TOTAL GLOBAL WORLD WAR II- fusion & clean-up PROJECT
Besides I am looking for a as close as accurate/realistic UNITS setup for a 21st JUNE 1941 SCENARIO: based on the AXIS ALLIES GLOBAL MAP ..... the only example I could find is following variant from Johnny on BGG but I see no feedback or reflections on that variant...
otherwise I use the regular AA global setup and spread out the units corresponding to the new territories and actual new battle zones ..... more or less....
Oztea has a 41 setup for the Global game which uses the time frame you want. It's with the "World War II Global" DLs. There's a link in the notes for where it was discussed when he made it.
He generally uses historic info with the obvious adjustments for playability. I kinda remember someone having some good info for the forces at the time. I think maybe it was @RogerCooper ? or maybe Cernel ? I don't recall. I could be wrong too.
Didn't know Midnight had a 41 setup. Maybe I'll add that at some point.
@JOSEPH-PRINCE Hej there, still takes some time and for the next steps I will be inviting people to coop for getting there; about extra units: I will not create to many extra units as the map will be overloaded in placement; but my idea now is that besides basic units every bigger player will get a couple of units to flavour the game in historic sense..: like soviet katyusha and armoured train, german Siege train, super Sub and Me- 262 , Type XXI sub.... etc... though limited by auto placement and/or pricing ; ) as on this maps scale ofcourse their influence should be limited....
@beelee GREAT !!!!! I 'll dive into it....
Another weekly progress: working on comparing sources for a historical & ballanced setup : I changed the starting point to APRIL** 1941; ( I made a 2 months turns: jan-feb/ march-april/ and so on ) as there are still some important little battles taking place with impact on the whole on the west front: like Greece still unoccupied so if keeping of a axis invasion still a factor.... and even more: Iraq and Iran are moving towards the axis... so by this UK first has to secure Iraq and later iran ( together with russia) to secure Persian corridor supplies to USSR. Also the east african campaign is still raging
so italian have units in Abyssinia , Somalia and tiny fleet in red sea.
And by this their oil... as the oil now at game start with flow to the Axis as they "own" the refinery in Iran-Iraq to symbolize economical ties with the Axis. Anyway..... still a lot to do..... besides many territories have a garrison now (inf. with G sign) this is a small non moving unit representing local garrisons and defences. Low roll but still feels better than a empty zones in your rear.. ; ) And Africa will cost a little more effort to conquer.... especially when entering the Jungle center... Also Non-replaceble obsolete units around, (like Light fighters, light armour and Flotilla as smaller naval units of minors or remote Colonial areas ) as allways... any tips remarks welcome..
@ JOSEPH PRINCE ( pacific side )!
Schulz last edited by Schulz
Wow looks impressive, some thoughts;
-Axis/Allies income distribution looks balanced for Jun 1941 set up. Could you share the incomes of nations with 1942 May set up?
-You could draw circles bigger and Abyssina without touching Red Sea thus giving Italians more options in this area.
-China looks visually bad as it is in Global, I would suggest redarawing it to look more realistic.
-Its better to make Northern Italy capital instead Rome.
-German, Italian, Soviet, Greek, Romanian, Yugoslavian, Syrian, British, Belgian, Dutch, Anzac and American flags are wrong.
Hej Schulz... thnxs for your
constructive feedback... I tried to contact you for some more specific replies on your post but now I solve it this way
****-Axis/Allies income distribution looks balanced for Jun 1941 set up. Could you share the incomes of nations with 1942 May set up? - I will once/ if I get there...
-You could draw circles bigger: - All circle areas are urban hot spots/ or historical hotspots and will get all their own over-flow placement boxes on map's edge..(like in old school A&A map )
-and Abyssina without touching Red Sea thus giving Italians more options in this area.**
I think about it .... but as eritrea was part of abyssinia / ethiopia then it would be odd to add the coast to either somalia... or even anglo egypt...
-China looks visually bad as it is in Global, I would suggest redarawing it to look more realistic.:
-China is actually an area that I used a googlemaps for and a historical provinces map of 1939 for... The thing with stratic maps is ofcourse that they are disproportionized.. like europe oversized...
-Its better to make Northern Italy capital instead Rome.
so all captials have a small circle that can hold 1 unit and a overflow box above....
-German, Italian, Soviet, Greek, Romanian, Yugoslavian, Syrian, British, Belgian, Dutch, Anzac and American flags are wrong.****: all the countries you mention have not their national flag but the army sign/roundel, as they are in war at that moment.... these roundels are correct... like syria is vichy french: they have the french flag with the double bladed axe....
but nice to have some critical feedback? are you making maps too?
@ebbe did you draw the map? Or did you adapt it from one of the other maps?
Schulz last edited by Schulz
You could just call all the coastline area as Somali, actually not much important its just an alternative idea for better usage of Ethiopia other than making it classical doomed to fall Italian territory in r1.
Yes, recently finished my first stand alone new drawn map.
I mean all nations should either use army roundels only or national flags only. They are mixed in here and some roundels are belong to post WWII like Yugoslavia or Greece. And actually national flags looks visually way better.
@ebbe Looks great!
The only thing I notice looking at the map is that many of your sea zones correspond to the divisions of land territories. I'm guessing this is intentional on your part... but personally I find it really stagnating to game-play as it just creates blocker moves everywhere. Personal preference I suppose but it is really the only thing that jumps out at me. Otherwise everything else looks really interesting.
@ff03k64 : it is a tribute to and fusion of Total War and Global... based on an advanced global map and with some Total War mechanics... I wanted a simple gameplay, but still have oil and terrain types be included...
@Schulz : hmm, I started from the Axis Allies-roundels' boardgames sphere.... I reconsider the flags , but for next month I focus on game mechanics... later I finish the map layout and so.. thnxs for your remarks...
@Hepps you mean a land and sea border match? hmmm I saw this often in the maps I started from: I kept this "mirrored borders" them as a way to limit flying limits, otherwise aircraft would have really far and sometimes historically impossible flying ranges...
Solved the impassable territories fly over, as strategically and historically it should be possible flying over for example the sahara.. but not entering or passing it with land units. Created a virtual "onlyFlyover" player who allows air sorties passing over due to Cooperative relationship with all players.....
Now starting with bigger challenges like: finding a solution for a WINTER season system more unit-type related than in Total war..., solving my issue that AI doesn't recognize rebuilding Refinery ( for oil supply) as a target after conquering an oil region and by this get short on oil, and I like to have scramble for fighters without Airbase .... I give it a try but likely will call out for HELP soon... ; ) all tips and clues are welcome...
Okej TripleA Community: HELP-REQUEST for introducing an alternative WINTER-SEASON ( other then running in Total War and Big World 2 games )
I like to have a Nordic Winter on all continents affecting all units attack and defense and movement. And have variations on that (like say T34 better winter-proof) I have allready the winter signs coming for a arctic and later nordic winter, followed by its removal in spring but fail to attach the negative units bonus
I could to this by making a terrain type WINTER, specifify for each unit type the impact, but then I have to switch between 2 TERAINTYPES LISTS: A winter and non-winter one ( like one can switch in production connected with turns...that workins well ) WOULD THAT BE POSSIBLE? : A trigger on the total TERRAIN attchment switching between 2 types? Or maybe easier: 2 types of winter terrain attachments : one with penalties and one without .... And if possible how would that look like in coding? If somebody has a clue ... or another aproach to solve this ? would save me lot of time and frustration as this goes beyond my skills ; )
Thanks @ wc_sumpton for feedback and suggestion on alternative Winter implementation!
This is what I see:
<!-- A winter territoryEffect --> <attachment name="territoryEffectAttachment" attachTo="Winter" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TerritoryEffectAttachment" type="territoryEffect"> <option name="noBlitz" value="whateverUnit:and more"/> <option name="combatOffenseEffect" value="infantry" count="-1"/> <option name="combatDefenseEffect" value="infantry" count="-1"/> </attachment> <!-- The conditions to apply the Winter attachment --> <attachment name="conditionAttachmentWinter" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RulesAttachment" type="player"> <option name="rounds" value="28:32"/> </attachment> <!-- I don't understand the reason for this trigger but left it alone --> <attachment name="triggerAttachmentWinter" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player"> <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentWinter"/> <option name="frontier" value="germansRumanianT25Production"/> <option name="when" value="before:germansPurchase"/> </attachment> <!-- The attaching trigger --> <attachment name="triggerAttachmentAddWinterToTerritories" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player"> <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentWinter"/> <!-- Needs the list of territories affected by winter ie: Berlin:Moscow:etc --> <option name="territories" value="ListOfTerritories"/> <option name="territoryAttachmentName" value="TerritoryAttachment" count="territoryAttachment"/> <option name="territoryProperty" value="territoryEffect" count="Winter"/> <option name="when" value="before:germansCombatMove"/> </attachment>
Make sure you give a list of territories separated by colons in the above trigger.
@wc-sumption: WINTER-Implementation via TerrainEffects List: after spending some time on variations of this suggestionmy current conclusion: I don't get it working: ( no bug report either so that is ok ) Winter effect is not "added" as feature in a "trigger-listed territory" by this trigger... it works fine if I add Winter effect as territoryEffectAttachment and add it to a specific territory "hardcoded" but not by trigger.... Thanks for your support... if you or anyone else might have an idea for another option please let me know... plan B was to see if it is possible to add a negative battle bonus on a Dummy-players' Unit ( winterSign) and try to get a general penalty but that would be pretty rough.... and not best option ( especially to support more winter-proof units as Soviet T34's etc )
Slow progress solving and testing oil refineries change/damage/disabled options, and strategic bombing of all structures.... one question popped up:
IS THERE A LIST/OVERVIEW WITH ALL ELEMENTS/OPTIONS supported by the latest triple A version ??? it would help me a lot !
empty winter front after 2 harsh battle rounds...
refineries at East Poland damaged after conquest or in full production in Rumania... oil will be central theme besides terrain types.... short of oil? than allways possible to buy extra but that drains your units-purchasing...
@ebbe not sure if this is what you're looking for or not but it's pretty handy if you're not already aware of it.
For the new stuff
look for Map XML.
I thought I remembered seeing some stuff on Git somewhere that listed everything, new anyways, but I could be wrong.