@beelee

This really depends on the type of 2-unit support.

Combined Arms support: Infantry, Armor and Fighter. Only when all 3 types of units are together will they receive a bonus.

<!-- Infantry Combined Arms --> <!-- Support given to all Armor and Fighters --> <attachment name="supportAttachmentInfantryCombinedArmsBuff" attachTo="Infantry" javaClass="UnitSupportAttachment" type="unitType"> <option name="unitType" value="Armor:Fighter"/> <option name="faction" value="allied"/> <option name="side" value="offence"/> <option name="dice" value="strength"/> <option name="bonus" value="1"/> <!-- Very high number is used because all unit can be buffed --> <option name="number" value="999"/> <!-- All Buffs need to have different names so that they can stack --> <option name="bonusType" value="InfantryCombinedArmsSupportBuff" count="1"/> <option name="impArtTech" value="false"/> <option name="players" value="Germans"/> </attachment> <!-- Infantry Combined Arms Debuff --> <attachment name="supportAttachmentInfantryCombinedArmsDebuff" attachTo="Infantry" javaClass="UnitSupportAttachment" type="unitType"> <option name="unitType" value="Armor:Fighter"/> <option name="faction" value="allied"/> <option name="side" value="offence"/> <option name="dice" value="strength"/> <option name="bonus" value="-1"/> <!-- Very high number is used because all unit can be buffed --> <option name="number" value="999"/> <!-- All Debuffs need to have the same name so that they cannot stack --> <option name="bonusType" value="CombinedArmsSupportBuff" count="1"/> <option name="impArtTech" value="false"/> <option name="players" value="Germans"/> </attachment>

Armor units have the same type, but only for Infantry and Fighters, and Fighters buff Infantry and Armor.

How this works: If only one unit type is in a territory, those unit do not self-buff, so there is no change to their attack. When two different unit types occupy the same territory, they will buff each other, but they also debuff each other, so there is no change to the attack value. But when all three types of units are together, each type will receive 2 buffs, but can only stack 1 debuff. So, each units attack value is increased by one.

Helpful?

Cheers...

Fixed missing Flag none.png image found here;
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/12584

.
Link to 1st post that has the Google Drive download link
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/2399/settlers-age-of-tribes-official-thread

tripleabuilderbot created this issue in triplea-game/triplea closed 2.6.14742: ImageFactory#lambda$getImageOrThrow$0:51 - java.lang.IllegalStateException #12584

@cernel Thanks! Don't know why I didn't think about that.

I played a few years ago and just started playing again. I think that might have caused some confusion but most likely operator error

🙂

@moomanmaster

Look at https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/
Some people play Classic over there.

@bret-hawkeye How's it going! No worries dude, we're all still sorta noobin' it here honestly, or at least I am hehe. Currently it's just a baseline. To make it into a functional tripleA map that we could actually edit in the game-engine we're still at the point where it needs the centers.txt and the map.properties etc.

It's a bit of challenge since basically what we're trying to do is upscale an existing map/scenario that already has an XML rather than creating an entirely new one. So taking the same Territories and Sea Zone tiles (same labels, nations etc) but where those polygons have new coordinates for a larger board. Everything else remaining the same. This is similar to the method used to make the UHD Global, where we take an existing game (the Standard Global by Bung & Veq) but using a new map for it.

Here's an example of something similar, using another larger scale map, but where the process is a bit further along. Just so you can see how it might potentially come together...

https://github.com/beelee1/mega_new_elk

That's a port of 1941 GCD gamemap, but using the UHD Global unit files/game XML etc. It's is just a skeleton of a game, there are no starting units yet, not actual scenario per se. Bill helped me throw it together, where we just grafted the latter onto the former to get a ball rolling. That one uses the 2.6 pre-release, so you'd just drop it into downloaded maps and should fire up as normal.

Here is the same, but with a quickie xml draft created using edit mode. So basically all territories with a production a floor at 1 PU, convoys blanked out, a couple capitals assigned and whatnot, just so it will launch within tripleA and look like something vaguely familiar for a G40 vibe. Again just as a jumping off point. From there you'd go in and adjust the production values of the territories or add starting units for a set up, come up with a turn order sequence or tech and stuff like that.

2024-5-7-Mega-New-Elk.tsvg

In that scenario, you can imagine maybe that the start date is right after the Fall of France (instead of before like regular G40). Maybe aircraft are evacuated from the Paris tile to England tile, on the first turn of the game to represent DeGaulle? Perhaps most of Vichy goes Pro Axis neutral, while Free France has their locus of power in Central Africa or a Government in Exile in London. Whatever, just a riff for a starting point and spitball idea. Might look something like this for a 1940 date, very rough draft...

Screenshot 2024-05-12 123749.png

In order to do something similar for the older WW1 map, it's a similar process a little bit simpler, since presumably players of that scenario would want to keep the game they play more or less unchanged, just with a beefier map. So starting with an existing game xml, same tech advances or whatever, but warping it to fit into a new larger map. In the case of 1914 NML, like using all those production values or units etc. Or one could use one of the larger maps and create a variant from there, but then that's like making a whole new game right lol. Little more involved hehe.

Anyhow not sure if that helps to clarify. It was pretty bare bones for the Domination stuff, last person to tool around there was Redrum I think? I wanted to make a WW2 customizers map that had sorta all the stuff in there, perhaps also with a playable scenario for a jumping off point, so I guess the idea would be roughly like that, just more WW1 themed?

Again not sure what all is grabbin' peeps these days or how much interest there'd be for it.

@cernel said in Non isAir SBR Attacks, what should be done with them?:

@wc_sumpton said in Non isAir SBR Attacks, what should be done with them?:

another answer would be to restrict SBU usage to isAir units only.

I'm not seeing how this is an answer. Game-makers can already assure that if they want to, and (if I remember correctly) this would actually be a revert because there used to be this restriction in the past (which was deliberately dropped in order to allow land units to raid). I seem to remember this was done by @redrum (but I may be wrong).

Yes, I remember that. But allowing it and then requiring map makers to hack around the "retreat" problem only means that the process was not implemented properly/completely. Thus, restoring the block is still a valid option.

@cernel said in Non isAir SBR Attacks, what should be done with them?:

Can you please re-elaborate distinguishing between having and not having the property Retreating Units Remain In Place effective? Does setting that property true remove any of the issues without adding any other ones?

The same as "Attacker retreats", as in this case even the "retreated" non-isAir SBR units are all collected and remain or are moved to the retreat territory. So, there is no change and would has no effect when both attacker and defender units are all eliminated, or all attacker's forces are destroyed. The defender cannot win because of these "retreated" units.

When I say these units are "retreated", I saying as what it appears visually, this is not what happen within the game engine. The game engine marks the as completing a battle, so they cannot join another battle. Like a battleship which participates in a sea battle is marked so that it cannot bombard during an amphibious assault.

Cheers...

This topic should be moved Maps & Mods, I have created a new topic called Global 40 Expansion UHD Boxes, since this discussion centers mostly on that map.

Thank you!

Cheers...

@ondis there is https://discord.gg/PRtexuSprq already, but it's not very active

@ondis
Fine.

@beelee said in No Welcome Message in Lobby:

Didn't know where to put this but News and bug reports won't let one make a topic, so here it is

There is the post for 'how to submit' these:
5c24caaf-ff27-481f-abe2-465a83808f80-image.png

Though, I've no idea if the trade-off of trying to centralize bug reports is still worthwhile. In part the goal is to try and get mosty high quality bug reports, such that both reporter and fixer can spend a minimal amount of time on overhead and spend the bulk of their efforts in an actual fix (in other words, high communication efficiency).

Regardless, I believe this issue was recently fixed. Try with the very latest @beelee

@dor20 said in Mute Dialog Boxes:

i accidentally clicked peace! im just glad its a game and not real life.

hmm ... well better than if you accidentally picked war

😂

glad you found a solution 🙂

Yeah I mean I guess that's the drill.

Currently seems like tripleA is kinda FHD limited there. A smaller sized display with higher pixel density doesn't give many options right now. It's basically a choice between enlarged text/tables in the UI for readability, or a loss in graphical fidelity for anything that isn't font. I can make a map for a QHD, UHD, 4K whatever, but it's limited by what the UI can do there for scaling, and also for the unit graphics dimensions/upscale.

1080 is still around for sure, like that snowboard was definitely built to last hehe. I was playing BG3 in 1080 for a while, but for tripleA it isn't like trying to find a buttery smooth framerate for animations and cutscenes, but just sorta just updating the dimensions of those little tab windows I guess, to raise the roof beyond the 54px limit, or to get some better interpolation going on there. Currently the same graphics shown on the map will a lot cleaner, even when at the same scale/same image as the UI element (like in the stats bars, purchase screen, combat windows etc.) you can kinda do the side by side, to see where the pixelation is coming in.

For now recommended settings for tripleA would be HD/FHD with a display scale at 100% I guess. For the 2K jump still pretty beta, needs more elbow grease hehe

Hi @thesnapking

Idk if this will help but ... 🙂

I'm using the prerelease as an example.

DL triplea you get this
Screenshot from 2024-05-01 00-09-51.png

Right click you get this
Screenshot from 2024-05-01 00-10-08.png

Hit Properties
Screenshot from 2024-05-01 00-10-41.png

Hit Permissions
Hit Execute

Open terminal and put the triplea dl in it
Screenshot from 2024-05-01 00-11-38.png

Should end up here
Screenshot from 2024-05-01 00-11-52.png

I installed to a different directory, just added the pre number to the end of existing.
Click your way to Finish and hit that and it should fire up.

Anyway, hope it helps. If not we'll ask someone else 🙂

Edit
Also, I think triplea has java built into it for the right version when you DL it.

@azimuth
[[laughs]] that sounds like a nightmare. i feel like the objective for it would end up being 80+% of the xml file... (not ALL the territories - just the land ones...)
i'll most likely be the only person who ever plays this mod and i tend to ignore victory triggers anyway - i'm a conquer the whole world kinda player. 🙂

@wc_sumpton Great news! Thank you!

@jkprince havent been doing much lately, here is some pixelart that might find its way in as unit sprites
5c0667b2-1d88-44d1-b29f-b43624525602-image.png 1849d59b-1729-42a5-935a-9107e955011e-image.png 21379730-daa3-44e6-a998-f623e5f04342-image.png 2953405c-1eeb-4d0f-8d01-b8411db2c899-image.png 49c9d10f-9b2a-4a70-a8b5-d95236223dd6-image.png cbc292e8-9bc7-4bdb-9eab-4fb6d92bf457-image.png 579b14e5-d9f4-4e1d-83e6-085aa142e746-image.png

Testing Forum poster

Test summary from TripleA, engine version: 2.6.14719, time: 9:32:49 AM
Savegame

@ubernaut he did on git a few times but I don't ever remember seeing him here.

@LaFayette Should new maps/games which (quite certainly like this one) will be released after TripleA 2.6 is released avoid having the "mapName" entry in the game (XML) file?

@panther yeah this is weird one i think gmail has been black holing them but first issue i've seen with yahoo