Azimuth's Trilogy - Official Teaser Trailer
-
@thedog Oh, Ok. Quite hypocritical TMHO, but OK, I guess it's more about the emotional perception in th US.
If I reach once the point where I would consider requesting my map to be pulled into the game, I'll change those naval bases for something else.
Thank you for informing me.
-
@azimuth how does one end up fully deleting those files? they aren't even in the "recycle bin"?
Anyway, excited to play Ironclad with its additions, gonna download it now.
I really ought to get back to work on my own fictional arheic-wars map once summer is in...
-
@jkprince Well, this shows well how deep I had no idea at all of what I was doing :beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes:
There is an optional game property "Danube Axis States Side With Italy" that I added especially for you, don't miss it
-
@azimuth Nice! Yeah, players on Italy will want that extra bit of relevance so we can be helpful on the eastern front
I made a pull request on your github which replaces some of the unit portraits and also includes 3 new unit type ideas which could go in Fall Blau: Recon, Torpedo Boat and Mobile Artillery. (former two based around the Recon movement phase, latter one based around Mech Inf's "Assault Guns" ability)
-
@jkprince Well, I personally dislike Italy to go to the eastern front, I appreciate the gap between major and minor powers as a core game component and I am more trying to make it relevant in the Mediterranean (I kicked out the Germans from there), with a key (perhaps ahistoric) role in the interactions with Vichy and Spain. But I added the option based on your previous comment, because it is always nice to try other ideas and strategies.
Thank you for your units icons! So now, I need to figure out: if I accept your request, it will update the folder in my computer as well?
Regarding new units, this was clearly a choice from my side since the beggining to stick to the original ones, but with more abilities and renewed interactions (I don't really like the OOB mech and tacs, feel like duplicates). I was mostly inspired by @BaronMunchhausen extensive work on revamped units rosters (but he might reject this paternity because I probably went to far from his ideas, because of engine limitations and personal tastes
)But in later developments or "extensions", why not.
I really like your idea to have the arty changed when boosted, but this is currently impossible, isn't it?
-
I did not get the Fall Blau game (but it is listed in the selection).
The first thing which I noticed is that I don't understand why you have the typical TripleA maps distortion in a map whose projection makes them all the more obvious.
In particular, I'm talking about the fact that going from Japan to the Western United States by sea is faster by going through Midway than by going through the Aleutians, whereas it should be the other way around.
This is the shortest path between Tokyo and San Francisco:
TripleA has plenty of maps based on equirectangular or similar projections which have huge distortions (World At War comes to mind), lengthening distances closer to the poles, and I was assuming a map with this projection would be largely safe from that phenomenon.
Did you do it in order to keep it closer to the original World War II V3 (indeed having such huge distortions)? Is it worth it?
Anyway, I would suggest splitting SZ 57 in two parts, western and eastern, Midway being in the western part of course, also on the account that Midway is actually nearer to Japan than to the United States so at least avoiding the opposite seems due.
-
@cernel Thank you for your interesting comment.
Sea zones are on of the thing I wasted a LOT of time with... This probably comes from the initial goal I had NOT to change anything about territories and connections. The original game is pretty much balanced in this regard, and to my personal opinion, it has the ideal scale to serve the fun of its mechanics. I am not a big fan of global for this reason (amongst others) and custom maps that add a lot of extra territories kind of loose the soul of the game (which is an abstract game after all). So I was very reluctant to change the sea zones, and was forced into it mostly because due to to the projection change, some connections were impossible without making very distorted and ugly zones, that also hampered the legibility of sea movements.
When I started to change the original sea zones I also forced myself to keep exactly the same number (66) and it is only recently that I gave up and added 3 extra ones - for graphic reasons mostly, because the Pacific is so huge - that would most probably never be used but make the map a bit more pleasant to look at.
I made very complex calculations to have them allowing (or not) some specific actions in the game and having more or less a comparable superficy (with some few exceptions).
I didn't really consider distance reality as a parameter in this equation. Because it is already so wrong in so many places. Except for few things I really disliked in the base game (like US able to reach Morocco or Guadalcanal from their coasts in one turn).
But in the end, your question (Is it worth it) is perfectly valid and perhaps I chose some sort of middle way that is worth than the original, and still unsatisfactory on many points.
If I had to restert it from scratch, I would definitely use another approach for defining the SZ.
And yes, I didn't include Fall Blau for now, still too experimental. Its mechanic is now working but it needs a lot of fine-tuning to make it really playable.
-
@azimuth said in Azimuth's Trilogy - Official Teaser Trailer:
And yes, I didn't include Fall Blau for now, still too experimental. Its mechanic is now working but it needs a lot of fine-tuning to make it really playable.
Don't forget to remove it from the
map.ymltoo.I definitely assumed it was intentional and guessed something like you said. Anniversary is not even the worst in this regard. In particular, the German - Russian front is a lot more crazily distorted in Revised (and v4).
At the end, it seems like you ended up with something for Anniversary like Pact of Steel is for Revised, map wise.
I've not actually tried the game yet: just looked at it.
Why 1942 instead of 1941 as the basis? 1941 is much more popular (though I don't like the anachronism of having Barbarossa and Pearl Harbour on the same turn).
-
@cernel what happens if it stays in the map.yml? Does it create some bugs?
Well, for this exact reason :beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes:
Because if the game really wants to start with Barbarossa, then US and Japan should be neutrals, East Indies can hardly be considered as British territories and I don't like all the meta linked with politics (again, personal choice). Also I don't find it funny to replay Barbarossa and the Japanese conquest (with the mechanics of AA, I mean). The "what if" starts for me in 1942.
But more pragmatically I assume I never really played the 1941 scenario and discovered it was so popular only when I started reading these forums (after I started developping this map).
-
@azimuth Search engines can block the site if swatiskas are used. Replace them with the Iron Cross.
-
@rogercooper done. It's now possible to play Nazi Germany and pretend it's not Nazi Germany
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login