• Conversions to Version 1.9

    100
    2 Votes
    100 Posts
    75k 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
    16k 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?)
  • WWII v3 1941 Mod

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    2k Views
    General_ZodG
    @schulz Well if your interested in testing out the balance with my suggestions let me know. It will surely require more tweaks. As current balance goes it is terrible imo, thus why allies need 13 to 15 bid. And even with bid strategies are limited due to NO's.
  • World War I 1914

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    2k Views
    SchulzS
    Yes. I have recerched them. I was looking for widely accepted house rules. Also honestly I'd prefer to chance IPC powers for to achieve balance instead of house rules.
  • Has Anyone Tried To Make World War I Larry Harris Game?

    Moved
    41
    0 Votes
    41 Posts
    21k Views
    SchulzS
    It works right now. Thanks.
  • World War I 1914 Map By Zim Zero and Colonel Carter Question

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    1k Views
    No one has replied
  • 0 Votes
    3 Posts
    2k Views
    T
    I tried it two times and got rid of it after failing.
  • Defiance In The Desert Game

    Moved
    13
    1 Votes
    13 Posts
    4k Views
    HeppsH
    @captain-crunch @beelee Not sure but I remember watching Baa Baa Black sheep as well.
  • UNDER SIEGE: America

    22
    1 Votes
    22 Posts
    11k Views
    wc_sumptonW
    @general_zod said in UNDER SIEGE: America: @wc_sumpton The American AI struggles a lot, with 3 human invaders as well. However we didn't use any of the game options that may help AI America, since there were no notes on it. Plus I wanted to see how it plays without those first. I made a couple other observations on the max 5 unit. It causes movement validation issues during NCM. Even with air units flying over an already maxed out territory, can't. This really sucks if they are returning from combat. It forces edits and redoing moves. It is completely ignored during CM. So a territory can end with way more than 5 units after combat. I like the 5 unit limit, but the above bother me a bit. Not sure if they can be worked out. As a whole, nice job. Thank you for your feed back. Try using the Fast AI as the Americans. It still does some 'stupid' moves, but it feels more aggressive and seems to play a better game. There are really only two options that change gameplay when using the Americans as the AI 1)'No Reinforcement' and no one gets reinforcements, 2)'Add 1 Extra American Reinforcement/TechRoll' which gives 3 Tech Rolls at the end of every turn instead of 2. When the game detects an AI it sets up the rules for that player. American AI gets 1) 'Add American Reinforcements to Purchase' - All reinforcements are add to the Americans so no purchasing is required. (AI has problems purchasing when 'maxBuiltPerPlayer' is set.) 2) The Americans can place the 'Strike Tokens' anywhere. Pre-placing them like they are done with a human player cause the AI not to touch them. For the Invader AI, they use a random schedule reinforcement pool to bring in their reinforcements (Because of the purchasing problem). 2 first) During CM any unit that can enter a contested area may do so. So yes 'stacking limits' are ignored. Since units that moved during CM can not move during NCM there will be more the 5 units there. When moving out of the territory, the stacking limits will apply. (Makes for a tough counter attack by the other team. lol) 1 second) Moving of air during NCM. Air unit don't really 'fly over' a territory in tripleA, they enter every territory they move into, also since the Battle has already happened, air units can not fly over/enter into a controlled territory that already has 5 friendly units, the movement stacking rules apply in this case, and by the rules would need to move around those territories. (A trigger to remove stacking limits for air units during NCM would allow air units to stack more the 5 units in a territory. Since stacking is check only during placement, movement, and attacking (which is not use here), there is no way to inforce stacking 'after movement' into a territory except during movement.) -- hope this helps I think I talk about both points in the 'Notes' 2 under 'Combat Movement' and 1 in the etc... section at the bottom. About the 'AI rules' maybe a pop-up to other player explaining what happens? I open for suggestions... Again thanks for taking the time to play, and you comments are most welcome!! Cheers...
  • Amazing what you can find when you can't find something

    4
    1
    3 Votes
    4 Posts
    2k Views
    General_ZodG
    @hepps While looking around for something else, I stumbled into this. I love this look for the revised map upgrade. It's not too busy and pops nicely. @hepps said in Amazing what you can find when you can't find something: Forgot about most of this from some time ago... was looking for something I misplaced for 270 BC and came across an old package of stuff for a Domination MOD. [image: 1500871148246-aoe-example-resized.png] LMAO... forgot about that MOD entirely. I may be bugging you soon on tips to recreate the look.
  • Need a little help with Triggers, etc.

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    2k Views
    alkexrA
    @stohrm Map Creator part 2... just forget that. It was buggy and glitchy even when it was supposed to work.
  • Changes to map repos on GitHub

    5
    1 Votes
    5 Posts
    2k Views
    ssoloffS
    @Hepps Sorry, I assumed you map makers all had the official-issue secret decoder ring we hand out over at GitHub. @alkexr I don't think you'll have any problems because you'll only be DnD'ing a file which was not touched by these changes, and the GitHub web UI should be smart enough to figure that out. If I'm wrong, just open an issue on GitHub, and we'll straighten everything out again.
  • World at war variant - v.1.7.5

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    2k Views
    S
    @redrum Hi Redrum, I understand the limitations of the AI. I hope there will be (at some point) an effort to further improve. Wish I could help directly, but have no java skills. If there were a defined effort, I would be happy to provide some financial backing. At any rate, I have attached a save game that demonstrates the issue. The transport in sz122 has an artillery that cannot be unloaded in combat phase. Also, I can't seem to unload it in either combat or non-combat next turn. I have seen a similar problem with bombers that cannot go attack enemy territories during combat phase and also can't seem to land in some territories. I cannot immediately reproduce this. 0_1512996821058_Transport Bug WAW Fuel.tsvg

Recent Posts

  • read more

  • @TheDog alright I've renamed it from main to master (and made a small balance fix that was long overdue), let me know if that worked!

    read more

  • Interesting video, and welcome back! I think the changes are interesting.

    Regarding tactics I do think that having 5 levels is a lot. I think that @shorogyth 's system seems reasonable. I'd also pull the plains bonus out of the tactics system (call it "defensive tactics") and have a separate plains attack bonus. That way horses can have a bonus there, and rangers won't automatically be good attacking on plains. I know it's a third number, but I think it'll be less confusing than tactics being mostly defense bonuses but also one attack bonus.

    Also, can you have more than a +-1bonus on some terrains? I feel like most flying units would need more than a -1 bonus on caves, especially because tactics give them bonuses.

    I agree with the relentless issue. I think it's cool for some units to ignore your defensive terrain advantage, but they should be rare and therefore scary. Having basically all orcs be relentless is pretty silly and makes plains better for defense than cities.

    Regarding unit abilities, I don't think rock paper scissors is necessarily bad, especially because not all factions are equally strong in each. If each faction has different strengths and weaknesses, it forces factions to collaborate more, and stops things from snowballing as much if one faction falls.

    Eg Gondor would spam rangers because they have good defense bonuses and would kill the winged nazgul (thereby denying mordor's leadership), so you could send flanking cavalry from Rhun or harad to eliminate them. Elven archers were much stronger than the spearmen, but fell very quickly to wargs, which forced the elves to diversify more. In particular, Isengard had no ranged units, so Rohan's flank cavalry was especially dangerous since it would directly target the fires of orthanc, and so isengard had to spend a lot of effort screening its siege forces.

    I think ranged support feels reasonable. I like all abilities that encourage using a variety of units. Eg the galadhrim archers are one of the most powerful units in the game, but they require you to buy the weaker elven spearmen to unlock their full value.

    I like the change to charge, since before formation made those units a liability because you couldn't make them not charge. Eg the warg riders were essentially useless for angmar because of this and rohan suffered hard.

    I do like the new ambush mechanic since it encourages more diversity in unit selection. I do think it should be allowed in cities though (that was the whole siege of osgilliath), and the fact that only a certain number of units can ambush will balance it. I'm not sure I like scouting as it is though. If scouting eliminates ambush, then you just need 1-2 units with scouting in your army and you're fine. And if those units are otherwise useful (eg rangers) then it makes ambushers useless. Maybe scouting should be like spearwall? Just decreasing the effectiveness of ambush so it's less good but still useful? So maybe barrow wights would have an ambush of 6, then eg warg scouts could have a scouting of 2, rangers 3, and wizards 6x2 or sth?

    I feel like something missing in the game is some notion of hit and run tactics for cavalry. Cavalry is expensive and strong and excels at taking out small groups, but you often can't take advantage of this because if you do it exposes your cavalry to counterattack where they won't make up their PU values. Meanwhile air units can do this which gives angmar and mordor a big advantage. Maybe some cavalry could have an ability wherein they (and only they) can independently retreat after the first round of combat, even if there's a win? This still requires some thought, since if you don't have a win in your first round you have to decide if it's worth leaving your cavalry open to guarantee the win, and cavalry is still worse than flying units since they don't get the whole combat or a noncombat move. But it makes cavalry much more tactically interesting

    Also a general thought, but I think rangers need to be a higher tier of ranged unit. They have excellent tactics, mountaineer, high movement, anti-flying, scouting, ambush, support, and maybe more. And given the lore this makes sense, but also in the lore they aren't common at all - the Dunedain are solitary and dying out. So I think buffing them and treating them more like weak creatures than elite infantry would make more sense. And then you could maybe have some weaker version for gondor representing Faramir's rangers which are just elite infantry

    read more

  • @thehobbesian

    Tha map is here, so can be downloaded manually.
    https://github.com/ClavintheGreat/thehobbesians_1939

    I think it to make it downloadable for all, it needs to change the repository from main to master
    I dont have permission to do this.

    Here is the instructions for a rename.
    https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/configuring-branches-and-merges-in-your-repository/managing-branches-in-your-repository/renaming-a-branch

    read more