_of_steel games: - {game_name: Pact of Steel, file_name: pact_of_steel.xml} - {game_name: Pact of Steel 2, file_name: pact_of_steel_2.xml}
    read more

  • Hi everyone! I forgot to post it here, but there is a new video where I talk about upcoming changes, mostly to unit abilities. Some abilities were removed, some are now affected by territory effects, and there are also some entirely new abilities, too.

    read more