Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.6
-
@Gully While the distance factor lends itself to a Japanese invasion first... the real question becomes how much Japan can afford to send there without compromising its other fronts. If say Russia chooses to honour the treaty on turn 1 (which it most certainly will want to by design)... it means that Japan can realistically only capture 2 or perhaps maximum 3 of the 6 treaty territories. Thus immediately handing over 6 to 8 PU to Russia.
Traditionally the front collapses willfully by the Russians as Yakut is the ideal defensive position and choke point in the East. However, Vladivostok can easily be defended on turn 1. It is just not an ideal strategy in the existing game since you end up with a pocket of men that is trapped since there is no incentive for Japan to postpone an invasion and at the absolute minimum take Khabarovskiy Kray with a single infantry. Now that would be disastrous for the Axis since handing over 10 PU to Russia for turn 2 would not help their interests at all.
The entire situation then becomes one of whether each side continues to build up... or divert its resources to other fronts. Russia can use the 8 PU from retaining the territories in the East, to build its war machine in the West hurting German interests... if on the other side of the equation Japan decides to honour the agreement it can focus much more of its war effort in China and the Pacific theatre using the additional +6 PU from the treaty. After turn one it then becomes a question of who is maneuvering where and how much is being committed to the cat and mouse game of deciding when to open a second front.
Bear in mind that the way I have designed the treaty units... either side can still move naval units into (or through) a SZ containing the Treaty units provided there are no enemy combat surface vessels in the SZ at the start of the turn. The decision as to whether you want to capture the SZ or not is up to the player.
-
Just adding a note here based on the lobby conversation:
There is a potential bug where chinese fighters are land units instead of air units. This happens if the neutral nations are disabled as some of the triggers are during those phases. There could be other bugs as well when they are disabled.
<!-- canBeDisabled: if true means that the player will skip all of their phases. their delegates will be removed from the game (so triggers will not happen during those delegates either) -->The easy way to fix that is just make it so they can't be disabled. Alternatively, we can take a look at what triggers occur during neutral phases and try to move them right before or after to core player phases.
-
@redrum You are so very smart.
-
rulebook pdf file is missing from the current download
-
@ubernaut https://github.com/triplea-maps/total_world_war_manual/raw/master/TWW_lossy_new.pdf
It hasn't been updated for v3 yet. So you'll want to review the first post of this thread for changes to the rules.
-
noticed that the page image files in the download are actually newer than the previous included PDF, last page references 2.8.0.4 but the combined pdf is just missing. thought id give a heads up on that.
i made a combined pdf of my own just because reading the notes in-game is tough, but i don't have the ability to add stuff to git. anyway here is a temporary link that good for a week if anyone wants a slightly newer version of that: -
@ubernaut Yeah, looks like the PDF hasn't been regenerated from the note pages recently so is another point version or 2 behind them.
-
@redrum just started playing TWW recently noticed AI is pretty hobbled with all the complication added in this game, are there plans to make the AI more capable for TWW?
-
@ubernaut Yeah, playing vs the AI is pretty meaningless on TWW as it uses a lot of advanced TripleA features that the AI can't handle currently. You are better off finding a human opponent or even practicing against yourself. I'd say its maybe a dream at this point to make the AI more capable of playing TWW as it would take significant effort. Probably the biggest issue with the AI currently is it essentially can't build infrastructure as it doesn't understand how to handle materials.
I also considered making some sort of "AI-enabled" setting where some of the advanced rules are simplified for the AI so something like the AI not using materials at all and just making buildings cost more.
-
@redrum that seems interesting.
-
is this the right place to tell people usa start image isn't currently loading on the latest download?
-
@ubernaut Yeah, this is the place to report any bugs. What do you mean by usa start image? Can you upload a screenshot?
-
@redrum It is the image that is supposed to be displayed when USA game start happens. I think the image is misnamed.
-
@Hepps So few people play with notifications on that I forgot about it.
-
@Hepps Oh ok. Yeah, I never play with notifications anymore. But do remember a few of them were missing.
-
@redrum Just USA start as far as I remember.
"A joyous heart sours with the burden of expectation"
Hepster -
@Hepps Ok. I added it to the list for the next release.
-
yeah just started messing around with TWW so i have the images on still so far that's the only one I've seen with the broken link image.
-
Hi all!
Here is an idea concerning starting technology.
Currently every major player in the game starts with five tech tokens (China stars with zero tech tokens).
When either Japan or Italy gets lucky and rolls for special warfare during round one then (in the case of Japan) the Exile Allies islands in the Pacific or (in the case of Italy) Western Egypt/Cairo fall much faster.
To slow, but not eliminate these outcomes, I propose to remove the five tech tokens from the start of round one and replace them with double tech tokens at the end of round one.
Thus, any player ending round one with one tech center will end the round with six tech tokens while any player ending round one with two tech centers will end the round with twelve tech tokens.
Also, tech tokens will not be purchasable until the second round.
Thoughts?
-
@xAAAx Its an interesting idea. I do think whether UK, Japan, or Italy get Special Warfare round 1 can make a major impact on the early game. I think the problem is really that Special Warfare is too strong as a tech for naval powers as it makes amphibious assaults very black and white (you can or you can't). While I think we could try to do something around making techs less random in the first round or 2, that would really just be a band aid and really what needs done is reworking Special Warfare.
I think the Special Warfare line needs to be more gradual so that amphibious attackers have significant penalties and that penalty becomes less and less as you work through the tech line. So keep most of the territory effect bonuses but adjust SWF line like this:
- no SWF - all inf can amphib but have a -2 attack (essentially just act as casualties)
- SWF - amphib inf have a -1 attack
- Improved SWF - amphib inf have no negative bonus
- Advanced SWF - allows amphib with non-inf
This is just conceptual so would need more thought on exact values and balance. But this would make SWF less powerful and make amphib assaults a more gradual tech advancement.
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