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

ebbe

@Cernel : okej, clear... but I wanted the Smoking Cobras expeditionary force into the game,

Brazils input might have been sponsered and small, but I thought it was enough to be represented ingame.... !! Their expeditionary force came late and was only 3 battaliions, 15,000 men... but fought upto italy. And their small navy and airforce did really good job on sub hunting and convoy protection...

Schulz

I would suggest setting up countries totally unplayable (no income collection, mobilization, relocating units etc...) until they join the war. I mean like how nations join the war in CrazyG's WW1 map.

"This country will join the war in round:x because of destiny" does not make sense to me either. Just because a country joined the war on a certain date is not mean the otherwise couldn't happen.

Also the game can be anachronistic too. Because the most enjoyable part is wondering "Where and how deep the Axis will advance on Russia, N.Africa and the Pacific?" That's why I think 1941 starting date is more interesting than 1942 regardless of the starting month. 1940 is also ok if starts after the Battle of Britain .

ebbe

Funny Bug appeared: In my scenario if you want to build a Battleship or Carrier you don't have to buy a hull when purchasing: but when the ship of choice is placed , it will appear as a carrier- or battleship hull.

In the next turn it will automatically be switched into a readybuild ship...
it worked fine but some testers had the bug/situation where the hull would remain, (as the consumeHull didn't work properly),*
and by this could add another ship for free every turn ..
woehahaha... evil...
I added now also a remove Hull so that it works for sure... 1.8 update added.

ebbe

@wc_sumpton @Hepps

TO REPAIR OR NOT TO REPAIR that is the question...

Okej, personally in my ideal map, repairing all constructions as well as 2 hit units is done by a pop-up at game start, so that one has the choice to spend PU's on that and certainely not done for free. .
For now constructions can be Repaired by this popup and Battle Units have the option to be autorepaired in the presence of a repairing unit.... for free?

There are situations that for example a battleship is involved in battle and automatically takes in the first hit to avoid loss of other navy. I like the consequence used in f.e. Hepps Total War where the ship gets a less powerfull damaged stand-in.

But if this ship would lay next to a home factory it would immediately be auto-repaired for free , in end of this turn or start next turn , depending on setting. That seems to out of ballance for me.

For this I started making a Repair Damage -token, which can be bought to repair 2-hit units. (in my case Battleship carrier geavyArmour and Heavy Battleship )

Works fine : I let a trigger replace the damaged unit and the repair token with a healed unit.... but with one exception: I don't manage to get it functioning in PLACEMENT PHASE, for BOTH sea and land units. ( to avoid too many options / units to choose from in Purchase screen.

And placementAnySeaZone' option only seems to work player connected, not unit. Any idea anyone?

ebbe

@ebbe okej,still continuing but at a slower speed.... .... fixed some minor bugs, got the repair system for carriers battleships and fortifications working... you gotta pay yo get this fixed,

no more easy first hit automatically on your double/triple hitpoint units
and ready for 1.9 update...but still having a challenge with one issue:

I simply one have a trigger to change ownership of some territories,
from neutral to active player... but cannot find the clue:

ebbe

@ebbe okej,still continuing but at a slower speed.... .... fixed some minor bugs, got the repair system for carriers battleships and fortifications working... you gotta pay yo get this fixed,

no more easy first hit automatically on your double/triple hitpoint units
and ready for 1.9 update...

wc_sumpton

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

I simply one have a trigger to change ownership of some territories,
from neutral to active player... but cannot find the clue:

<attachment name="triggerAttachmentBurmaChineseOwnership" attachTo="Chinese" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
   <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentAlwaysTrue"/>
   <option name="territories" value="Burma"/>
   <option name="territoryAttachmentName" value="TerritoryAttachment" count="territoryAttachment"/>
   <option name="territoryProperty" value="originalOwner" count="Chinese"/>
   <option name="when" value="before:chineseEndTurn"/>
</attachment>

Is this what you are looking for?

Cheers...

ebbe

@wc_sumpton thanks for the suggestion: I fixed it with a <option name='changeOwnership' value='X:X:false'/>

ebbe

@ebbe

Final issue that tortures my brains

-I like to have some territories in which Airplanes cannot land ...after battle and by this , not at start of a players turn.

like some remote territories that have to challenging terrain... (like Greenland) or small islands require first to build an airfield to be able to host bombers....for example... anyway...

So i could use a part of the Railroad approach, but then air units cannot fly over that specific "ruled out" territory...

would the only option be a -reset- for the territory after combat...? That would be too much coding and
then still it would be impossible to retreat over it.....

has anyone out here maybe a Genius idea / suggestion?

I like to implement it too in future maps with more micro level maps in which airfield-functions can be limited to few specific areas.

Hepps

@ebbe You could trigger the territories you want, to turn into water="true" after the combat moves then change back after the end of the players turn.

I haven't tested it. But might work

General_Zod

I thinks Hepps's idea should work for you. But I have a couple alternate possibilities you can try as well.

Try changeOwner with captured=true. This may treat the territory as a newly captured territory. Thus not allowing the air unit to land in it but can fly over .

Try to get creative with these. You should be able to alter these on the fly. Although this will be more code.

canMoveLandUnitsOverOwnedLand values: "true", "false", or "default". default setting is "default", and "default" means that archeType of war and allied can move into, while neutral can not

canMoveAirUnitsOverOwnedLand values: "true", "false", or "default". default setting is "default", and "default" means that archeType of war and allied can move into, while neutral can not

canLandAirUnitsOnOwnedLand values: "true", "false", or "default". default setting is "default", and "default" means that archeType of allied only lets you land units in the player's territories

ebbe

@general_zod @Hepps Thanks for your ideas! Hepps: again you are really a Oracle of "Out of the box" solutions... great!
I wonder what the " =sea temp -reset-" will cause for regular land units in the territory....... and I need to make a territory restriction for navy then , otherwise I might end up with a battleship stuck on greenlands Glacier with A.I. players...

the captured =true approach is interestesting too...
but indeed lot of coding to get working for all players......
or I might indeed temp. change ownership to a Dummy player with
"no landing" options in post combat phase, but could look weird when it changes colour then twice....
I give it a try too,....thanks !!!!

ebbe

@hepps @General_Zod ... okej....
Good thing: resetting works with the sea or a new terrain feature NoAirlanding...
but: if I make a trigger/switch just before the "Place No Air remaning" delegate It will NOT effect any air units that are allready inside the territory arriving in combat or noncombat movement....
so by this it doesn't work unfortunately....

even if I set the trigger between these two steps... hmmm....
seems like the check is done earlier: I guess I have to try another way....

ebbe

@JOSEPH-PRINCE @Schulz
so progress is slow here: little spare/hobby time left in this family at the moment
Concerning SPAIN.... and other
hypothetically Pro Active Major Minors
I choose this way now:
-starts as true neutral....( as they didnt' allow Axis troops moving through)

-Spain will not join the Axis at start as it was very depended on
USA- oil and trade import..... BUT:
if the Axis will conquer 4 Allied capitals..
( so like: Paris..allready in the pocket..and let's say: Moscow leningrad & stalingrad...) **
they might dare to join the Axis at a annual 1:4 ratio.**
turning Light yellow ....
unlike Turkey Spain has 0% chance to join the Allies,

If they do.. and Gibraltar is Axis controlled by that time..
they will receive this territory automatically.......

sorry Joseph prince: no space in my version for many
territory divisions... Schulz's mega version I saw a glimpse from might have ....

jkprince

@ebbe I made a Panzer 1 tank a while ago which you could use as the spanish light_armour

Schulz

@ebbe While it is true Spain,Sweden or Turkey probably would never join the war when the outcome was uncertain but on the other hand if they will only join when the winning side becoming clear then it means they will have no affect of the outcome.

For example Germany would need these nations more in the middle of war instead of after defeating Russia and still holding Paris.

I think neutrals should actually join the loser side if you would prefer playability over realism. It would be more interesting to see if (for example) they could turn the tide of the war when Axis seems losing rather than seeing them joining Allies after Allies victory seems imminent.

Also I would suggest adding more orangeish tones to Spain and its units. Reducing the brightness also might help.

ebbe

@schulz @JOSEPH-PRINCE

-Major minors joining loosing side: true , interesting from a gameplay point... I will integrate that too....as alternative behaviour

-player colour Spain: Well, I am running out of colours, haha..
I have Japan with reddish/warm yellow.. so... and yellow seems so natural for the Spanish I 'll finetune that....

-yes the panzer I would be good! I'll fix that.....

Hepps

@ebbe If the Minor nations don't earn anything or have any additional units by the time they join the war... they are a pretty inconsequential factor either way.

A spattering of units and 1 Inf. per turn shouldn't really be decisive in the outcome of the game.

ebbe

@hepps ....fact! that is why they are minors, haha... anyway...
They'll receive an annual reinforcement of 1 infantry once joining, which is to keep them ingame/alive and acceptable realistic...

The impact will more be on territorial strategy then on total units balance,......
Spain or Turkey, (especially the later due to the Dardanelles opening for navies) ...joining changes tactical options in the European theater in a interesting way... I think
but yes, this is lot of work and discussion for a tiny Minor with minimal impact.. that's why I consider working on this project a hobby....

ebbe

@ebbe

still puzzling to find a workable way with some creating No Landing territories for Air...no working solution yet , despite all good suggestions and tips... I put it in the freezer for a moment..

next thing to tackle: OUT OF SUPPLY / ATTRITION..

I want to have Victory Cities in my Map, suffer the consequences when compeltely surrounded by enemies and while under siege. For now I see often A.I. as well as human players stack a lot of units, mostly infantry in their Victory cities... without consequences.

I lie to implement Out of supply/Attrition:
so when a players Victory city is surrounded, and the player will not or cannot break the siege in his following turn, the will be a negative impact , affecting his manpower in that city.

I still doubt which would be the bet way to have this done:

could be by a Battle-penalty symbolising that the surrounded unit gets weaker by time...

-or maybe more realistic: by giving them some random extra hits each turn as long as being surrounded....

I was trying something with a Attrition unit,
that will be placed when VC besieged... attacking the units with a AA-style attack....
too much work and issues to work that out properly I noticed..

Anyone other ideas?

Yes, I keep it limited to VC's as they are small and often used for stacking..
and it would implement some code to involve all VC's ..
and I have allready massive number of trigger attachments in my map....
(I do not see a way to fix it for all isolated/surrounded territories either ) anyway all ideas / tips welcome....