💥 1941 Global Command Decision - Official Thread
-
Gentle reminder to German Commanders
Uboat Notifications
Perhaps its best to set the following,
Game> User Notification
If you dont untick the Roll Failure (last tick box) you will be spammed with Failure notice panels requiring an annoying [OK] button click.
The success panels show where the Uboats have manged to escape to in the Atlantic.
-
@thedog Ah, that's definitely what was happening to me with the sub notifications! I unclicked that option.
For more general combat type feedback, having played a few rounds now, I will say that this combat scheme seems to heavily favor the defender in just about all cases. Almost to the point where I am reluctant to run any attacks. Like even with overwhelming force hehe. Often I'd just rather force the opponent to attack me. Unless it's a super obvious wipe of a battle, where the calc is telling me 100% not to sweat it, but I still sweat anyway, even for those hehe. On land the bunker unit exacerbates this sense of the defender advantage for me, esp the 2x bunkers. It's a very potent unit for the cost, and seems to be the most important unit in any tile for determining how the battle is likely to shake down. It can be place instantly without requiring production, which makes it significantly better than infantry at the low end. Since bunkers are in many locations as a starting unit, understanding how they work is essential to playing the game, but learning the hard way how deadly they are, this might be something to dial back a bit I think.
Otherwise, most units and the general combat mechanic itself appear to hinge on the AAgun or First strike system of A&A combat for most stuff, since many units will have that sort of shot. So where a unit has relatively low odds per shot (hits at 1 or 2 on D6), but has multiple shots in a combat round per single unit, and where those shots are targeted (defender doesn't get to choose casualties/hits assigned automatically by unit type). In A&A this form of AAgun style combat is probably the most "swingy" meaning a lot of times you'll see duds, but when you do see hits these can be very decisive. In A&A this stuff is restricted to special combat rounds or special unit types, and is presented as sort of peripheral to the main/more familiar combat situation defined by the inf or whatever the main fodder unit, but here it's sort of the backbone of the scheme, since this is how a lot of the units work. But while playing my overall impression is that I'm seeing a lot of duds when I might expect hits (like from a large attacking force) or else seeing a lot of hits from a defending force, (when the total number of defenders might suggest fewer), and then also a lot of battles resulting in stalemates.
Regarding these last, I think the statemate thing kinda works against familiarity with the new combat scheme, since often the battle will force-resolve before the player can really get a sense of the interplay between attacking/defending units. I also find that it's somewhat unclear to me, while combat is ongoing, when exactly the game will force this resolution/stalemate, like when my attacking units are about to become frozen in place. As the attacker I would almost always want to withdraw before that point, to retain regular control of my units. Although the defender advantage I mentioned might recommend stalemating in some cases (attacker turns into defender on the follow up) in general I'd think it's better to retain control and freedom of movement for your own units. Still, even if it works sometimes to the player's advantage as a tactic, I suspect that many strange things are likely to occur with stalemates, when opposing teams can occupy the same tile at the same time in stasis, since I don't know that tripleA had this situation in mind really. I think it was conceived as a way to prevent really drawn out fights where both the attacker and defender are rolling low, like 1 inf vs 1 inf for infinite rounds. In that case, if a single dude gets frozen after 10 rounds of combat (destined to die on the follow up opponent's turn) that seems expedient, but here the forces can be much larger. Two large stacks can stalemate pretty easily, but even if the forces aren't particularly large, two smaller armies can also stalemate over successive game rounds waiting for a resolution. I had it happen in my last Axis game, where Italy spent like 5 rounds trying to take Tunisia, with both sides whiffing each time and firing duds.
The cap on combat rounds makes stalemates more likely to occur, so I think again I'd consider upping the number of total combat rounds. If capping, I'd also consider treating all combats the same or maybe just making this a feature of the Air war? Like coming into play to prevent "dark skies" strats, where all-Air forces are used to wipe ships or whatever. Otherwise though, I think it can be a little confusing if a battle begins with mixed forces, but then ends up with only air units remaining after a while, or where all the Air dies and only Land or Naval units are left, and in those cases I'm not sure how many more combat rounds would remain. Capping the combat rounds for air units also eliminates the airblitz as a tactic, which while gamey is nevertheless sort of a halmark move. I'm not sure I wouldn't be just a little sad to see it go away entirely hehe, but I guess I can see the rationale. Still my sense is that the cap is too low, and should probably be doubled, if only to ease the player into it hehe.
Anyhow, that's my random thoughts for the afternoon. I'm diving back in as Allies now!
See ya next round! -
If you did not know, checkout using more Bomber-Lgt/tactical bomber they have the option to Raid/dive bomb Bunkers.
Also, IIRC in your release Bunkers cannot fire on Air they need support.Im not coming from an A&A background and maybe I need to compromise on the 321 rounds v unlimited rounds, I will do some testing.
ps. Most TT have a terrain type favouring the defender and penalising the attacker, check the status bar before you attack.
-
Ah! Maybe that's the bunker buster I've been looking for! hehe
I'll try it out on the next run for sure!Probably a lot of my impressions can be summarized as "stubborn A&A player, has trouble changing his patterns of thinking" lol, but still I do find myself looking for a touchstone to kinda hold onto. I definitely do like the concept of unit targeting, because the standard game is quite gamey. You know, where the answer to the question about what to buy is so obvious that it never changes hehe. Or where the solution to the opponent buying aircraft or tanks, is always just buy more infantry! lol. That stuff is admittedly silly. I definitely enjoy the idea of a dynamic where the Air fight the Air, the tanks fight the tanks, and the ships fight the ships, and if there's crossover that they at least try to prioritize their targets in ways that make sense from a realism perspective. To me a simple handling would be opening strike on land, where the air units and tank units all target each other for a single round of combat, before it goes more norm core. This to me would be more engaging than the usual fair, and still give a little swing, but would also be relatively simple to parse, since after the first combat round you could divert back to the standard pip vs pip attack power vs defense power way of thinking. This may just be me trying to pull the game in a direction that I'm more familiar with though, and doing a disservice to the novelty of the new scheme, but it's just my first impression. I think what I'm also looking for is a framework to help me parse the likely outcomes and really get a feel for what will happen.
As an example, I ran a number of calcs for the naked double bunker, just to see how many infantry it would take to reliable kill the bunkers and take the TT.
2 inf vs 2 bunkers Attacker 0%, draw 34%, Defender 66%
4 inf vs 2 bunkers Attacker 8% draw 84% Defender 8%
6 inf vs 2 bunkers Attacker 23% draw 77% Defender 0%
8 inf vs 2 bunkers Attacker 52% draw 48% Defender 0%
10 inf vs 2 bunkers Attack 70% draw 30% Defender 0%
So you can see how it scales there, and in my simple headmath you have a situation that says "to clear that tile you need to bring 3 times the numbers" to have a reasonable chance of success, and probably 5 times the numbers to have a comfortable chance of success. Just in terms of hitpoints I mean. Obviously you can up the odds by bringing more powerful units than the basic ground fodder unit, but to me the attrition cost would be the main factor. Also preventing a stalemate, cause in a stalemate those odds could then be altered, as other players could interrupt the contest over the tile and put their thumbs on the scale too.
TUV of 2 bunkers is 10 PUs
TUV of 6 inf is 20 PUs
So a pretty steep trade for the attacker. This might offset somewhat in a contest over a higher value tile, but over a lower value tile, the player is trading at a loss probably. Especially since you're unlikely to avoid a stalemate with just inf (high draw) so probably you end up exposing more TUV than that, just to ensure you clear the tile before the combat round caps. Basically bringing even more hitpoints, or heavier hitting/high value hitpoints to get high enough to overcome the draw. As the defender, under the current scheme, I think the bunker basically becomes the base fodder unit for the defender, and then everything else goes on top of that. Meaning the first thing I'd do after taking a tile is to buy however many bunkers the game would allow me to buy, before I starting stacking anything else. Also since it's treated like infrastructure and you can drop it basically anywhere for a low cost. In my earlier games I found myself buying a couple each time I advanced, but if we were playing for keeps I'd probably use all my starting cash to buy nothing but bunkers, as many as I could, and place them everywhere, because the price the opponent pays to kill them is probably way more than the 5 pu outlay up front. My solution if you didn't want to change anything else, would be to make them more expensive I guess and to have fewer on the board at the outset, so the impact isn't quite as dramatic.
-
@Black_Elk
Agree something has to change regarding Bunker/Garrison.I did resist giving Artillery-Hvy targeting of Bunkers/Garrison, thinking I had already overdone the use of targeting, but as it is the role of artillery to shoot static targets, maybe we should?
Should Artillery-Med also get targeting?If I increase the pu cost of Bunkers the AI will not buy them, maybe that's OK as well, as there is a lot of them. In the next release there will be even more Bunkers as the Neutrals get them as well.
-
I'm definitely intrigued by the idea that if there are fixed fortification units that these can be softened up somehow. Your earlier post piqued my interest for sure, because I didn't notice that. So is the concept to have the Bombers raiding the tiles rather than attacking them directly? I had not been using them this way, but instead bringing them into the fight. Above I mentioned the x2 naked bunkers, but since usually there'd be other stuff as well on top of that, I just figured every combat capable unit was probably needed in the battle proper. That said, the idea of bombers or artillery softening up the enemy, is quite thematic, so perhaps there's something more to this than my first impressions were giving. In the next game I will try what you suggest and see how it feels.
I like the idea of artillery being used in that way, which to me makes sense, even if I'm used to thinking of them as just the infantry boost unit hehe, that's pretty much how I'd imagine them used vs fortifications. With more tiles in play, the artillery unit could become more of the shock-fortifications unit or have that dual role along with certain aircraft. That seems kinda cool.
For the neutrals I think the bunker could definitely make them more unattractive as ready targets, since the attrition cost is high in that case. In N. Africa I could see myself going after Tunisia for that 3 spot, but otherwise I'd have had second thoughts facing the bunkers hehe. For the AI purchasing, I could see this coming into play for sure. Like if the bunker is a key component of the combat scheme and the AI whiffs it hard on rebuilding them or placing them in the right spots. At first glance I thought all TTs had x2 bunkers, because there are so many around Germany, and in China vs Japan, but later I noticed that they are less common further afield and that there were a few spots that didn't have them. If I saw that there were no bunkers (like around Denmark) I immediately thought, I need to buy bunkers for those spots so they won't be like the weak link in the Atlantic wall hehe.
ps.
@thedog said in
1941 Global Command Decision - Official Thread:@Black_Elk
Agree something has to change regarding Bunker/Garrison.I did resist giving Artillery-Hvy targeting of Bunkers/Garrison, thinking I had already overdone the use of targeting, but as it is the role of artillery to shoot static targets, maybe we should?
Should Artillery-Med also get targeting?If I increase the pu cost of Bunkers the AI will not buy them, maybe that's OK as well, as there is a lot of them. In the next release there will be even more Bunkers as the Neutrals get them as well.
Here's an example from my earlier game...
You can see the ANZAC strategy I adopted was basically to spam as many bunkers as possible. This was in part since ANZAC didn't have any starting forces and a more limited unit roster, which is where I noticed the bunker thing. My thought was how to most effectively have an impact with the limited resources, and bunker spam seemed the obvious choice, because I can place them in any spot and they're pretty cheap at 5 bucks a pop. I guess this would be like the opposite of the AI not buying them, where the player buys a ton to throw the computer into deep freeze hehe. Speaking of which, I noticed that on the German turn the AI seems to slow down to a crawl, taking a lot longer to think through it's moves than the other nations. I'm not sure if it's the sub spawn, or maybe just cause they have more stacks to move around, but here it is on G2. For me the computer takes about 4 minutes before it will begin moving usually. Or at least last few times I loaded the save from this point. It's on the hard AI's turn here...
This is the aftermath on R2...
The Germans swept my line at the center, but I figured those dudes would probably go down. The bunker I bought couldn't save them lol. But here you can see, cause Germany stacked into Novgorod hardcore. This is an instructive battle cause it's a large engagement, but also with no bunkers to add a wildcard.
Just judging from the numbers and the visual, I'd say the Soviets should have the Germans beat here, like dead to rights. But the presence of the HQ Army Commanders, and the distinction between German trained-inf vs Russian conscript-inf, tips the scales way out. Soviets taking this attack are likely to get rocked, and then stalemated.
The most advantageous play I can think of in this situation is to attack into Novgorod for 1 round of combat (praying not to take heavy losses) and then retreat the entire force to Arch where it can be reinforced. Or maybe back to Leningrad, where it just parks it. Either way, the defender advantage seems to recommend withdraw over attack. But this is an example of what I meant earlier about the skip/retreat thing. It's a legal move in A&A, so not exactly an exploit really, but in this case I'm hoping to shock and withdraw I guess hehehe.
This was the result...
Bad News for Soviet Bears! lol As a strafe this went rather disastrously. Only a couple hits put up vs the German defender, then bleeding out like a dozen conscripts and a few tank types before limping back to Arch. Perhaps it would have been better to just hold position and run no attacks. Although again, just from looking at it my instincts say it should be Red nation on that one, but I got my ass handed to me hehehe
ps. I started a second game. Here is the situation on R1...
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision R1.tsvgThe AI German opener was largely similar to the last time, except here they concentrated more on the middle and left Lithuania to focus on Grodno with the main force. At first glance it would seem they left East Prussia vulnerable doing this, but I don't think the units in Lithuania can clear 4 bunkers. Likely stalemate, Soviets getting rocked and then stuck. The Bessarabian units are basically trapped, best they can do is retreat to Moldavia. My instincts tell me to pull away with everything and try to make a more defensible line off Smolensk as the nearest convergence point. But the last game made me think holding Novgorod through G2 might be pretty key. I'm not sure I can hold it, but I was thinking to buy bunkers for sure hehe.
This is what I ended up doing with Russia, and my UK opener... Not sure about the buys, but basically priority Gibraltar again for the British. I forgot to move the fighter off Cyprus. He's kinda hidden over there I think hehe. I flew all the UK fighters to Sweden, because that's what'd do if Neutrals allow the flyover. Sending them to help the Russians, and using the neutrals as a cushion while I transit. I think Gibraltar can hold, but if not I'd send them there instead I guess. I think I'd still prefer a scheme where neutrals were closed. Like it seems fine for the aircraft to fly over them, but landing there feels like a violation of their neutral status to me heheh. In this one Japan swept at Pearl, but stalemated at Manila. So sort of a toss up I guess. They didn't advance in China vs the tiles I reinforced, so I think that was a pretty solid move, not running any attacks with China but just repositioning stuff. I'll have to pause here to think about the USA buy a bit before making the moves.
-
@black_elk
The Bomber-Lgt or maybe it should be called Bomber-Tac for tactical has 3 TripleA functions/roles? So choose your role.- A level flight 2 engine bomber - tactical Blitzkrieg support army bomber
- A Dive Bomber precision strike against Bunker/Industry
- A Torpedo Bomber - well yes, a ship sinker
I know no ww2 aircraft could do all those roles, but for the sake of having 3 units reduced to one I thought it worth having 2 unit types less.
Its a bit like the Inf-Elite, they are any elite you want them to be without having one unit type for each label, paratrooper, marine, ski-trooper, SS, Pz-Grenadier, Special Forces etc
Bunkers & the AI
The AI is rubbish at buying bunkers, so for the Japanese xml/theme is bought for them so they too will start laying down 2x Bunkers per turn from turn 7, they have to pay for them in pu,.
Off on a tangent
The US Marine coffee break
US Marines land on a Japanese infested Bunker filled island, scout forward, find their positions the hard way by getting shot.
Coffee Break, call in the local artillery, scout, get shot
Coffee Break, call in the local Destroyer/Cruiser, scout, get shot
Coffee Break, call in air support, scout, get shot
Coffee Break, call in all three, scout
Next island... -
Your post for your Russian counter attacks made me laugh.
Hopefully you read your Russian pre start notification
General, you must lead our great USSR nation to victory with our allies.
Relocation of Heavy Industry will be complete by Early 42 (Turn 3) to Khanty-Mansiysk & Tomsk
So on line for Production for Turn 4Also maybe I need to add this to the above, that our Officer cadre are in training and...
General, USSR has been at war for over a year and its commanders have learnt a lot and can now build Army HQs.So I would wait till say Turn 5+ so you can field your measly 3x HQ-Army v Germany's mighty 8xHQ-Army + Italy's 2xHQ-Army.
-
Right on! I'll keep an eye out hehe
Here it is on the Russian's second turn...
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision R2 Combat Move.tsvg
German AI still attacked into Novgorod like the first game, but this time we had a pair of bunkers and some ready units to prop it up. I still don't know that Russia can kill that army on counter attack, owing to the Army HQ guys, but seems like a more tenable position...
Yeah, smoked em this time! hehe the plan worked...!
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision R2 Non Combat Move.tsvg
We were able to destroy their main stack up North pretty cleanly that time.
ps. Here is the situation on J2 (Computer's move)...
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision J2.tsvg
My British transports were able to take control of the Danish straits, as Germany left Copenhagen undefended. I think canal control may be problematic for the AI. It would help probably with bunkers on the tile and maybe a factory to ensure they stack up a bit there. Just to prevent this sort of chicanery from team Allies hehe. On the other hand the HardAI was able to discern my plan for the Gibraltar task force and sent their Subs to block my path, so they did alright there I guess. Instead we just attacked Amsterdam, to keep em guessing lol. I figured losing the Novgorod battle on R2 and then Copenhagen on UK2 is pretty much the end of Germany's ambitions up North. I don't know though, maybe they'll pull something off? Without control of the strait though, Britain can just start dropping into Russia to prop them up directly. On the other side of the map, J2 took a while. So maybe my bunker plan with ANZAC gave AI Japan something to think about hehe. Hard AI again has taken about 5 minutes before moving. Not sure if something is stalling them, but figured I'd shoot ya the save.
I'll dive back in tomorrow and see how round 3 shapes up in this one.
Ok just one more turn!!! heheh
Here it is on R3...2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision R3 combat move.tsvg
Rommel made his big play for Cairo and Germany mopped up our Southern Army in Odesa. Then consolidated their lines on non com. I'm not quite sure Smolensk can hold, but seems to be shaping up for a real contest now. Brits broke the stalemate in Netherlands, so we might be able to open a second front after all. USA moved out to start applying some pressure, and ANZAC built a gang of bunkers, so hopefully this round Allies can get the drop on team Axis somewhere
-
I have noticed you are into the realtor/estate agent business of letting out Bunkers
But your are only supposed to able to build 2 Bunkers per TT, Oh bother! as Winne the Pooh would say at a time like this.
-
Yeah I'm just basing it off what seemed to be the most potent and what the AI was up to with them lol.
Here is the same game in round 5...
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision USSR 5 combat move.tsvg
Soviets are about to mount their first real counter offensive, after getting rolled up in the south for several rounds. I'm not sure there's much to be done for saving Stalingrad, but I wasn't going to let Moscow fold in the middle so this seemed the best plan. USA has landed in N. Africa. It was a little awkward, and we basically had to cede the battle of the Atlantic to the German uboats to pull it off, but it to panned out alright. The Brits are just kinda doing distraction moves. Retook Egypt, though there are still some Axis units running amuck in the backfield. I realized only too late that I had a factory in S. Africa to be using hehe. China is in full collapse mode, but the ANZAC bunker strategy seems to have worked reasonably well, as Japan completely abandoned that front. USA is positioning to take Truk hopefully but not sure. Going to give my brain a break for a few hehe
Ps. Here it is in Round 7...
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision USA 7 combat move.tsvg
I think the Allies are about to fold, since India is near collapse. My impression overall is that there isn't quite enough production there to oppose Japan effectively. ANZAC as well. I think both would need a major factory to keep pace. North Africa feels like it could also be pretty tight with the current production. Like hard to get from there into Italy proper. I think a few more small factories could work, since they add up, but really you need to snatch a major to get things going, since that allows for building the heavier stuff. Having more 3 spots should help though, since it's really a numbers thing. In this game the Axis eventually managed to punch through the center with Italy. I forgot about the movement bonus after they took Stalingrad. I also kinda forgot about the sea zones for a few rounds, which allowed Japan to dominate the convoy income before I woke up to what was happening hehe. I started fanning out some DDs eventually, but it was probably too little too late. I let it get pretty out of hand haha.
I'll probably hold off till the next update with the production tweaks, but it was fun to bang around. I think we managed reasonably well as the Russians, but whiffed it pretty hard in China. Japan scored a major victory there and then just rolled up the line. Anzac I'm not sure I could have done much better. It's hard to do anything with them because the production is so low. They have a fair amount of money, but can't really spend it in a way that allows them to break out. Or at least that's how it felt. Not being able to build ships out of India is also tough. I feel like the Brits need like 3 or 4 more production locations on the subcontinent, or Burma maybe, or Singapore. Somewhere they can reach out from to try to help China stay afloat. I suspect the computer will probably overcommit to China in most games, then get kinda stuck several round of position in the Chinese interior. If I was Axis I'd probably just try to break the factory spots and leave everything else alone, so I don't know, but China I think may also need a few more build locations. Just to match the kind of stacks Japan can amass with transports shucking units to the coast.
pps. Oh also, I tried out 3f3f3f for the German Hex color. It reminds me of an old map I like in a Time Life book series, since the German color is almost the same. Anyhow, just an idea for people who like a darker shade. I call this one "Midnight Eeyore" heheh
-
@black_elk
Im aiming for another update this weekend, so any graphic updates try and get them to me for Thursday/Friday.Hold off on more testing for my benefit, as you have fed me enough to be going on with, Im full
I have a lot to reread.
-
Sounds good
This was as far as I pressed tonight. Till round 9...
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision USA 9 combat move.tsvg
ps. I just finished up one more turn to see how the battle in Naples would shake down. Looks like USA has a shot to take it after all! In the Pacific, because there weren't many other spots to go, I just B lined into the middle of Japan to try and get a factory. Soviets fought the German stack almost to a man, so the front there has stabilized a bit. China is basically just turtling and waiting for a rescue. I guess if I can hold Southern Italy, then maybe send the Med fleet east to relieve India maybe. Anyway, I think Allies have maybe rounded the corner, despite a pretty good press from Axis. I think the Anzac bunker thing kinda threw them, after that the IJN just kind scattered and their island campaign fell apart hehe.
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision UK 9 combat move.tsvg
Anyhow, will look forward to the next one.
For Graphics I still saw a line off New Jersey that needs a fix, so I'll do that and clean up anything else that stands out to me.
I like that German color if you do, it feels more menacing and slightly easier to distinguish with blends on. Italy and UK are still a bit close, esp with blends on though I prefer blends off myself. I might play with that and see if I can find something that looks more distinct, since they're both brown. I figured to maybe make Italy just a bit more sienna in the raw, with some more red/less yellow. Otherwise though I like the way it looks. I dig the aesthetic. Map feels clean to me! Nice work!
-
For Germany use 3f3f3f ?
Yes a better distinction between Britain and Italy would be good.
Yes I prefer blends off too.
The map will look even better when the TT labels & PU are turned off.
What do you think of using the SPG/Tank Destroyer as Heavy Artillery ?
Otherwise how do we easily distinguish between Hvy and Med Artillery?
Maybe we could remove Artillery-Hvy ? (It does have First Strike, but is it different enough to Artillery-Med?
We could just merge both abilities into one unit/stat? (Also one less unit on the purchase screen) -
Yeah I think so, I mean if you like it. Both colors work for me honestly, but I was vibing on the darker shade earlier hehe.
All sounds good to me! I'm with it!
I wrapped that game just now I think by holding Chubu for the full round. Now that I got a spot to build out of should be easier to start breaking Japan apart, so seemed like a good place to call it.
2023-1-15-1941-Global-Command-Decision USA 10 non combat move.tsvg
-
3f3f3f it is.
I realize the whole graphic look is a set, so it is OK to keep changing these values. I dont see the beauty in graphics & colour like you do, my beauty is in numbers, and patterns, so a good partnership.
I will remove Artillery-Hvy. One less synergy to worry about.
Thanks for the tsvg will check it later.
-
Round 10, impressive and with so few HQ commands, the green rash is spreading.
Are the US too strong?
-
I don't think USA is too strong per se, cause I only just eeked that one out really. I think it's more a matter of the overall regional production spread. Cause with only a few factory capable TT targets, the best play in my view is always to bypass everything non essential and only gun for the spots with production threats. It took me 9 rounds here to start rushing, which is a fair bit of time I'd say. I think I could have been more effective concentrating in just one direction though. Like both USA and Britain focusing on Italy, but I think UK's antics also helped Russia to hold the line, so I don't know. Overall seemed to work out ok for team Allies there, but I think by including more high value TTs in intermediate locations that would help the pace of play.
You can see how I basically ignored everything that was neutral, because the neutrals don't pose a direct threat, but it also leaves a lot of the board inactive which might otherwise be contested. I would consider lighter defenses for neutrals along the historical/thematic paths. Similar to how you handled Iraq and Syria, though I didn't really notice those were mostly empty till the game was almost over. Probably the same with N. Africa and Iran would be helpful, giving more places for Allies to push. I suppose you could weaken USA too, but I think first I would give ANZAC more to work with, and perhaps India/China as well. Especially since I expect many will play Axis first, and it's good to have a fun challenge for Japan in the Pacific. I think it just needs those couple extra stepping stones to act like production nodes along the way. The smallest factory, being unable to produce really much beyond inf and art types makes it's utility kinda limited. More of the Medium factories that can do a ship or a fighter in those stop along spots. Saving the heavy industry for the sensible spots sure, but giving the player a bit more for the frontline build options. Particularly where they need to push hard like into France, or up the Boot in Italy. I think I got pretty lucky there, as the margins were narrow. Germany also screwed themselves over by moving a giant army to Toulouse where it was less mobile. The factory bonus to movement is an interesting dynamic. I kind of dig how you can get stranded by moving out into a tile with no factory. Like a bullet train to nowhere hehe. I got caught up a few times doing that. I think for Russia next time I would be more cautious and try to keep more stuff just parked in the main factory tiles, since units based out of those spots can move so much further. Definitely takes some getting used to, but I'm a little more familiar now I think hehe
-
For the graphics, the only thing I can really think of is just to fix that little line near New Jersey. I think it's in the base rather than the relief. Like I must have made the correction but didn't post the update or something, cause my master base already has the correction and I can't find the older one anymore lol. Anyhow this is the base I've been using...
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xnvwl23sf092dia/Domination_1941_baseline.png?dl=0
There are some minor things I'm not exactly in love with, but changing those things now would mean reworking the base, and not sure if we really want to do that step again, since this one is already up and running and looks pretty good to me.
Sure there's some wonk, like with the shape of that New York tile, but it still works I think. Originally I had "new york" as just a little circle, like if you look on the old Dom maps, so it was really just meant for the City basically, but Hepps ballooned that TT out a bit to include more stuff. I don't mind really since they're more abstract regional shapes that don't necessarily need to follow the state lines exactly. Also where the two sides of the map meet further west, I read that as allowing for a bit of distortion in the imagination as well. Like I'd prefer to have Texas and Colorado be their perfect shapes, and have all the connections hit all seamlessly across the map divide, but it might not really be worth the effort. Like I can't think of a great way to do it with the relief disguise, that wouldn't still show weirdness when TTs were changing colors. Anyway there are other TTs elsewhere that are abstracted in shape already, so it kinda works with parity to have the blob effect spread around. If Texas has to take the hit for the team, I can live with it heheh.
Just on the subject of New York though, I noticed the tile has no production in the current Command Decision which struck me as a little strange. I'd probably give it a factory, or maybe shift one of the existing factories to that location, just cause it was major mobilization hub. I'd probably make this the highest value TT for the US too over Washington DC Metro, being the financial capital and largest city and such, to me that would make sense. It might also be cool, in the unlikely event of "Invasion Canada," to have a tile coming between the Allied factory in Halifax and the next nearest American factory. So like shifting the factory from New England to New York would achieve that, with buffer spot between the two hubs. You know in case the region becomes contested, like during the way way end game, so there's a chance for Axis to gain a toehold before being roundly ejected lol. Sure it's not the likeliest outcome, but still fun to have that option just in case it's a real all-nighter of a game haha
Anyhow just a thought! Catch ya in a few dude
-
You have been very busy testing on my behalf, which I appreciate very much, so my offer, one time only, is for you to redo the base and relief if you wish? :face_with_tongue:
Yes it will mean extra work for me, but this is for your map toolset for both map versions G40 & detailed/Command Decision.
I assume its just stuff around the edges of the baseTiles TT, so the centres stay the same? Also no new TT or SZ ?
So take your time find all the niggles that bug you and I will rework it, into this map.
Thanks again for the help.
ps. Dont rush for this coming weekend, I dont have the time to incorporate it.
https://forums.triplea-game.org/tags/thedog
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/3741/curated-best-top-maps-triplea-guides
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