Simultaneous moves
-
So I found a rule set that allows simultaneous turns, speeding up the gameplay: http://axisandallies.wikia.com/wiki/Simultaneous_Movement
Is there a way I could make TripleA allow every player to move at once? Has anyone tried this before?
Thanks
-
@ajay-ramachandran I've never seen A&A played with simultaneous movement. It would be interesting though makes naval battles kind of odd. It would take a very large amount of changes to TripleA to allow something like that.
-
Larry Harris's new game has simultaneous movement. We will see how well that works.
-
@redrum would there be a way to just disable the turns? Or allow every one to move at once? The rest of the moves could be enforced manually.
-
@ajay-ramachandran The challenge is that you'd only want the moves to be "local to each player" until everyone is done then play all the moves out. That would take a pretty significant change to how the current engine functions especially from a live multiplayer type game.
-
Sounds like a pretty fun idea to let all players move their own units and then see what everyone else did. But how would the game engine determine who is to use attack stats and who is defending? Like if two enemy players move into an empty or neutral territory? Or would such a new system require a new single-strength unit stat?
-
@frostion Just the tip of the iceberg for this idea.... So many other questions come out of such a concept.
However, that being said... this idea really represents an entirely new engine. This is not a modification or feature of the existing engine... but would be an entirely new concept that would profoundly change most aspects of the way the engine works.
-
@frostion Yea I didn't think of that before, the rules book I found online has no mention of a solution to it too. That's weird
-
@frostion From a very basic standpoint, land battles would be based on the current territory owner would be on defense. Naval battles are more difficult and the article references mentioned something about each player can choose to be either attacker or defender. You also have to consider ordering of battle resolution if two enemies attack the same neutral or two allies attack the same enemy territory. Probably would either have standard order or randomize it each round.
-
@redrum I completely forgot about the fact that someone would already own the territory.
-
I wonder would happen with the current engine if turns were structured differently, for example have all players move and then all players fight. Would this break the engine?
-
@rogercooper I believe it would work as each nation still has its own combat resolution phase which it'll only consider OWN units as attackers. It might make sense to have all allies move but it would probably be weird to have both allies and enemies move before combat resolution.
-
@rogercooper I tried resequencing with the mini-map mod. The results were interesting. 0_1510627748263_Experiment.tsvg . I had the Russians launch an attack in the center and the Italians rush defenders in. TripleA resolved the Russian attack completely ignoring the Italian reinforcements and then ran an Italian counterattack. However, the Italian aircraft simply vanished during non-combat.
The Hard AI could play this, but it never attempted to reinforce an attacked area.
So a pseudo-simultaneous game mostly works in the current engine.
-
@rogercooper Kind of. Its not really simultaneous in the sense of actually playing any moves at the same time. Just doing all moves before doing combat so more of a re-ordering (still interesting but doesn't necessary make the game play faster). True simultaneous moves is much more difficult to handle given the engine we have.
-
@redrum Another sequencing thought would be random turn order. This would require engine changes, but not huge ones. For many mods, there is no clear-cut way to decide which nation should play first. Back-to-back turns would be a possibility, but the effect could be mitigated by having static units in the capital.
