Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread

Schulz

@board-3659 Maybe it is because the entente is too strong to offset AI's relative weakness of the seas?

board 3659

@schulz Could be though the US player is pretty competent at balancing ground units and naval units. The Alliance player is the same. Nemo pirates for some reason just build planes

redrum

Fixed Italy buying armour without researching Tank tech: https://github.com/triplea-maps/domination_1914_no_mans_land/pull/11/files

Ondis

Hey!

~~I love this map though I havent played it a lot. Do have some questions about what everyone thinks in regards to Bids here.~~

~~Personally I love to play with no rules in regards to "capturing neutral territories" and no rules in regards to gas.~~

~~I cant remember what side gas benefits the most but if I remember correctly neutrals in especially Asia but also Spain benefit the Allies a lot.~~

~~So what would be your recommended bid in regards to a LL game with no other rules?~~

~~I know 1 sub is common, what about 1-2 techs? Maybe even for Germany and Austria each?~~

Im also curious how you´d rate dice vs LL. In Global, which Im far more familiar with, the bid difference is about 6-10 PU. That is, the allies get LESS bid when there is Low Luck than when there is dice.

~~Same would apply here I assume, especially due to the curcial german sub play.~~

How would you compensate? I know once when me and Kurt played he gave me +3 PU per turn for the rest of the game as Germany, but he may have just been nice since I was new to the game then. Though it is not that much, in essence its one average neutral territory extra.

edit: Epinokon told me that there had been big changes to the map in the past year or so that means at least the LL bids and other house rules no longer are used.

Does anyone know what version / since what version those changes came so I can browse them through a bit?

Also still curious about what if any bid youd put for dice, or in other words how dice affects the balance?

redrum

@ondis Its pretty balanced in my experience after the changes made (you can see the change log in the first post of this thread). Those mostly addressed a lot of the past issues around neutral territories, gas, etc. Centrals probably are a bit stronger in LL and a bit weaker in dice as naturally whoever is on the offensive benefits a bit from LL as things are more predictable.

Kurt is an experienced player and probably just giving you some help.

KurtGodel7

@ondis said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:

Hey!

~~I love this map though I havent played it a lot. Do have some questions about what everyone thinks in regards to Bids here.~~

~~Personally I love to play with no rules in regards to "capturing neutral territories" and no rules in regards to gas.~~

~~I cant remember what side gas benefits the most but if I remember correctly neutrals in especially Asia but also Spain benefit the Allies a lot.~~

~~So what would be your recommended bid in regards to a LL game with no other rules?~~

~~I know 1 sub is common, what about 1-2 techs? Maybe even for Germany and Austria each?~~

Im also curious how you´d rate dice vs LL. In Global, which Im far more familiar with, the bid difference is about 6-10 PU. That is, the allies get LESS bid when there is Low Luck than when there is dice.

~~Same would apply here I assume, especially due to the curcial german sub play.~~

How would you compensate? I know once when me and Kurt played he gave me +3 PU per turn for the rest of the game as Germany, but he may have just been nice since I was new to the game then. Though it is not that much, in essence its one average neutral territory extra.

edit: Epinokon told me that there had been big changes to the map in the past year or so that means at least the LL bids and other house rules no longer are used.

Does anyone know what version / since what version those changes came so I can browse them through a bit?

Also still curious about what if any bid youd put for dice, or in other words how dice affects the balance?

Balance changes to the map mean that bids are no longer used.

There are still two house rules which are in somewhat wide effect. One is a gass limit of 12 per nation. The other is a zeppelin limit of 2 per nation.

A gass limit serves to help prevent 3 things.

Germany and Austria picking an Entente capital, such as Paris, to try to zerg rush. One of the two uses normal units for its aggression, while the other sends a huge stack of gass.
Germany or Austria building a huge stack of gass, and moving it back and forth between various fronts to threaten Entente in more than one place.
Later in the game, no gass limit means the U.S. could put nearly all its money into gass. American gass would be in conjunction with a French or British offensive.

The zeppelin limit exists to prevent the U.S. from buying large amounts of zeppelins, and sending them against the communists. Without a zeppelin limit, Russia could send units to try to take the communist capital, while the U.S. sent large numbers of zeppelins.

There are no longer widespread house rules restricting neutral farming. The modifications to the map included income reductions for some neutral territories, or increases in the number of units defending them, or both.

Ondis

@redrum said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:

@ondis Its pretty balanced in my experience after the changes made (you can see the change log in the first post of this thread). Those mostly addressed a lot of the past issues around neutral territories, gas, etc. Centrals probably are a bit stronger in LL and a bit weaker in dice as naturally whoever is on the offensive benefits a bit from LL as things are more predictable.

Kurt is an experienced player and probably just giving you some help.

Yo. Thanks. But if the central powers are weaker by dice then naturally there should be some kind of bid to them, no? But very few seem to play dice so I guess its not really been tested either. Regardless of niceties

Also that was in the old version so it somewhat compensated the neutral farming I guess.

About Gas, there was a big discussion on the chat earlier last evening about it, whether or not to have a limit. It seemed evenly split.

I think the problem obviously occurs when there are so large stacks that any manoeuvre warfare is made impossible.

I think the limit of 12 is perhaps too small if there should be a limit. And probably since dice allows for more flanking (as you can´t attack flanking stacks down to 1-2 units and always expect not to move to that territory) stacks don´t become that big of an issue.

But in LL I could see a reason for a limit like @KurtGodel7 says.

About Zeppelins I don´t know. It seems like a more legitimate strategy. I guess its partly countered by moving to Mexico with Germany. But I can see how it can look a bit exploitable to do it to a one province powerhouse like the Communists.

There are several workarounds that may be better than having limitations imposed on the player by house rules. One would be to give the communists off-map income for a portion of that province value - reducing the province by as much.

Russia could be compensated with a national objective to take the province capital and then gain the same amount of PU.

An other to limit how many zeppelins can be used on one province.

KurtGodel7

@ondis said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:

@redrum said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:

@ondis Its pretty balanced in my experience after the changes made (you can see the change log in the first post of this thread). Those mostly addressed a lot of the past issues around neutral territories, gas, etc. Centrals probably are a bit stronger in LL and a bit weaker in dice as naturally whoever is on the offensive benefits a bit from LL as things are more predictable.

Kurt is an experienced player and probably just giving you some help.

Yo. Thanks. But if the central powers are weaker by dice then naturally there should be some kind of bid to them, no? But very few seem to play dice so I guess its not really been tested either. Regardless of niceties

Also that was in the old version so it somewhat compensated the neutral farming I guess.

About Gas, there was a big discussion on the chat earlier last evening about it, whether or not to have a limit. It seemed evenly split.

I think the problem obviously occurs when there are so large stacks that any manoeuvre warfare is made impossible.

I think the limit of 12 is perhaps too small if there should be a limit. And probably since dice allows for more flanking (as you can´t attack flanking stacks down to 1-2 units and always expect not to move to that territory) stacks don´t become that big of an issue.

But in LL I could see a reason for a limit like @KurtGodel7 says.

About Zeppelins I don´t know. It seems like a more legitimate strategy. I guess its partly countered by moving to Mexico with Germany. But I can see how it can look a bit exploitable to do it to a one province powerhouse like the Communists.

There are several workarounds that may be better than having limitations imposed on the player by house rules. One would be to give the communists off-map income for a portion of that province value - reducing the province by as much.

Russia could be compensated with a national objective to take the province capital and then gain the same amount of PU.

An other to limit how many zeppelins can be used on one province.

Good post.

It's possible for the U.S. and Britain to prevent Germany from taking Mexico City.

Round 1:

Germany moves its Pacific transport + 2 land units as far east as possible.
Britain moves two colonials to Montana.
The U.S. buys 2 trenches and 3 - 4 gass. Of the units in the western U.S., it keeps 1 infantry in San Francisco. At the end of the U.S. turn, there will be 3 infantry and a cavalry in New Mexico. 2 trenches are placed in San Francisco (prevents Germany from conquering it/building a factory). The gass is placed in Charleston.

Round 2:

Germany uses its Pacific transport to take Guadalahara.
The UK moves 2 colonials from Montana to New Mexico.
The U.S. attacks Chihuahua with 3 infantry and a cavalry from New Mexico. If the U.S. gets decent dice, it conquers Chihuahua. If it gets bad dice it needs to retreat before it loses its cavalry. It moves the Charleston gass west to Louisiana.

Round 3:

Germany moves 2 units from Guadalahara to Mexico City.
If the U.S. took Chihuahua, Britain doesn't need to do anything. If the U.S. failed to take it, Britain attacks Chihuahua with the 2 colonials in New Mexico.
The U.S. uses its cavalry + gass to kill the Germans in Mexico City.

Schulz

@ondis You might want to use LL in round 1 then switch to dice.

Also it is possible to save Paris without gas restriction. In this strategy Austria makes a sucidal gas attack to Paris in r3 to help Germany. Then Germany attacks Paris with its all available forces in r4.

If Germany rolls really good dices at naval battles and moves all its fleet to the North Sea, Move all of your British and French fleet to SZ 25 and buy 5 British fighters in round 1 and round 2 and send them Paris.

As Italy, Just buy cavalries and fightes as much as you want and send them Paris.

The zeppelin spam against the Communists also can ben countered. If CP takes Belarus and makes enough pressure in initial rounds, Russia won't be able to hold Bratsk let alone taking Yakuts. Without Brats, US zeppelins wouldn't reach Yakuts.

Wassmuss

Hello, who made the new version of this map? From my opinion, why destroy a good map? Changes are too heavy. Trench tech defend at 2... not nice... Many people play this map and like it. Do an extra mod with a extra name, if you want a new game...

Wassmuss

@wassmuss ok it looks that it only appears in some bots, not in all

redrum

@wassmuss Not sure what you mean? What new version?

KurtGodel7

@redrum

@redrum said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:

@wassmuss Not sure what you mean? What new version?

There have been some new versions floating around lately. In one, the cost of heavy guns is reduced. Once you get rail guns tech they defend on a 6. Just now I played a different version where Russia had been given a few extra units to start. I'm not a fan of this version pollution. You think you're playing the normal version, only to find that the version you're actually playing has altered game balance in ways which might hurt you.

Cernel

@kurtgodel7 I suggest anyone to write down (in here) the full and exact game name of the game in question, so that it may be verified if the name might be confusing in some way.

Unfortunately, TripleA has the egregious problem of allowing whatever number of different games to have the exact same name if they belong to different maps.

Reference:
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/7005

NGMC

@wassmuss The version i played was created by caoyu. I agree that all modifications were too defensive heavy. I told him so. It is a shame he didn't name it differently.

redrum

Any mod of NML should have a different name so its clear. If the user continues to create mods of existing maps without changing the name then please let mods know so they can address the issue.

zlefin

A bug was found: apparently Italy can't build tanks even after armour has been researched. I verified the bug is present, at least in v 2.5.22294 and with the currentl v of NML.

I edited the original post to put that in the bugs section, since apparently I can do that.

To fix the bug: search the file for
value="conditionAttachmenttankA"/>
there are two instances of that, select the one that is a few lines below
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentItalyT5"

and modify it to say
value="conditionAttachmenttankI"/>

that is, with an I instead of an A at the end of the conditionattachmenttank

So whoever's in charge of the map now can update it at some point with that fix.

ice1

deleted post