@JohnnyCat 354345234988-G40 EXP StevenJ vs JohnnyCat G56c End.tsvg RIP Japan

@Nothingtoseehere Combat Hit Differential Summary : Germany regular : -0.33 Japan regular : -0.17 Usa regular : 0.00 go for .tsvg

@Trout @Trout said: @alexander @panzerstahl-helm-0 @beelee By the way, you may see me posting some questions on the A&A forum for our Danish leader. That's because when summer started, my son who goes by Mussolini Pizza Emperor on TripleA, decided to want to play his Dad in HRE again. So we have a board game going now which has an interesting twist. Tokyo fell to Allies and next turn Moscow falling to the Nazis. So I need some clarification from him on a few things that are new in this situation Howdy, I indeed saw these post and was searching for that game here to have a look at t he map and front lines. That game sounds a hell of a ride! At which round are you? BR

@Panzerstahl-Helm-0 Hallo Game History Round: 14 Purchase Units - Japanese Japanese buy 1 Japan_destroyer, 6 TotalWar_Tanks, 1 carrier, 1 demo_harbour, 1 elite, 3 infantry and 1 mech_infantry; Remaining resources: 0 PUs; 6 SuicideAttackTokens; Combat Move - Japanese Trigger Kamikaze: Japanese has 1 Kamikaze placed in Japan Trigger Banzai: Japanese has 1 Banzai placed in Japan Trigger RailMovementAutoPlaceJapanese: Japanese has 2 J_Rails placed in Kiangsu Turning on Edit Mode EDIT: Turning off Edit Mode 1 Japan_destroyer moved from 19 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 3 fighters moved from Philippines to 36 Sea Zone 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kwangsi to Yunnan 4 armour moved from Kweichow to Yunnan 1 JPNbomber and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kweichow to Kansu 1 armour moved from Shensi to Kansu 1 mech_infantry moved from Suiyuyan to Kansu 1 armour moved from Sikang to Kansu 1 armour moved from Yakut S.S.R. to Amur 1 armour and 6 mech_infantrys moved from Korea to Amur 2 mech_infantrys moved from Jehol to Amur 6 armour moved from Jehol to Amur 2 infantry moved from Korea to Amur EDIT: 1 Japanese_LCV, 1 elite and 1 infantry moved from Japan to Amur Combat - Japanese Battle in 36 Sea Zone Japanese attack with 1 Japan_destroyer and 3 fighters Americans defend with 1 submarine Japanese roll dice for 1 Japan_destroyer and 3 fighters in 36 Sea Zone, round 2 : 2/4 hits, 1.83 expected hits Americans roll dice for 1 submarine in 36 Sea Zone, round 2 : 1/1 hits, 0.17 expected hits 1 Japan_destroyer owned by the Japanese lost in 36 Sea Zone 1 submarine owned by the Americans lost in 36 Sea Zone Japanese win with 3 fighters remaining. Battle score for attacker is -1 Casualties for Japanese: 1 Japan_destroyer Casualties for Americans: 1 submarine Battle in Yunnan Japanese attack with 4 armour, 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber British defend with 3 infantry Japanese roll dice for 4 armour, 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber in Yunnan, round 2 : 4/6 hits, 3.17 expected hits Chinese roll dice for 3 infantry in Yunnan, round 2 : 1/3 hits, 1.00 expected hits 1 armour owned by the Japanese lost in Yunnan 3 infantry owned by the British lost in Yunnan Japanese win, taking Yunnan from Chinese with 3 armour, 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber remaining. Battle score for attacker is 4 Casualties for Japanese: 1 armour Casualties for British: 3 infantry Battle in Amur Japanese attack with 1 Japanese_LCV, 8 armour, 1 elite, 3 infantry and 8 mech_infantrys Americans defend with 3 infantry Japanese roll dice for 1 Japanese_LCV, 8 armour, 1 elite, 3 infantry and 8 mech_infantrys in Amur, round 2 : 7/21 hits, 6.17 expected hits Russians roll dice for 3 infantry in Amur, round 2 : 1/3 hits, 1.00 expected hits 1 Japanese_LCV owned by the Japanese lost in Amur 3 infantry owned by the Americans lost in Amur Japanese win, taking Amur from Russians with 8 armour, 1 elite, 3 infantry and 8 mech_infantrys remaining. Battle score for attacker is 6 Casualties for Japanese: 1 Japanese_LCV Casualties for Americans: 3 infantry Battle in Kansu Japanese attack with 1 JPNbomber, 2 armour, 1 mech_infantry and 1 tactical_bomber Chinese defend with 2 infantry Japanese roll dice for 1 JPNbomber, 2 armour, 1 mech_infantry and 1 tactical_bomber in Kansu, round 2 : 2/5 hits, 2.50 expected hits Chinese roll dice for 2 infantry in Kansu, round 2 : 0/2 hits, 0.67 expected hits 2 infantry owned by the Chinese lost in Kansu Japanese win, taking Kansu from Chinese with 1 JPNbomber, 2 armour, 1 mech_infantry and 1 tactical_bomber remaining. Battle score for attacker is 6 Casualties for Chinese: 2 infantry Non Combat Move - Japanese Trigger RemoveKamikaze: has removed 1 Kamikaze owned by Japanese in Japan Trigger RemoveBanzai: has removed 1 Banzai owned by Japanese in Japan Trigger RailMovementAutoPlaceRemoveJapanese: has removed 1 J_Rail owned by Japanese in Sikang Trigger RailMovementAutoPlaceRemoveJapanese: has removed 1 J_Rail owned by Japanese in Kwangsi 1 Escort moved from 6 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 3 fighters moved from 36 Sea Zone to Philippines 2 infantry moved from Japan to 6 Sea Zone 2 infantry and 1 transport moved from 6 Sea Zone to 35 Sea Zone 2 infantry moved from 35 Sea Zone to Philippines 1 pacific_transport and 1 transport moved from 35 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Yunnan to Kweichow 1 J_Rail moved from Kiangsu to Korea 1 J_Rail and 1 infantry moved from Korea to Kwangsi 1 JPNbomber and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kansu to Kweichow 2 fighters moved from Japan to Kweichow 1 armour moved from Shensi to Kweichow 1 J_Rail moved from Kiangsu to Korea 1 J_Rail and 1 infantry moved from Korea to Sikang 1 aaGun moved from Buryatia to Amur Place Units - Japanese Units in Kwangsi being upgraded or consumed: 1 harbour 1 demo_harbour placed in Kwangsi 1 Japan_destroyer and 1 carrier placed in 6 Sea Zone 1 elite placed in Japan 6 TotalWar_Tanks, 3 infantry and 1 mech_infantry placed in Korea Trigger JapaneseTotalWarTankPlace6Korea: has removed 6 TotalWar_Tanks owned by Japanese in Korea Trigger JapaneseTotalWarTankPlace6Korea: Japanese has 6 armour placed in Korea Turn Complete - Japanese Total Cost from Convoy Blockades: 4 Rolling for Convoy Blockade Damage in 43 Sea Zone. Rolls: 4,5,6,3,4,4,3,1,5,2,4,2,5,1,2,2,6,4,3,2 Japanese collect 47 PUs (4 lost to blockades); end with 47 PUs Trigger Japan Loses CarolineIslands: Japanese met a national objective for an additional -3 Optional[PUs]; end with 44 Optional[PUs] Trigger Japanese Controls Philippines Pacific Expanded: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 3 Optional[PUs]; end with 47 Optional[PUs] Trigger Japanese Controls Guam Pacific Expanded: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 1 Optional[PUs]; end with 48 Optional[PUs] Trigger Japanese AdvancedProduction: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 8 Optional[PUs]; end with 56 Optional[PUs] Trigger Japanese Controls WakeIsland Pacific Expanded: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 2 Optional[PUs]; end with 58 Optional[PUs] Objective Japanese 5 Control China: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 63 PUs Combat Hit Differential Summary : Chinese regular : -0.67 Americans regular : 0.83 Japanese regular : 1.33 Russians regular : 0.00 EXP Game 10 Straw J 14.tsvg

@Nothingtoseehere You will need to use workarounds here or play at https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/ PBF works fine there, as the forum-software is on a lower (but compatible) version than here.

@Trout Hi Trout Your old saves won't work with a new email address. Triplea or the Dice Server, will look for the emails the game originally started with. If it can't find it, then the above error that Panzer gets is the result. You can either register your old email, if you still have it, or play out the game in local mode

@LaFayette Success! I can confirm that registering, confirming and testmail work with 2026-06.16.15640! Thank you, that will certainly help!

@drumstick919 @lafayette i’m wondering if this might have something to do with the new skin engine?

Did there used to be a time stamp in the lobby when one would comment ? It seems like there was but I can't remember. If so, not a huge deal but it was kind of a nice feature. If it even existed

@RogerCooper said: I am not sure that this is true. I recently played the mod https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/WWIIv3_1941_UK_Factory in which the British starts with an unplaced factory. The AI places it in Persia. This is done through the bid process. Zero out the British bid and the factory will never be placed by the British AI player. The engine does violate the rules for placing factories. Cheers...

@trout Yep I just tried us. You are back in action. You did it all yourself too on a massive update day for the site lol

@RogerCooper Yea I haven't looked at the new map process closely yet. I have updated a preexisting map twice and both times it has updated to the latest in the lobby fwtiw

@Cernel wasn’t even aware of all of these existing commands i do use the control click for getting an entire unit type. didnt realize at all that right clicking current deselects units selectively. i dont think it’s a great idea to flip the click tho not sure the current thing is broken just a bit convoluted and not well understood probably

I suppose it is worth pointing out that a 'revert' in git is just an undo update. The code history in Git is write-once. Git never deletes anything. So, in a revert update, based on the reverted change: any lines that were added are removed, and any removed lines are re-added. So, a revert is a new update, it just an inverted update to cancel out a previous one. Revert PRs are not at all special to Git, it's just another update. Once a revert is merged, a person can revert the revert update, add more changes to it, and then merge all of that as one bundle. So, a flow might be like this (the letters on the left hand side represent the commit ID, AKA the commit SHA): a43ae Some update that introduced a bug 3ads2 Revert: Some update that introduced a bug fae54 Revert: Revert: Some update that introduced a bug + Bug Fix Changes to the code base are "squashed" together. When a person clicks the revert for the revert, that creates a new proposed change. Bug fixes can be added to that proposed change, then it'll all be squashed together as a single commit that is then released. For example, when reverting the revert, this change would be proposed: abc12 Revert: Revert: Some update that introduced a bug In that proposed change, we can add the bug fix, eg: abc12 Revert: Revert: Some update that introduced a bug fea23 Bug fix Then, when merged, that would land on the main branch and in the history as one commit, eg: fae54 Revert: Revert: Some update that introduced a bug + Bug Fix

@LaFayette ok so maybe all that wud be needed at this point then since the menu is icons i’d reverse the up arrow that wud make it more obvious that thats where you go to download

@beelee said: Defender either stays and fights or retreats. If retreating, they undergo 1 rd of combat that they cannot fire back at. I did understand that @iratoric does not want this rule, but I'm not sure. Nevertheless, I would much suggest having a property to define whether or not retreating units must be subjected to a round of fire (with no fire-back) before they can retreat. I also suggest retreating happening before everything (beside air battles), meaning that retreat also happens before any AA can fire. Personally, instead of having a retreat round, I guess we should better have 3 settings for game-makers: Retreat is possible before each combat round (and also before AA fire), meaning that you can defensively retreat without even engaging in battle. Retreat is possible in the middle of each combat round, between offensive and defensive attacks, meaning that, if you defensively retreat, you will be subjected to offensive fire without being able to fire back (but both the AA fire as well as any first strike will fire both ways). However, you have to decide to retreat before the combat round. (In this case, a unit with first strike would be able to fire before retreating as that happens before offensive fire.) Retreat is possible at the very end of each combat round, immediately after the offender is possibly offered the option to retreat (and refuses to do so or cannot retreat). In this case, you decide this at the moment. I understand that point 2 is how it works in North Africa. Can anyone confirm this? @panther? (I've never read the rules.) @iratoric Can you please clarify which one of the 3 points above you primarily want (or letting us know exactly otherwise)? Personally, I don't like the point 2, and I think it is messy. It is up to @iratoric if he/she wants to support such North Africa rules as part of its proposed feature or not. I'm not advising it, but I do believe that (like @beelee) persons will expect defensive retreat to work at least possibly like in North Africa (not doing so having the likelihood of being seen like a problem no matter if this feature was never done for supporting such rule-set). If not supporting point 2, I strongly suggest trying to make as clear as possible that this is the case, to avoid misunderstandings (persons assuming this is the North Africa's retreat rule). I think the best way of doing this is generally giving game-makers the ability to customise the battle round more or less in the same way they can currently customise the phase order within the round. In doing so, if supporting North Africa, it would be needed to have 2 defensive retreat combat phases, one in which you decide whether defensively to retreat or not and the other one in which the retreat happens (if still possible). (Obviously, the former must always be before the latter.) (This would be somewhat similar to having two phases for tech development and tech activation of what you developed.)

I can confirm that it downloads fine now. That already was a good example for the workflow. Thank you

@beelee Oh, let me clarify. I noticed the "Automatically Send Emails" section is disabled. That is what I was referring to.

@beelee No rush! I'm calling it a night and can do the minor allies in the AM for your takeover German fun to begin!

@RogerCooper Thanks, I just made a post to poll people's opinions on how it should work in Development, be sure to give any opinions there