• Crazy Europe: House of Habsburg

    453
    7 Votes
    453 Posts
    750k Views
    CrazyGC
    Little one is a galley, big one is a man of war. Both can fight, I really dislike the instantly killed dedicated transports of some games.
  • Random number of units placed randomly at random turns?

    38
    0 Votes
    38 Posts
    16k Views
    CrazyGC
    Random though about this. Currently you can make a trigger fire another trigger. <option name="activateTrigger" value="triggerAttachmentRussians5_FarEastReserves:1:false:false:false:false"/> (Format: "triggerName:numberOfTimes:useUses:testUses:testConditions:testChance") How doable would the following be? <option name="activateRandomTrigger" value="triggerAttachment1:triggerAttachment2:triggerAttachment3" count="2"/> The above would fire exactly 2 of those 3 triggers at random. IDK how important the additional options are for activateTrigger (I don't understand what the test things do, and if I wanted to fire the trigger more than once I would just put more lines) Also I investigated and I do not have the global conquest map on this computer. Sorry
  • AI never buys resources?

    12
    0 Votes
    12 Posts
    3k Views
    redrumR
    @comr Best thing is to play some of the new/complex maps and read the POS2 XML to understand what is available today: https://github.com/triplea-maps/the_pact_of_steel/blob/master/map/games/pact_of_steel_2.xml The AI overview and backlog of improvements are here: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/105/ai-development-discussion-and-feedback. I wrote all of the Fast/Hard AI so know all of the algorithms/code for it. It was primarily written to play the standard A&A maps (classic, revised, v3, global, etc) so it performs reasonably well on maps that primarily use similar rules. But if you try to have the AI play Total World War or Civil War, it plays very poorly and doesn't understand many of the features used in those games. Suggestions and contributions are always welcome and you can find the AI code here: https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/tree/master/game-core/src/main/java/games/strategy/triplea/ai
  • This topic is deleted!

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    11 Views
  • Can Russia upgrade minor IC's to major?

    Moved
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    1k Views
    HeppsH
    @willk_1230 So if by eligible Minor Factories... you mean the one in Novgorod and the one in Volgograd... then it is because neither is eligible to be up-graded. "Major industrial complexes can be built only in originally controlled (not captured) territories with an IPC value of 3 or higher." Page 23 Restictions on Placement Pragraph 4. Here is a link to the manual for your reference.... https://www.axisandallies.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Axis-Allies-Europe-1940-Second-Edition.pdf
  • Civil War | Ships placement

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    1k Views
    C
    I know the owner of the map is not around, so what I'm asking here is what most players understand or anyway play with.
  • Civil War | Assign and hide utilitarian players

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    2k Views
    redrumR
    @cernel Ah, well yaml file updates just determine whether users that have the map downloaded get prompted to update it. Probably don't need to update it for a minor change like this. But not a big deal either way.
  • Japan limited on Minor IC's in Global 40?

    Moved
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    1k Views
    B
    @willk_1230 unless you already have one there you should be able to. Post a save and we'll try and see what's up
  • This topic is deleted!

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    19 Views
  • Alagaësia

    49
    4 Votes
    49 Posts
    35k Views
    alkexrA
    Version 1.0 released, uploaded to map repository. Updated the first post in this thread to reflect this.
  • Axis and Allies 1914 Map

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    3k Views
    mezzaM
    @panther Thanks! Hopefully someone will be able to make a workable version.
  • Conversions to Version 1.9

    100
    2 Votes
    100 Posts
    77k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @rogercooper Everything I have has been converted. I will leave it to others to put these in the repository.
  • question about TWW

    Moved
    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    2k Views
    prastleP
    @hepps gigglez
  • i need someone who can help me develop a new game

    Moved
    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    2k Views
    RogerCooperR
    @seancb Can you post your rules & setup?
  • Unit Browser

    22
    0 Votes
    22 Posts
    9k Views
    MahksM
    @general_zod Got the support bonuses working: UBr Update Filters may be configured under "Settings" (Not 100% happy with those yet) The techAttachments do not look like they will be useful. Since they are dependant on whether the player has the tech or not, it would be hard to display, unless there is a popup with all techs switched on, but ... messy...
  • Global 1940 2nd Ed. Revised_Combat Move First

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    1k Views
    B
    @drbrunch Hi dr It's mostly a personal preference thing. NWO uses it. Their reasoning was for when you have AAguns shooting at air units during flyovers in CM, you would know before purchase if you lost any air. As far as the mod goes, if it's RD 4, Russia can attack regardless of the phase order. Suppose the Game Notes could be updated to reflect that.
  • WWII v3 1942

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    2k Views
    SchulzS
    @deltium I would like prefer to play the it via the lobby if possible. I don't know how to PBEM, I used to try it but I was unsuccesfull during the v341 tournament.
  • Non Combat Move - Disable issue

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    MahksM
    @general_zod resetUnitStateAtEnd fixed it thanks!
  • Terra Firma 1939

    40
    4 Votes
    40 Posts
    17k Views
    redrumR
    @oda Overall, definitely a step in the right direction. I think you have at least a good core unit set now and the infrastructure portion is pretty interesting. I think just layering on a few more of the features you have planned then starting to get some games going to test balance is a good approach. If you have any questions on the XML or would like feedback on any particular areas just let me know.
  • neuschwabenland flags mystery

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    2k Views
    General_ZodG
    @mahks To expand on above explanations. If the game located in C:\username/triplea/downloadedMaps/*gamename*/map is lacking an image or sound file. It will look in the following location. Which is the TripleA engine's installed location. The typical install location for the triplea engine and the "assets" folders are below. C:\Program Files/TripleA v.1.9.x.x.xxx/assets flags misc resources sounds units territoryEffects (this one is missing now?)

Recent Posts

  • @Schulz said:

    I'm working on a big update for this map, improving balance, game graphics, correcting the historical setup for May 1942, and placing more emphasis on air unit cost efficiencies against ships, as was historically true in World War II.

    I would like to give a +1 attack bonus to fighters and bombers against ships (excluding subs and transports). How could I do that?

    You can do it two ways.

    The first way is by having a territory effect in every sea zone giving the bonus to the air units. I strongly suggest against doing it this way because then you may have to add the territory effect in the battle-calculator.

    The second way is to have as many of these supports as the number of combat (non-v3-transport) ships types which can be hit by the air units:

    <attachment name="supportAttachmentAAA" attachTo="BBB" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.UnitSupportAttachment" type="unitType"> <option name="unitType" value="CCC"/> <option name="faction" value="enemy"/> <option name="side" value="defence"/> <option name="dice" value="strength"/> <option name="bonus" value="1"/> <option name="number" value="1000"/> <option name="bonusType" value="DDD"/> <option name="players" value="EEE"/> </attachment>

    AAA = a name of your choice, different amongst the attachments (You can just use the name of the ship.)
    BBB = the name of the ship
    CCC = the list of the air units each separated by :
    DDD = a name of your choice, the same for all attachments
    EEE = the list of all players in the game (comprising "Neutral" if relevant) each separated by :

    Are you sure that defending fighters on carriers or scrambled aircraft should not have the bonus against ships? If they should too, use offence:defence instead of defence. I would use the former also for air units which can never actually defend against ships if that makes the most sense.

    option name="number" value="1000" is just meant to be infinite if there is not a way to set infinite here (I don't know.). You may try to test if option name="number" value="-1" is accepted as infinite (I guess not.).

    I have not tested this. I could have written or assumed something wrong: you need to test it.

    Realistically, if by bombers you mean level bombers dropping bombs on ships from high or medium altitude (for example, B-17 bombing ships), these bombers proved very scarcely effective against underway ships (almost never hitting anything) (but fairly effective against ships in port or anyway not-moving ships).

    read more

  • I'm starting to create tech differences between America Pacific and America Atlantic.

    America Atlantic's strategic bomber is the Flying Fortress. America Pacific's strategic bomber is the Liberator. A Liberator has longer range than a Flying Fortress, but isn't as good at defending itself against enemy air.

    America Pacific has received a new unit. The marine. A marine costs 2 PUs and 1 MP, attacks and defends on a 2, and can receive support. In contrast, an infantry costs 1 PU and 1 MP, attacks on a 1 and defends on a 2, and can also receive support.

    America Atlantic has also received a new unit. The M7 Priest. A Priest is unlocked with tech. It is an artillery-type unit, costs 7 PUs, movement of 2, attacks and defends on a 2, and provides support on attack only. In contrast, a field gun attacks and defends on a 2, costs 5 PUs, has a movement of 1, and provides support on attack. An M7 Priest could pair well with mobile infantry because it provides the support the mobile infantry would need.

    Only America Pacific can build Superfortresses.

    Unique Piston Air techs for America Pacific
    SBD Dauntless: +1 naval combat value of your dive bombers
    Skip bombing: +1 naval combat for your medium bombers
    TBF Avenger: +2 to your torpedo bombers' naval combat

    Unique Piston Air techs for America Atlantic
    P-47 Thunderbolt: +1 hitpoints for your dive bombers
    HVAR Rockets: +1 land combat for your dive bombers
    FIDO: +1 bonus when your torpedo bombers are targeting subs

    Carriers tech for America Pacific
    Combat air patrol: All your carriers fire during the air interception phase.

    Electronics tech for America Pacific
    VT Proximity Fuze. Adds +1 to your ships' fire when defending against enemy air.

    Innovation tech for America Pacific
    Seabees: -1 PU cost for your trenches

    Artillery tech for America Atlantic
    M7 Priest: allows you to build M7 Priests
    (Creeping barrage tech now adds +1 to the attack of both field guns and M7 Priests)
    Fire Direction Center: each M7 Priest now supports two units on attack

    The above is a summary of the differences between the tech trees of America Pacific and America Atlantic. It is not a summary of either nation's total tech tree.

    read more

  • I'm working on a big update for this map, improving balance, game graphics, correcting the historical setup for May 1942, and placing more emphasis on air unit cost efficiencies against ships, as was historically true in World War II.

    I would like to give a +1 attack bonus to fighters and bombers against ships (excluding subs and transports). How could I do that?

    read more

  • @KurtGodel7 said:

    Germany sends four fighters and four dive bombers to attack a Soviet territory. The Soviets defend with 4 fighters. Neither nation can send more because they are both at the cap. (The attacker is limited to four bombers + four escorts; the defender is limited to 4 fighters.)

    Step 1: a dogfight between German and Soviet fighters. This lasts two combat rounds. Each side's fighters fire at their dogfight value.
    Step 2: Any Soviet fighters which survived the dogfight get to attack the German dive bombers. The Soviet fighters fire at their interception value, the dive bombers fire back at their air defense value. Destroyed units are removed.

    In this case, if you want to have all Soviet fighters firing both at the German fighters and (if surviving) at the German bombers and do not want to have different dogfight values for escorts and would-be interceptors, then I would say that the change which I would suggest to this system is having the surviving German fighters firing during step 2 too, meaning that (during step 2) the surviving German fighters fire against the Russian fighters with their dogfight value at the same time as the German bombers fire with their air defence value (meaning that this time any fighter downed by other fighters get to fire at the bombers anyway).

    To achieve this, the rule may be that on phase 2 up to as many surviving fighters as the number of enemy bombers fire at bombers with their interception value and the rest of the surviving fighters (if the surviving fighters are more than the enemy bombers, meaning them all if the other side has no bombers) fire at fighters with their dogfight value (or do nothing if there are no more enemy fighters at this point). Alternatively, the rule may be that all surviving fighters fire at bombers if one or more bombers are present and fire at fighters otherwise. I think the best would be having a prompt to decide how many fighters are firing at enemy bombers (the prompt being given only if the enemy has both bombers and fighters at this point).

    If both sides have fighters but no bombers, this would be the same as having an additional dogfight round.

    (The attacker is limited to four bombers + four escorts; the defender is limited to 4 fighters.)

    I really don't like the number limit and don't understand why having it.

    read more