• RE: Tournament of Champions (Season 4) for AA 50 Anniversary '41 version

    **** FINAL RESULT ****

    Just received notification that Icelander defeated Wasp in the Finals.
    Congratulations to Icelander for his victory.
    It is worth noting that BOTH Wasp and Icelander kindly donated their prize money to TripleA development.
    Thanks to both of you for your generosity and good sportsmanship.

    Warm Regards, Deltium

    posted in V341 - 42 (AA 50 Anniversary)
  • RE: Global Dominance

    @ghostronin I seriously nearly poohed myself. 🙂

    Yes there has been a bit of a slow down on much of the TA development for me as I am extremely busy ATM. Not to worry. The project is still very much alive and kicking.

    posted in Maps & Mods
  • RE: Roger's Scenario Thread

    @rogercooper Wasn't Fantastic Forces just the old name of Elemental Forces? I don't think a map has to be considered unfinished if during the development its name was changed, thus not further developed with the old name (tho I cannot say if the current 1.0 is that finished). Mostly assuming here, as the Download link doesn't work for me.

    posted in Maps & Mods
  • RE: Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread

    thank you cernel

    posted in Maps & Mods
  • RE: How would you rate countries and territories considering realism in big WWII maps.

    @schulz So that is not an easy question, and the real war had timeline dynamics that are quite afar from your average TripleA game. For example, the transports that you were using in Normandy you would, then, use in the Philippines, while in a TripleA game you don't keep moving naval stuff like it happened in reality, for the same reasons that nobody in any TripleA game I know of uses transports to load armours in England and go all around Africa to the Indian Ocean and then north in the Mediterranean to unload these armours in Egypt to then go west fighting the Italians, just because that would be too slow in game (but you can argue that the English were being dumb and should have just go invading Morocco and Algeria and push east from there, like the Americans did quite soon).

    That said, if I would have to make a guess and as long as I'm not demanded to prove anything, I would say 75% Atlantic and 25% Pacific for the USA for the new stuff produced after declaring.

    posted in Help & Questions
  • RE: How would you rate countries and territories considering realism in big WWII maps.

    @schulz UK alone 1/4 than USA seems about right, but I would say all the British Empire can be 1/2 of USA. Adding any other non-British Americans (Brazil, etc.) to the U.S.A., like you usually do, would change relatively little.

    posted in Help & Questions
  • RE: Roger's Scenario Thread

    @rogercooper I don't think being able to build in any territories should be, per se, a bad point. It's a choice. I'm also making a medieval map, in which you can do that, as that seems at least more reasonable than having 1 or 2 territories raising armies and all the other ones not.

    posted in Maps & Mods
  • RE: How would you rate countries and territories considering realism in big WWII maps.

    @schulz At the end your production is what quantity and quality of armed forces you can put and maintain on the field (not necessarily what you actually did; like Denmark didn't really even try). What Brazil did in WW2 was mostly paid for by the United States of America, while Denmark produces a lot of butter and has at least a little production of transport ships. Really what Brazil, Argentina and the like were able to have as their own armed forces before WW2 was very meagre. On the other hand, at the time Brazil had more than 10 times the population of Denmark but, still, valuing Denmark twice than Brazil doesn't seem necessarily wrong to me.

    Anyways, I was just saying the Energy Consumption looks like the best pick amongst the given altenatives there. Like Denmark produces no steel at all, most likely because they were just starting producing their stuff from steel ingots, rather than raw iron (but Denmark was animal farming focused and had very little industry, mostly just for producing ships).

    On the other hand, I don't necessarily like that Belgium is stronger than Italy, even tho Belgium was surely much more advanced, on average.

    posted in Help & Questions