WW2 Oil and Snow (1st ed.) NEW MAP RELEASE

ebbe

Trifle: Just added some other things like more Oil in the Arabian peninsula... for that I implemented BAHRAIN , small feature but was lot of work for such a tiny island ,
I had to move 14 overflow locations on games top.. haha...

Anyway ; the area needed a bit more oil to be represented...
I changed Yemen into Aden Protectorate.... and choose not to display the UAE ( trucian States ) and Yemen itselves....
so...more oil for the grab

and yes a trifle definately but hey, that's a hobby
and I just lack the time the very moment to take on bigger things

ebbe

@roybot Hej there, nice you take a look at my first Triple project ever.... I can send you the latest Word-doc for the game as you asked for.... just give me your @ by chat... If you want my latest game version I can send it to you by We Transfer, as I moved much further but lack the time now to do a Github upload..... feedback and bugs report really welcome!

General_Zod

@ebbe How about this idea.

When the air unit flies over the territory a condition/objective and/or trigger can change the status of any number of circumstances (your choice). Which prevents the air unit from landing there. However if air unit flies out of the territory all the circumstances return back to status quo.

I personally think that making the territory into status "just captured" somewhere in the turn should be enough, if not however. Optionally if you made it a contested territory during noncombat after the air unit flies into it, this should also prevent the air unit from landing in this territory. Once air unit moves out remove the contested status. This should be achievable by placing a enemy combat unit of some type and then removing it.

ebbe

@general_zod great, thanks for the effort... I give it a chance soon

ebbe

case ITALY:

I like to have the feeling that the German player should really
take after its southern neighbour, to protect its own gains.
= If Sicily, South italy and Rome will be in Allied hands; allmost all Italian troops will surrender. And 3 Italian Infantry units
(with own brighter yellow green colour and other flag) will switch side into a Royalist Italian "Southern Army" and join the Allies.

If North Italy is still in Axis controll at that moment, 2 Italian infantry units
and the italian leader Mussolini will continue the fight from there, resulting in civil war alike situation. implemented in v.1.9

General_Zod

@ebbe A thought to make the contested territory somewhat logical. Call the enemy unit "Hostile Flying Conditions" . Or something of the sort, in an attempt coverup the hacky nature of the mechanism.

ebbe

@general_zod said in WW2 Oil and Snow (1st ed.) NEW MAP RELEASE:

Hostile Flying Conditions

yes, withyour suggestions I was thinking about creating a unit that works on both sides, axis and allies... so a hostile player that appears with a blank or Non-landing warning -token.... during noncombat....... only have to see If I implement
an option to build airfields in these terr's how to stop triggering this mechanism... hmmmm but that should be solvable with a condition if No airfield around okej I give a try ..... -->

RESULT: doesn't seem to work either....
-Same as my territory switch approach: THERE SEEMS TO BE NO CHECK for AIR concerning landing after combat phase:
even if I add this "enemy"element in earlier, like after Purchase... air units may land... guess ownership is dominant... I also tried different types of enemy unit,like with infrastructure element or regular

an Airunit is allowed in contested territory as a result....

My previous option: Change ownership after combat phase & switch back before place phase works fine! But......
-the changing of colour looks odd during the game...
-And then I ll have to write for each player for each teritory a trigger to
return it to the current owner..
hmmm... challenging...

anyone a suggestion how to tackle this?

my test attempt:

<attachment name="conditionAttachmentNoLanding" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RulesAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="players" value="Germans:Italians:Japanese:Vichy-French:Russians:Chinese:British:Canadians:ANZAC:Americans:French"/>
    <option name="switch" value="true"/>
    <option name="unitPresence" value="no_airfield" count="1"/>
</attachment>

<attachment name="triggerAttachmentNoLandingSet" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentNoLanding"/>
    <option name="changeOwnership" value="East Greenland:any:NoAirLandingAllowed:true"/>
    <option name="when" value="after:britishBattle"/>
</attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentNoLandingReset" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentNoLanding"/>
    <option name="changeOwnership" value="East Greenland:NoAirLandingAllowed:Neutral_Allies:true"/>
    <option name="when" value="before:britishPlace"/>
</attachment>

NoAirLanding = a dummy player with

     <option name="canMoveAirUnitsOverOwnedLand" value="true"/>
      <option name="canLandAirUnitsOnOwnedLand" value="false"/>

Well I could avoid the swapping of colours by adding a No Air Landing -dummy player allowed FOR EACH PLAYER.... in their own colours... WOW that would be very serious amount of code alltogether for a little feature... too bad the reset of territory effect doesn't work if the unit is allready in the specific territory once the switch is done: this would have been the easiest way ...

bel246

Hey I just tested out your map. I really like the your fresh approach and think it works well. I love the train system and the seasonal changes. I also think the oil shortage in some countries adds a very nice flavour. I have a few things I noted:

I guess that's a bug. Sea zone 3 and Greece are next to each other which means you can fly from Greenland all the way down to Egypt with a fighter (lost my fleet to that).
I really like the rebel system, so you can't rely on the conquered territory and it is realistic. There is one part I don't really like though which also isn't realistic. I conquered a territory in china then a rebel spawned there. The problem with that is my whole army stack (about 20 units) couldn't move (combat phase) because of that one unit. In non combat I couldn't move them either because they did battle there. So in theory it could happen that you can't move your army for several turns just because rebels keep spawning and you have no chance of knowing when your whole army will get stuck which can easily loose you the game. Is it possible to change it so you can still leave the territory in combat phase when a rebel has spawned there?
Sometimes I wish there would be some more notes of what is going on or going to happen. For example: I was standing next to Leningrad knowing I can definitely conquer it next turn. The next turn I couldn't and looking in the history an event was triggered called "defend the homeland" and they got 4 more hitpoints (trench and 2 units) in there. That is of course something that you can learn by playing the map several times but it would be nice if there could be a note so you can read about those things beforehand.
Another instance which I still don't understand was when I conquered Ulan Bator on turn 4 with Japanese. There where no units in sight so I was sure my units are safe. Then it was the Russians turn and suddenly they had 2 more units in the area a cavalry and an infantry. I couldn't even find the trigger for that in the history.
Also some notes about which turn technological advancements happen and where they spawn an extra unit would be sweet.
I think its weird that my air planes can get killed by sea mines. Maybe make them like submarines? Especially since my planes can't kill the mines.
England is very badly defended. I was able to conquer London in turn 3 and I don't think Britain can stop that (I played against AI on 150% income) if you go all in.
Some rules I don't understand. In jungle it says you can't blitz. To me blitz always meant I can drive through an enemy territory and go to the next one after that. I did some testing and I can't move most of my 2 movement units into jungle from 2 territories away even if I own the territory in between. I can move through 2 jungle territories if I own both though. I can move cavalry (which also blitzes) from 2 territories away in there. I would love some clarification of that rule.
I haven't found any way yet to repair battleships even leaving them next to my original factory doesn't seem to repair them. I guess the same is true for carrier. Oh and is it intended that carriers can't carry any fighter after they are damaged?

When I hover over a battleship it says it has 2x8 attacks and defence. When using them in the battle calculator they have 9 attack and 9 defence without having 2 attacks.
I did some testing. For some reason the battle calculator is really confused by battleships. If a battleship (2x8 attack, 2 HP) fights against a destroyer (4 defense) the calculator says there will be a draw 40% of the time. Which shouldn't even happen if it only had 9 attack because of the 2 HP. I put the game settings on low luck and there a battleship suddenly has only 9 attack (which is weird because normally it would have 16 attack in low luck). Something doesn't really work there.

Is it intended that you can't upgrade finish entrenchments into fortifications?
Some channel rule clarifications would be nice. I can't figure out where channels are and what countries you need to own to pass through them.
I can't figure out how to use the defensive Leadership. I can't use it on newly conquered territory but also when I use it on owned territories it doesn't give any bonus at all. Sometimes I can't even move it.
I noticed when defending japan that the 10 units per stack rule doesn't apply for transports. That makes it quite unfair. Americans can land with 40 infantry while I can defend with a maximum of 10. Maybe apply this rule for landing transports also?

By the way I read you want to get rid of the triggers concerning partisans. I actually would love to see them happen. Then it isn't such a huge surprise when suddenly somewhere on the map new units appear.

I really enjoyed playing the map. Keep up the good work!

wc_sumpton

@ebbe

The only way I was able to accomplish 'Non Combat Move Restrict Landing' was with 'territoryEffect'

First the 'territoryEffect's, there are two, both have the same 'png' in the 'territoryEffect' folder, this way the player can see the visual 'Can Not Land' icon in the statusbar:

<territoryEffectList>
   <territoryEffect name="CanNotLand"/>
   <territoryEffect name="CanMoveOver"/>
   ...
</territoryEffectList>
...
<attachment name="territoryEffectAttachment" attachTo="CanNotLand" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TerritoryEffectAttachment" type="territoryEffect">
   <option name="unitsNotAllowed" value="fighter"/>
</attachment>
<!-- Only to make icon visable -->
<attachment name="territoryEffectAttachment" attachTo="CanMoveOver" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TerritoryEffectAttachment" type="territoryEffect">
</attachment>
...

Next the 'airfield' check:

<attachment name="conditionAttachmentAirField" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RulesAttachment" type="player">
   <option name="players" value="Germans:Italians:Japanese:Vichy-French:Russians:Chinese:British:Canadians:ANZAC:Americans:French"/>
   <option name="directPresenceTerritories" value="East Greenland" count="1"/>
   <option name="unitPresence" value="airfield" count="1"/>
</attachment>

Now for the triggers:

<!-- Is there an airfield, if so remove all effects -->
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentLandingEastGreenland" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
   <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentAirField"/>
   <option name="territories" value="East Greenland"/>
   <option name="territoryAttachmentName" value="TerritoryAttachment" count="territoryAttachment"/>
   <option name="territoryProperty" value="territoryEffect" count="-reset-"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:russiansCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:japaneseCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:britishCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:etc..."/>
</attachment>
<!-- No 'airfield' so replace no landing restriction -->
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentMovingEastGreenland" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
   <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentAirField"/>
   <option name="invert" value="true" />
   <option name="territories" value="East Greenland"/>
   <option name="territoryAttachmentName" value="TerritoryAttachment" count="territoryAttachment"/>
   <option name="territoryProperty" value="territoryEffect" count="-reset-CanMoveOver"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:russiansCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:japaneseCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:britishCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:etc..."/>
</attachment>
<!-- Restrict landing after combat -->
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentNoLandingEastGreenland" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
   <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentAirField"/>
   <option name="invert" value="true"/>
   <option name="territories" value="East Greenland"/>
   <option name="territoryAttachmentName" value="TerritoryAttachment" count="territoryAttachment"/>
   <option name="territoryProperty" value="territoryEffect" count="-reset-CanNotLand"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:russiansNonCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:japaneseNonCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:britishNonCombatMove"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:etc..."/>
</attachment>

Review and let me know what you think.

Cheers...

ebbe

@bel246

I really really appreciate the very detailed feedback you gave on this project.. as stated before it is my first project, took me a lot of time to understand the coding and how to get my ideas transformed in this game...

after working so long on it I definately loose the objective fresh overview that what makes your post really valuable to me...

I will read through your long list at a proper time to give you the right answers and take into account your suggestions...

My work is my further allready than the version you downloaded, judging from the 2 hit unit repair issues... I find it troublesome to refresh all the files via Github, ( I lack the rest and time for it at the moment)
I you feel like I can give you my latest version, via We transfer....
just let me know....
and yes there is a big wishlist of refining things and
sometimes the wish to implement things that I haven't found solutions for or maybe are impossible... but we'll see in time...

thanks a lot... I come back to your input soon....

ebbe

@wc_sumpton Hej wc_sumption, thanks for thinking along again: I try to workout this suggestion tonight somewhere between the diper-changes.... yes, just like the true winter effect this issue should be solvable...... great... thanks!

Hepps

@ebbe "The artist alone sees spirits. But after he has told of their appearing to him, everybody sees them."

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

ebbe

@bel246 Okej here my response.... and thanks again for finding and posting your feedback and bugs:

1: GREECE -SEA ZONE 3: A bug definately... of the more funnier kind..
is solved: I used to have another bug where suddenly ANZAC forces
made a landing in Greece in turn 1... haha... loophole .....
2. PARTISANS: blocking units to leave: hmmm that is indeed TOO much impact, taking away both movement options....
I see what I can do about that... subs and transport may vary in controll areas, not sure if land units may do that....
3.MORE NOTES: Indeed "the Save the motherland" should be added to the game notes. And about the Mongolian Ghost Army: sounds like the trigger doesn't work as it should.. I'll take a look at that....
4. FLYING SEAMINES: haha... naughty naughty seamines: yes I fixed that Planes cannot knock out seamines but the opposite doesn't seem to work yet.. will be on my list....
5. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN: okej I give UK a boost, I allready changed that London is not directly connected anymore to the north sea zone which made it toooo easy target.... but I'll fix some defense forces....
6.BLITZ: okej, it should work like a movement penalty:
so jungle should all 2 movement land units have only 1 movement except trains: I'll check that
7. REPAIRMENT OF 2 HIT UNITS: is allready solved in version 1.9
the choosen way is mentioned in this forum previous....
so you'll see that coming with coming update,... also
the battle ship issue you mention is solved....
I removed the double attack... but the bigger ships have an small
AA against Air units now...
8. FINNISH FORTIFICATIONS: Initially it was indeed my plan that finnish and other incorporated minors cannot build fortifications, thinking they lack the resources and manpower for big projects, same as not being able to build battleships...and so
9. CHANNEL CLARIFICATIONS: yes, another good point: I never worked that out so far... is on my list now...
10. DEFENSIVE LEADERSHIP: the bonus issue is solved in 1.9;
the movement issue with some players ( I think germany was a problem with not moving ) fixed too... but it was not easy implmenetation the whole system.. I double check it...
11. MAX UNIT STACK: that sounds like a very unfair escape indeed concerning Japan... I have to see how to ballance that.... I put it on my test list.....
12.PARTISANS notifications.... okej...I only wanted to silence the failed partisan roll notifications as there can be many for example when germans have taken over west USSR, but; it is still optional in game settings now to do that....

great feedback... I work at very slow pace here now... so takes some time to fix all... now also working on this NOAirLanding case and on Attrition at City Siege.... I 'll do a Github version update somewhere next month ;
if you can't wait I can transfer you the latest version... greetings from the Lowlands...

beelee

@hepps said in WW2 Oil and Snow (1st ed.) NEW MAP RELEASE:

@ebbe "The artist alone sees spirits. But after he has told of their appearing to him, everybody sees them."

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Got me thinking again : )

ebbe

@wc_sumpton Hej ...thanks for your nice piece of code...
it is in a "solution-direction" that I tried before too.... ( but your code much more spohisticated and smooth... thanks for teaching )
it seemed the most logical approach too ( with the winter effect reset experiences we had ) :

But: 2 disadvantages:

It doens't work if an Airunit has moved allready on this territory in combat
movement... allthough it is clear in terr. info that reset was done...
then it can simply remain and by this land on a NoLand Terr.effect
-Other disadvantage is an airunit may not move over this terr. when returning to other terr to land.. so: it may block the way and cause mayday mayday out of fuel consequences

so I think my Bombastic Over The Top : temporary change ownership solution still be the closest way to get this done....

I write share the code I used cause I am sure it could be much more simplified

ebbe

@wc_sumption @zodd ** My Bombastic Dinosaur Way of NoAirLanding ** ( following Zodds suggestion of Contesting Terr. )

first make dummy players for each player ingame:
give the same colour as original player colour to avoid colour swaps
in trigger moments....

<player name="NoAirLandingAllowedGER" optional="true" defaultType="AI" isHidden="true"/>
<player name="NoAirLandingAllowedUK" optional="true" defaultType="AI" isHidden="true"/>

Then make for each "No Airfield Terr."and each player that can
occupy it a condition and triggers... wow that is a shtload indeed :(*

( I use it the opposite way: like in my rail-road system: to avoid too many Units in a Terr.. and keep a clear view .. so I only mark the terr.'s that don't have an airfield option, with a No Airfield token....
works fine: example


<attachment name="conditionAttachmentNoLanding" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RulesAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="players" value="Germans:Italians:Japanese:Vichy-French:Russians:Chinese:British:Canadians:ANZAC:Americans:French"/>
    <option name="switch" value="true"/><option name="directPresenceTerritories" value="East Greenland" count="1"/>
    <option name="unitPresence" value="no_airfield" count="1"/>
</attachment>

<attachment name="triggerAttachmentNoLandingSet" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentNoLanding"/>
    <option name="changeOwnership" value="East Greenland:any:NoAirLandingAllowedUK:true"/>
    <option name="when" value="after:germansBattle"/>
</attachment>

<attachment name="triggerAttachmentNoLandingSet" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentNoLanding"/>
    <option name="changeOwnership" value="East Greenland:any:NoAirLandingAllowedUK:true"/>
    <option name="when" value="after:britishBattle"/>
</attachment>

<attachment name="conditionAttachmentEastGreenlandOwnedByNeutralAllies" attachTo="NoAirLandingAllowedUK" javaClass="RulesAttachment" type="player"><option name="directOwnershipTerritories" value="East Greenland" count="1"/></attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentNoLandingReset" attachTo="NoAirLandingAllowedUK" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentNoLanding:conditionAttachmentEastGreenlandOwnedByNeutralAllies"/>
    <option name="changeOwnership" value="East Greenland:NoAirLandingAllowedUK:Neutral_Allies:true"/>
    <option name="when" value="before:britishPlace"/>
</attachment>


<attachment name="conditionAttachmentEastGreenlandOwnedByGermans" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="RulesAttachment" type="player"><option name="directOwnershipTerritories" value="East Greenland" count="1"/></attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentNoLandingReset" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentNoLanding:conditionAttachmentEastGreenlandOwnedByGermans"/>
    <option name="changeOwnership" value="East Greenland:NoAirLandingAllowedUK:Germans:true"/>
    <option name="when" value="before:germansPlace"/>
</attachment>
<attachment name="conditionAttachmentEastGreenlandOwnedByBritish" attachTo="British" javaClass="RulesAttachment" type="player"><option name="directOwnershipTerritories" value="East Greenland" count="1"/></attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentNoLandingReset" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
    <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentNoLanding:conditionAttachmentEastGreenlandOwnedByBritish"/>
    <option name="changeOwnership" value="East Greenland:NoAirLandingAllowedUK:British:true"/>
    <option name="when" value="before:britishPlace"/>
</attachment>

And then it is easy to give a player the option to "build" an airfield...
in purchase , in order to remove the No Airfield -token.

Seems logical to me but I accept that I might sound far from that ....

But : It takes a then:
-11 dummy players ( not a big deal)
-a lot of code to fix this for every possible owner of
every "No Air Landing Terr." like East Greenland
to make the switch back to this owner after Non Landing player trigger
has come by

Could I write this code more simple? less stoneage?
Or is there really another option we missed?

wc_sumpton

@ebbe

Question, if Russia owns East Greenland, what is stopping their allies from landing there during there turn?

You would need to check to see if the territory is allied owned, which ally owns the territory, switch to that owners dummy player, check which dummy player owns the territory and switch back to original owner. (You did say that you like to write xml? )

Using territoryEffect only check for the presents of the airfield unit and does not care about ownership. Granted there are 2 side effect, being able to land during combat move, (making a non-combat move during combat, which is illegal) and blocking fly-overs during the non-combat move. But the balance between what is trying to be achieved, and the amount of code seems like a fair trade off.

Even though 'changeOwnership' works, it only limits the owner and not their allies.

Cheers...

ebbe

@wc_sumpton yes you are very right.... and making a trigger for every player "visiting "an ally by landing AND for if owning the terr. simply would take too much code....
But when I will use this system in a Eastfront map 2x2 for example it could be workable... thanks for thinking along...
I put my energy now on less head twisting things...

ebbe

@bel246

by the way; for the Seamines attacking Airplanes unacceptable behaviour I will try the : canNotTarget or canNotBeTargetedBy
unit attachment option.... though they seem not listed in
http://www.starlords3k.com/XOB.html overview of usable elements....

wc_sumpton

@ebbe

'canNotTarget' and 'canNotBeTargetedBy' would be placed on the 'seamine's:

   <option name="canNotTarget" value="fighter:bomber"/>
   <option name="canNotBeTargetedBy" value="fighter:bomber"/>

Just remember that ww2v3 rules allow 'isDestroyer' units to cancel 'canNotBeTargetedBy' which would allow 'fighter's and 'bomber's to attack 'seamine's.

Or just use 'canNotTarget' on both 'seamine's and air units. Since 'canNotTarget' is not effected by 'isDestroyer' this would keep both sets of units from attacking each other.

As to your other problem. The best solution would be to expand 'territoryEffect's to include 'airUnitCanNotLand' and would require a feature request.

Cheers...