• Map tweaks

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    F
    @Cernel I don't think it is in the repository. I got it from the wiki anyway. I actually downloaded it after reading his map thread!
  • Map closest to Axis and Allies Anniversary Edition?

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    789 Views
    ubernautU
    @SkyGawker v3
  • TripleA - a request from a player to a designer

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    734 Views
    C
    @The_Good_Captain said in TripleA - a request from a player to a designer: First, in both '41 and '42 versions of Anniversary, the official errata optional rule regarding SZ 16 (the Dardanelles rule) was omitted. The problem here is that the TripleA program doesn't allow for having a direct setting that enables/disables a canal. This could be hacked in a number of ways, but probably should rather be a feature request for the program to support such a possibility, before changing any maps (so, one would need first to find a developer to add the feature to the program, another developer to review such feature, then someone willingly to modify the map's games, and, finally, an administrator accepting the changes (all this besides any considerations about copyrights over the existent map, whose creators are likely not all active any longer)). Meanwhile, you can use my "WWIIv3 1941 Tech Advance" variant. Just be sure to customize it back to standard WWIIv3 rules, before enabling the "Canal Turkey" option. Second, I know this is a map in development but the destroyer units in Europe '99 (“Europe - Alpha” map as its called in TripleA) This (as well as "Pacific") is more like a map abandoned during development. It may be more than 10 years nobody is working on it.
  • "Bad-Ass" 4 Nation FFA

    58
    1
    1 Votes
    58 Posts
    24k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @RogerCooper This scenario has been fixed can be downloaded
  • Amsterdam_met_de_bois

    Moved
    19
    5 Votes
    19 Posts
    3k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @Hidde2k You need to change the B in the version number to 2.
  • Diplomacy like modification?

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    978 Views
    RoiEXR
    @Cernel Not necessary. Providing the link like you just did is absolutely fine. @Marc-Sarzi Yeah it's a real bummer that simultaneous movement is not possible. You can do a lot with the xml, but there are just some core concepts that can't be changed. As developers we're in a long process of modernising the code and TripleA itself in multiple areas, but core gameplay is simply not a priority. There are tons of more pressing problems to solve and simultaneous movement isn't just something one can implement in an afternoon. TripleA is open source after all, so if you're ambitious enough, at least in theory, you could contribute for this to eventually become a reality.
  • Axis & Allies Zombies (AA42-2)

    20
    2 Votes
    20 Posts
    4k Views
    C
    @Cernel For example, if I'm making a game that is not exactly "chess", I would call it "chess" if the ultimate aim is for it to be exactly like "chess", and maybe this is just impossible, due to the limitation of the program. On the other hand, I would not call it "chess" if it is a game inspired to "chess" but deliberately made different in some ways.
  • Adding a map to the repository in one category or another one

    1
    3 Votes
    1 Posts
    554 Views
    No one has replied
  • best WW2 map?

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    4k Views
    K
    The best WWII maps are New World Order (European theater), Rising Sun (Pacific), and World at War (the whole world). They are all part of the same series. I'll focus on New World Order, as this is the one with which I'm most familiar. The attached picture shows New World Order at the start of a game. Germany is supposed to expand quickly, conquering Paris on G3, and conquering most or all of neutral Poland by G3 as well. Early in the game Italy is supposed to conquer southern France, the Balkans, central and western North Africa, and potentially Greece. It's also supposed to expand into eastern Spain. Britain is supposed to expand in the Middle East, conquering neutral Iran, Iraq, and possibly neutral Turkey. There are no diplomatic or other penalties whatsoever for attacking neutrals. Axis nations are Germany, Italy, Finnland, and Romania. Allied nations are U.S.S.R., France, Colonial France, Britain, and the U.S. Contested areas are Scandinavia (if UK or US go north) France (if UK or US go middle), Spain (if Britain or US go south) or northern Africa. Over in the east, Turkey can be contested between Britain and Italy. If Britain wins that struggle it will seek to advance into Greece and the Balkans. If Italy wins it will seek to take Iran/Iraq from Britain, perhaps even conquering Britain's factory in Cairo and driving Britain out of the east Mediterranean entirely. Sometimes Allies will go Kill Italy First, in which case Axis will often respond with Kill Soviet Union First. In this map Italy is at least as important to the Axis as the Soviet Union is to the Allies. To give you a feel for the scale of this map, it's perfectly normal for Germany to have an income of 130 and Italy to have an income of 80, and for Allied incomes to balance out Axis. Starting on round 4 you will be able to build special, more technologically advanced units: harder hitting, long ranged bombers for Britain and the U.S., Katyushka for the Soviet Union, jets for Axis, big armor and bunkers and super subs for everyone. This map includes some land and air unit types not seen in Larry Harris maps. [image: alt text] [image: alt text]
  • Existing A.I options and A.I modding

    7
    1 Votes
    7 Posts
    1k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @felizardo You should also check out the Fast AI. It plays almost as well and it usually much faster.
  • Steampunk 1915

    10
    1 Votes
    10 Posts
    2k Views
    S
    @RogerCooper Hi Roger, Actual Cernel answered my question for me. I had inadvertently left some of the original authors units in the unit folder. That is why they were appearing in "unit help". I think my version is ready to go.
  • Dragon War - Official Thread

    103
    3
    0 Votes
    103 Posts
    63k Views
    FrostionF
    @Michael-Hoover Very well spotted! () This is now fixed if you remove and redownload the map. There were actually 3 dragon notification mix-ups that I had to fix.
  • TWW 2.7.7.2 or earlier versions

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    384 Views
    No one has replied
  • Total World War Diplomacy?

    9
    0 Votes
    9 Posts
    2k Views
    Hal LinH
    Oh, that fixed it! I feel dumb now haha
  • Game of Thrones & A Song of Ice and Fire - Official Thread

    96
    2
    4 Votes
    96 Posts
    55k Views
    Greg AndersonG
    Sorry for not posting in a while. I'm currently quite busy. I'll post again when I finish the units, as there are a few things to iron out.
  • Star Trek Dilithium mod

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    580 Views
    No one has replied
  • Missing Connection in Dragon War

    4
    2 Votes
    4 Posts
    1k Views
    FrostionF
    Thanks @Michael-Hoover for the notification. I appreciate that you came here to the forum and not just fixed your own local copy Yes, there was a flaw in the XML. Actually there were two connections in the XML between the two territories. But this was not the problem. There has recently been an implementation of “Air connections” to the map as an alternative to bridge connections. (Credit to @Cernel :thumbs_up:) The two territories had gotten an air connection (even though it shouldn’t) and this was preventing normal unit movement. You probably flew over the connection but could not walk over it with another unit. It should be fixed now when v1.2.8 Dragon War is downloadable/updateable. I hope you return and notify if you find other flaws. :winking_face:
  • Broken Mods in Scenario Repository

    2
    1 Votes
    2 Posts
    587 Views
    LaFayetteL
    The hope was that we'd have an army of map owners/makers taking care of the maps in repositories. In practice the maps in repository tend to be a last step and a bit of 'fire and forget'. That is not the case for all maps, there are some certainly being actively maintained, though that can't be said for the bulk as we have over a hundred and just a few people maintaining the whole project (code, servers, maps). If you have fixes, it would be great to see them get uploaded, let us know where you are running into trouble and/or what you are trying. Any scenarios you have that can be uploaded are certainly very welcome additions.
  • 1940 map with 1942 rules?

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    2k Views
    Michael HooverM
    Thanks for the ideas I'll check that out!
  • Correcting the Pacific Mod

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    509 Views
    No one has replied

Recent Posts

  • Starting productions;

    Germany: 90
    Japan: 45
    Italy: 25

    USA: 85
    UK: 65
    USSR: 45

    No Chinese front and no Soviet-Japanese War. The Western Allies and the Soviets can't land on each other's territory.

    The Soviets and the Japanese get conscripts with 0/1/1 stats with a 4 IPC cost instead of infantry.

    I'm still working on distributing incomes better, though. Like, the British mainland itself is currently only worth 10 IPCs, which is too low to be worth bombing compared to Germany's 30 mainland IPCs. So, Germany is prevented from using more than one bomber, which is a bit lame. Maybe the UK could be raised to 75, Germany to 95, and Italy to 30.

    read more

  • @Schulz Post the income rates for the nations in your mod too so we can get a sense of the scaling

    read more

  • I've always liked Anniversary's unit costs more than others'. I think armor and bombers are on the expensive side, costing 6 and 14 respectively. Cruisers also feel expensive at 12 IPCs, and carriers + fighters are way too good.

    I also like that air units always provide more value per IPC than naval units.

    My current unit costs:

    Fighters have a +1 attack bonus against surface ships (not currently working due to a bug), and they can scramble to nearby sea zones too if a fight occurs there.

    Bombers can inflict 5–10 damage (no more than the territory's total value) and have +1 air attack as well. Meanwhile, fighters have +1 air attack and +1 air defense.

    I'm struggling to balance the cost of air units vs. transports. I want strategic bombing to be neither too inefficient nor overpowered, while still keeping it nowhere near as efficient as a land invasion.

    as.png

    read more

  • Unit pricing is a bit of an art, there’s not really a universal formula for how many PU each stat or ability is worth. Generally it’s a good idea to start with your cheapest general purpose combat unit which players will be purchasing in the largest numbers (in A&A, the Infantry) and use it as an anchor to balance the rest of your roster against. Because for every more expensive type of unit, the question players will ask themselves is “why should I buy this instead of an equivalently priced stack of infantry?”

    Fighting effectiveness is something that can be calculated. If you tell an AI that you need to calculate how often 6 Infantry beat 3 Tanks in battle on offense and defense, it can give you the exact probabilities once you’ve provided all the unit parameters. Whichever unit wins more often for the same IPC investment is the more efficient in combat.

    I could go through a long list of examples to prove it, but I’ll just summarize and say that of the four basic combat stats (HP, attack, defense, movement), HP is king when it comes to combat efficiency, specifically HP per IPC. And when all the land units have 1 HP, a stack of cheap units is almost always favored to win against higher priced ones with more attack/defense. The only things that can really shift the balance in favor of the elite units over the swarm is if they have multiple attack rolls, multiple HP, or special abilities that disable or debuff some of the enemy units - which none of the land units in A&A have.

    But combat efficiency isn’t the only thing you’re paying for. Movement is obviously another. Fast units should not be as cost efficient as slow units (otherwise no one would buy slow units) - you pay a premium for the greater responsiveness you get for extra movement points.

    How much that extra movement is worth depends heavily on both the map size and the overall unit density. Extra movement becomes more valuable on larger maps, and blitzing capability is most useful on maps with lower unit density (leaner starting forces and relatively lower incomes).

    Then you have all the other abilities like support, AA, etc. these are valuable for creating different role archetypes - jobs one unit can do better than any other unit. In A&A, Infantry’s role is to be the basic line holding and HP filler unit. It is the most efficient unit to buy for defense and to sacrifice as a casualty. Artillery’s role is an enabling one that turns the Infantry into an efficient attacking unit as well. The AA Gun is crap for most purposes but the only unit that has a chance to bypass screening and snipe powerful air units before they can fight.

    The Tank delivers poor combat value for its price in A&A, but still has a role it can fill because it is fast, capable of blitzing, and individually superior to a lone Artillery or Infantry - exploitation. The Tank is good for seizing poorly defended territories. It’s bad for fighting in large scale battles on its own, but it can be used to tip the balance between two fairly evenly matched stacks of infantry. In wide fronts like Russia, tanks have multiple avenues they can attack from, which forces an opponent to spread their defenses or leave some areas uncovered. One Tank costs the same as two Infantry, and usually loses if it attacks them, but if your opponent has to put them in two different places to cover the Tank’s possible attack avenues, then the Tank has favorable odds to beat either of them on their own. So in the right environment (areas with a lot of provinces), the Tank makes up for its inefficiency in combat by threatening many areas at once.

    The land and naval combat systems are self contained and relatively easier to balance. Air units are the hardest ones to get right because they interact with both systems - you might fine tune it to be in great balance with the land units but then find it plays horribly with ships, or vice versa.

    And the base game does far from a perfect job at balancing unit capabilities against prices. I could go on a really long tangent about all the things it did poorly. So use basic A&A as a benchmark you don’t want to do worse than, but not as a shining example of balance done right.

    Basically, at the end of the day, you want to look through each unit on your roster and ask if there’s a good reason players would pay the price you’ve set for it instead of buying something else. Does every unit have some niche it can perform better or more efficiently than all the others? If any of the units have overlapping roles, what traits set them apart - do they both have at least one distinct strength over the other, or interaction bonus with different unit types?

    read more