@malmessi said:

@KurtGodel7 said:

My planned solution to this (once my weekly usage limit resets).

Just for curiosity, once your weekly limit resets, how do you interact with AI ?
You just write what you posted here on the forum in teh propmpt and AI understand everything at your 1st attempt ?

There are two different AIs I've been using for this. Cloud Claude and desktop Claude. Normally the interaction is as follows. I will have a conversation with cloud Claude. I will tell it objectives I have, or things I believe aren't working as intended. It will give me ideas on how to solve the problem. I will take the best of Claude's ideas, the best of my own ideas, and the best of ideas I've seen elsewhere. I will tell cloud Claude to do that. Cloud Claude can change the XML file directly. There have been nearly 100 versions of the XML file.

If I want changes to the engine itself, cloud Claude creates a change document. It's written in plain English and is several pages long. I will read this document over. Then I pass it along to desktop Claude so it can change the engine. Engine changes don't always go as planned. There can be GUI problems (most common), there can be bugs. Solving that requires a follow-on engine change. Desktop Claude has implemented roughly 25 engine change requests so far.

The things pushing me towards my weekly limit are engine change requests (which can take a long time) and creating the map itself. Tweaking the map a little here and there isn't bad; building the initial map was. For three straight weeks I've gotten very close to my weekly limit.

@Cernel said:

@KurtGodel7 said:

@RogerCooper said:

@KurtGodel7 How are you going to enforce "Sticky Hits"?

I've used AI to make a few tweaks to the engine. The modified version of the engine lives only on my computer. The modified engine allows me to do the following:

Sorry if this was already asked, but I guess you are planning to make a pull request to have all new features you developed to support this map added to the official TripleA release once you have the map ready. Right? Are you confident that the main developers will accept them? Maybe you should open feature requests (assigned to you) in advance (one for each new feature which your map needs) so to try to understand if there is the willingness to accept the feature additions? I mean, what happens if you finish the map and then the feature requests needed to have it playable are refused?

You ask very good questions.

I've come up with what I believe are some good ideas. But do these good ideas gel into a good game? I'd like to think the answer to that is yes, but until I get closer to a finalized version of my game I won't know that for sure.

My thought process here is as follows.

Even WaW's 14 nations are too much, let alone 22.

Turns take forever to complete, and that's not even the only issue with this map:

The only good thing about it is Japan being split in two, which prevents them from railroading into China and/or putting heavy pressure on Russia.

This isn't specific to WaW, though—it's more my general distaste for maps with too many nations or units. I feel like the standard rules stop working when a map gets too big.

@doki-doki

Saruman’s mountain troops are unable to pass through friendly mountainous territory to launch an attack.

Mountains and marshes cost 2 movement now.

The good units has lost too many skills and attributes, such as ranger and swan knights; it feels a bit unbalanced imo and very pro evil.

Yes, a lot of things are unbalanced.

@cyanfire

The new Orc Holds faction is fun, but doesn't seem to add anything new from when it was controlled by Angmar.

The idea behind the Orc Holds is to help with canopeners. Angmar was in a really tough spot alone against 4 players who could use canopeners with impunity.

It also doesn't have any counter to Dwarves.

I haven't worked on Orc Holds units yet. They just have whatever I've copied from Moria for now.

Winged Nazgul (and maybe all flying units) prompt the attacker if they want to submerge submarines each combat round.

Not all flying units, I suppose it's character / hero units, they are now effectively submarines. They probably shouldn't be able to submerge when attacking though, I don't see why you'd want to do that.

Rivendell visually had hills, but is not a hill terrain tile.

Nice catch!

Druadan Forest in v2 used to be a neutral tile that shortened the route for Rohan to send reinforcements to Minas Tirith. This made the tile strategically valuable and worth fighting the neutral archers there.

In LoTR the Drúadan allow the Rohirrim to pass their forest, and they even fight orcs that enter their lands. I don't want a fight between them and Rohan/Gondor.

The Gondor settlement of Calembel has an extra 1 income marker on it bordering with North Lamedon.

I haven't properly placed income markers yet, it's the game's auto placement. I think Dwimorberg's ended up in North Lamedon.

Add the archer unit to the Gondor roster since Rangers don't have Anti-Air anymore.

Gondor will have some new units, including an archer with anti-air.

Spearwall ability references a Werewolf unit that doesn't seem to be in the map.

I don't know what dark magic you used to notice that, but yes, werevolves are one of the units I've been working on. They aren't ready yet.

@cernel

Shouldn't they be two separated realms (players) because they are actually separate polities with separate non-subordinate rulers?

The Grey Havens are independent from Rivendell, the Dwarves have 4 independent realms (Iron Hills, Erebor, Grey Mountains, Blue Mountains), the Fangorn forest is independent, Bree-land and the Shire are separate, etc. I think 16 players is plenty.