A new option for factories
-
@Cernel Yeah, you'd have to "player enforce" that rule. I was just showing him if he wanted SBR air battles everywhere how to achieve it.
-
@redrum Well, this is also probably the simplest way to obtain something like this (bombing raid aimed at engaging and killing the enemy air force), if just adding a property for obliging the defender always using all its interceptors. The way it works now doesn't really make full sense, anyways, since you either want to use all or none.
-
@redrum but after doing this enemy can decline dogfighting which I don't want.
-
Is it possible to add infastructure option to air units? Thus without adding invisible infastructures to every territories, air battles will be exist without land battle in non/factory territories?
-
@Schulz Yes, that is option 3 above where you can turn certain planes to infra so they can he bombed.
-
When I added only infastructure option to air units, they turned enemy fighters after the battle than Once I added both infastructure and "canbedamaged" options then enemy fighters gained to decline air battle option.
-
@Schulz Yeah, if you go that route you would be "bombing" enemy planes rather than a true air battle.
-
Transports don't land to friendly territories in combat movement. How do I solve this issue?
-
@Schulz I'm just curious ... do you really need this function or you just bored and trying to ask about 3 or 4 questions a day?
-
@Captain-Crunch LMAO!
-
Yes I am bit perfectionist I don't want any defect,
-
@Schulz You can't. That's what non-combat move is for.
-
In almost all maps landing to friendly territories in combat phrase is allowed but probably I've added additional property, trying to find this one.
-
@Schulz Assuming with transports you mean the air transported units, it's just one of the few cases where TripleA enforces the intended rules about not using the Combat Move phase to make non combat movements (the most common supported "exception" is the AA gun being totally unmoveable). The rest is not "allowed", just currently unsupported (some may argue being able to combat move air without sending it in combat is a bug), and it may be unwise to make a map based on unsupported rules, as, then, the map would risk to be broken any point in the future. I'm in particular wondering if you are making a map with Combat Move but without Non Combat Move, as this is the only way I can understand why that would be an issue. Anyways, no air lands at any point of the Combat Movement or Conduct Combat phase; they are just staying there, but landing only at the end of the subsequent Non Combat Movement phase or sometime thereafter.
I would morally support a feature request for having a Combat Movement phase in which you can make Non Combat Movements too, if a custom map wants to go with a single phase (as the Empire map does (and it is currently broken because of this (while it was not broken in the past (this goes back to what I said about making maps based on unsupported rules))))
-
Ive' asked it for sea trannies. Not a big issue but still annoys a bit when you are accustomed to land units to friendly zones in combat phrase.
I didn't know that making a game without non combat phrase possible since need to replace air units.
-
@Schulz Ah. Since you said "land" instead of "offload", I wonder if @redrum understood that too. Anyways, I assume the matter is offloading during Combat Movement from a hostile sea zone to a friendly land territory, right? Yeah, that is one of the other few cases where, for Revised rulesets, the intended rules are enforced, in forbidding non combat movements during Combat Movement.
I guess you can make a feature request for something to always allow non combat movements during a Combat Movement phase, as that would also open actual support for maps having a single phase per turn (like the currently broken Empire).
-
Yes, non-combat phrase would actually be useless if players will be able to re-place planes after battles in combat phrase.
How do I make feature requests?
-
I've completed the map, it is my the first experient at modding on medium map.
Having playing a few games against both players and myself I felt pretty close to balance, maybe Allies would need bid but I am not sure.
-
@Schulz Could you post this to Google Drive, rather than the endless stream of ads that constitutes SendSpace?
-
I could but I have still doubts about the map. Allies always outproduce Axis but I feel Axis has advantage I am not sure bidding could solve the problem. USA is strong but Allies cannot invade scandinavia or France really.
For example in round 6 durnig Japan round (testing) here is stats:
Germany: 192 Pus
Soviet Union: 82 Pus
Japan: 70 Pus
UK: 104 Pus
Italy: 43 Pus
China: 21 Pus
USA: 167 Pus
,
Germany keeps Karelia and Allies seems won't be able to take back it.Strong USA really isn't as effective as strong UK or Soviet but i like it because thus USA willl be able to split its forces like historically.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login