Mega New Elk WIP

[Black_Elk]

@beelee Ah yeah, that's right. So I think this might be because when I was eyeballing it, I had my screen at 1600p with font in windows at 150%, but we need to get it dialed for 1080p with font at like 100%, or ideally for both. I can fire it up this weekend and noodle around. Basically should be more straightforward with the Name place having some set coordinates to riff from, before it was just sorta jumping around cause we didn't have one. Original display didn't have the labels so didn't matter there, but here it would make a difference for sure. I'll knock something out and hit you up when I get done running some errands

[beelee]

@black_elk

Name and Place were capitalized so now I get this

should be a little easier to work with. Looks as if the names will have to slide left as you were saying

[Black_Elk]

@beelee Oh yeah I forgot the caps thing, that'd do it. I was using windows haha. Go figure!

For the screen rez thing, long as it looks good on your end should end up fine on mine. There can be sorta subtle changes in how a set graphic displays, like going higher rez the image may be slightly smaller, so I thought it was that, but prob just the capitalization thing

[wc_sumpton]

@beelee, @Black_Elk

Wow, looking good. But I still think you guys are going at it the long way. But OK.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

@wc_sumpton I agree it's more an issue of trying to use the little circular graphic and strongarming it for the other map which just used like decoration style place for all the bung labels. For this the advantage of having the PU place all keyed up to be at a fixed center, and the Name place, would be that then you can ditch or substitute the graphics for the simple text and it won't show up striking right into the drawn on label. Cause right now just has the same coordinates and I only quickly edited the graphic to lift that above. But if PU folder removed, and show resources PU is on to supply the regular txt, it'll show up inside the Name. The built-in text is nice because it scales like font vector, instead of the graphic which scales raster with the main map screen. At 50% view not an issue, but if going lower text prob scales cleaner for most, or can be enlarged for smaller view (map zoom.) Anyhow, just and idea. If the PU centers are all in a sweet spot, the graphic can be centered instead of offset as it is now. I was just doing it quickie so you could see how might look, and cause there was no name place in there.

[beelee]

@black_elk

Updated to git. You should have a clean folder to work with now. Added Chicago as a VC to test. Search "VictoryCities" in the xml and you'll see you just add the TTy where Chicago.

The vc.txt works for new coordinates. I tried an existing one and you can move them there too.

https://github.com/beelee1/mega_new_elk

[wc_sumpton]

@beelee

So, I see that you have "isInfantry", and the armor as "isLandTransport". I'm going to say the same thing I said to @TheDog, you going to pile 8 to 12 soldiers, including a machine-gunner on top of a tank and roll into combat with bullets flying at you. 8 - 12 maybe also towing an artillery piece. Them brave M-F'ers. Then what is the use of the mech_infantry? I can purchase 1 infantry and 1 armor which can travel 2 spaces and blitz or buy 2 mech_infantry les 1 pu that cannot blitz, cannot transport troops, cannot tow artillery.

Ahh... the point is moot as the is no mechanizedInfantry tech, so, those brave soldiers are still walking. I think it's safer that way.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

@beelee Cool digs, I was just rummaging around in the map folder to see what all was in there.

Here I combined the VC list from G40 along with some entries from GCD or removing any duplicates there, then making a couple substitutions.

I think one could add Chicago, but that is also very interior and not easily a contested location which Axis are likely to reach till the game is sorta over. Instead I'd maybe consider a spot that's more coastal? Or probably was just to test. Obviously they can be moved around to suit the desired play pattern for VC wins.

Here's a quick list of 42 that seem pretty good to me for Victory Centers, just to give a distribution across a distance sorta m2/m3 in clusters. I condensed a couple Dutch VCs to get Amsterdam and Batavia Java (Jakarta) in the there, in case of wanting to do Dutch mods maybe for earlier timelines. Anyhow, just something to ballpark it VCs. I'd think goal of turn 1 would be to get some changing hands quickly into Axis control for the balance.

Baghdad
Baku-Azerbaijan
Bangkok-Siam
Batavia-W.Java
Benghazi-Cyrenaica
Berlin-Cen.Germany
Cairo-Egypt
Calcutta
Cape Town
Chungking
Greece
Guadalcanal-Solomon Is.
Helsinki
Hong Kong-Kwangtung
Honolulu-Pearl Harbor
Iwo Jima-Bonin Is
Italian-Somaliland
Legos-Nigeria
Leningrad
London-S.England
Manila-Luzon
Moscow-Cen.Russia
Netherlands
New Delhi
Ottawa-Montreal
Panama
Paris-Cen.France
Ploiesti-E.Romania
Rio De Janeiro -Sao Paulo
Rome-Cen.Italy
San Francisco-Cen.California
Shanghai-Kiangsu
Singapore-Malacca
Stalingrad-Volga
Sydney Canberra-New South Wales
Tokyo
Truk-Coraline Is.
Tunis-Tunisia
Warsaw-Cen.Poland
Washington D.C.

I was not sure what you'd planned to do in terms of relabeling, so I just used the templet from before for that. If looking to cut the hyphen out of the current labels, I would probably use either the designation that's more familiar from G40 (say 'Bordeaux' rather than Gascony, for Bordeaux-Gascony, since G40 has a TT named Normandy-Bordeaux, it's likely more familiar to use Bordeaux). Or otherwise to use the more specific designation of whatever City or smaller region included in the name. Some TTs had more a combo two regions in one TT name. So say New York-New Jersey, might just be New York or whatever. I think generally would be more compelling to use a familiar Metro sometimes, as opposed to something more Generic like N. or S. or E. W. Cen. whatever which I sometimes used. Mainly to avoid the issue where a player unfamiliar with the geography sees smaller tile and associates it with the larger region. So for example thinking Poland is too small, when that tile is actually just Metro Warsaw, and Poland is the half dozen or so TTs surrounding it. In each case there are some issues with choosing just one name sometimes.

For example TT called Prague, might also be called Czechia, or it might be called Bohemia, I mean probably now that everyone is playing Kingdom Come Deliverance 2, there's a bit of a Bohemian pre-renaissance going on right now hehe. But you know what I'm saying I think, sometimes compromises would probably be made if trying to display a label that fits nicely, favoring whatever name is familiar and also has fewer characters in the name total. I had avoided giving this too much thought for the other one, since it was decided fairly early to just sorta nix the name display in favor of PUs. That could work here as well with the line in the map props, though if trying to get it all dialed might make sense to just work with the displays up while trying to sort the place for it.

I dropped one VC in Rio, just to have one in South America. I think it should work alright for a spread. Could substitute or add, maybe Vancouver if you want to pull Japan into an Alaska campaign. I'd highball it

[beelee]

@wc_sumpton

oh Idk I'm just focused on place. Try and get it up and running. The xml changes were mostly made a year ago. I don't even remember what all I did

Think I mostly just got rid of politics, everyone at war.
Changed to the later start date so France doesn't have any dudes.
Got rid of Objectives.

Think i used G 40 as the base and removed the rules Elk didn't want and then added all of The Dog's stuff over for territories basically.

Hell Idk lol

Early stages Take a while to get it dialed.

I've got it in Notes now though

[wc_sumpton]

@beelee said in Mega New Elk WIP:

and then added all of The Dog's stuff over for territories basically.

Yea... little paw prints all over the place.

Cheers...

[beelee]

@wc_sumpton said in Mega New Elk WIP:

Yea... little paw prints all over the place.

That's how most people use triplea. Copy other peoples shit

[Black_Elk]

Yeah totally hehe. My thinking was the barest of bones first, then could add stuff back in as it goes along. Sorta the hackjob Frankenstein approach, to get the roster and the g40-ish thing going on, but then was also trying to the aesthetic there, cause labels on gives a pretty different vibe. I can't really think of a way to match out the labels with the double tone thing, short of like typing them out. It could be done fairly quickly but I'm not sure we ever actually determined the font choice he used. Couldn't find it in my GIMP plugins, alas. But then there are some other options too down the line, like we go try transparencies as well. Or making the little circles and whatnot slightly smaller, could options there. For just seeing what the Fast/HardAI does with it, can add in a large purse to start and see how it's building out under the g40 with the cash involved. I suspect it will buy quite a few bombers and such, but then also each Ai nation has it's own purchasing that it tends to do. Anyhow, should be easy enough to riff and sorta tease out different ideas to add on top. At some point down the line.

[TheDog]

@beelee
@wc_sumpton has a point about mech infantry, you need to find a balance for including/buying them.

Mech infantry/Inf-Motorized in GCD

• For Japan and Pacific-Allies, I removed Inf-Motorized, as the Player & AI did not buy them, also Japan used most of its trucks for supply.

• For Germany, Italy, Britain, USA Inf-Motorized can

  • Blitz if stacked with Armor
  • Get Combined Arms support of +1 Atk from being stacked with Armor or Bomber-Tac
  • Produced from Base-Camp, good for moving around Africa

So are they worth the extra 1pu over infantry?
For me, for Germany & Italy attacking east, yes, the rest is situational.

[TheDog]

@beelee
The minimalist in me see no reason to display the TT or SZ name/label on the map, usually its hidden under a mass of units, also it is on the status bar.

Unless, you are going to print the map as a map board then I would go to all the trouble that it entails of shoe horning the name within the TT/SZ.

Just my 2p.

[Black_Elk]

I'm ambivalent, I think it would probably be fine if I could do a line break instead of hyphen, but for the built-in text sorta just has to run in one long line. I think the text itself could probably be danced around, though for me the PU is the more important at a glance. Text sorta more for flavor and to make it G40-esque though prob recommends some noodling.

Thought for units would just be the barest bones, like grafting G40 or some form of it onto the existing thing. So mech would just do whatever they do in world war II global, basic roster there. I think since standard roster has the ABs and NBs, that land base of some sort makes sense, and for that some form of simplified rail would be nice for m3. Just granting say the +1 bonus for ground units beginning their turn on a territory with an operational factory, but otherwise probably keeping all the ground the same. I think unit set up was more just to get some stuff down see how it filled out. I think other stuff probably just like a holdover from trying to port the one on top the other.

[wc_sumpton]

@thedog said in Mega New Elk WIP:

@wc_sumpton has a point about mech infantry, you need to find a balance for including/buying them.

Thank you, this reminds me of our conversation about the AA, which has gone the way of the Dodoo bird in GCD with the mech_infantry and submarines on the endangered species list.

TripleA, IMHO, is designed around the concept of each piece having a job. Though there is the bomber which can SBR, combat, and transport. But if it transport it cannot SBR or combat, so it can only do 1 job per turn. When jobs are shared between multiple pieces, then some pieces become useless. Tanks are land transports, so you do not need mech_infantry because now infantry can move 2 and blitz. Every unit can AA so you do not need AAA. Transports have isDestroyer, so submarines are used as fodder.

Why buy an AAA, you don't.
Why buy a mech_infantry, it cannot blitz, so maybe give it a buff with armor? But now infantry can blitz and move 2 les 1pu!
Why buy submarines, they can no longer sneak attack on transports?

I know, I need to get off my soap box, but one last comment. Each infantry unit represents between 1000 - 1200 soldiers, while each armor will equal maybe 100 tanks. So, you going to put a platoon of equipped infantry on a tank! Someone walking. If half the infantry are walking, then the tank should only be able to move 1 space, to allow the walking soldiers a chance to keep pace.

To me the logic just does not work. I know that soldier road abord tanks, but that's two or three, not ten to thirty.

Sorry, this is just one of the things I can't wrap my head around.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

I think the vanilla roster in G40 would work fine for this one. I mean it has the advantage of being extremely familiar, so then if that is the starting point it's a bit easier to riff on something more advanced there, maybe via tech or novel mechanics, or some form of different combined arms I guess. For this thing though, just sorta seeing if we could get the G40 features onto the jumbo board for some bones. Requires a different sort of production spread to make it more in-scale with a G40 I'd think. Hence sorta blanking the production back down, and then putting the high end a bit lower on this one 6 pu instead of 9 pu at ceiling, for the most productive tiles. Then reworking the rest of the spots back down from there.

Goal would be to get something that might service that idea maybe of tech token oriented game ala v3 NML style, but set more WW2 and using the more vanilla roster from one of those scenarios, or basically just world war II global, but reduxed for the larger map. I think m3 factory concept is pretty solid, not too hard to implement in a simplified way if the bonus is sorta universally applied +1. So tanks at M2, or Mech when paired with tanks might be able to move M3 into combat if starting their turn on factory, M1 units like inf or art would be able to operate at M2, but again only when positioned on that tile at the start of their turn, and if the factory is operational (under the G40 scheme for factory/base repair). It will would be fewer factories on the board overall and only two types Major/Minor, and with some limitations there to follow the vanilla scheme on how factories and such work in A&A, but I think once it's put together a bit more it should be pretty simple to see in operation there.

Basically just an analogy to the NBs and ABs, but handled via the factory so we wouldn't need an additional graphic to make it work. I would keep all the units essentially identical in terms of pricing and abilities to world war II global, so that when opening this one or UHD global, all the stuff looks more or less the same. Vanilla G40 roster as the basis, then other stuff possibly optioned on via techs or the like, but first to just get the reg stuff down.

[Black_Elk]

Here is a quick savegame using that last map file posted to the git the other night. I just used Edit mode to ballpark a control arrangement for a 1940-ish set up. To mirror the g40 in terms of who got what sort of neutrality treatment. Didn't have the VCs cause I didn't want to mess up the xml, but just to give a gist.

2025-2-28-Mega-New-Elk_1940.tsvg

Then the other one would be more like the Ozteas or a 41 or 42. A 39 could be more like the HBG's board, that sorta thing. I still like the idea of X files aliens and zombies at some point in 45, but that's surely getting in over my head lol. Here at the start, more to just crib the standards.

[Black_Elk]

Proposed adjustments from vanilla to support the playscale of this board.

Minor Factory restricted to territories worth 3 PUs or more
Major Factory restricted to territories worth say 4/5 PUs or more (something limited)
Operational Factory grants +1 movement to ground units

Universal rules for the Capital capture, following G40 - taking an enemy capital awards the purse. However, if the faction still controls a factory VC they may collect income and purchase the following round (fight till the bitter end option hehe).

When a Nation's capital or final VC factory is captured, then the standard China G40 rules apply for placement. Idea is to make what's happening with China rules in the standard thing a bit more uniform here. Applies to all factions. So France, USSR, Italy, any nation might end up in the same position once their last VC is taken. Liberation rules for teammates I think would just also follow the G40 rules on that, but I can see a situation where any territory that isn't a VC is treated as original owner neutral, and could go to whoever is holding it in case of liberation.

For production spread, and to accommodate those tweaks, I suggest the following PU adjustments

E. Prussia 3, Netherlands 3, Belgium 3, Oslo 3, Juteland 2, Silesia 2, E. Romania 2

Germany 150-ish PUs (these are all ballpark but trying to round up to get a few more 3 PU spots)

Rome 5, Milan 5, Naples 3, Venice 3, Istria 3, Sardinia 3, Sicily 3, Tripoli 3, Italian Somaliland 3, Albania 2, Benghazi 2, Tobruk 2, all the rest 1 PU

Italy 50 PUs

Iwo Jima 2, Saipan 2

Japan 80 PUs

On the Allied side, I think need to bump these

Kuybysev to 3 PUs, Archangel 3 PUs, Rostov 3 PUs

Soviet Union 150

Normandy 3 PUs, Marseille 3 PUs, Vichy 3, Algiers 3 PUs, Tunisia, 3 PUs, Gabon 3 PUs

France (in a 1940) would be at around 80 Pu starting, but with the Capital capture that's more a way to push Germany's starting cash after their opener for a fall of France timeline, so sorta swing to Axis there. Idea is to provide some option for Atlantic or Med fleet resupply.

Scotland 3, N. England 3, Egypt 3, Nova Scotia 3, Cape Town 3, Vancouver 3, Ottawa 3

British 140

To provide them a few option for Minor purchase and to support the fleets, but stretching the choice on which theater to build out.

USA production pretty feels good to me, they're at 160 I think, with a starting factory on the east coast should be about right.

ANZAC I would raise Guadalcanal to 3 PU, Melbourne 3, New Zealand 3 so they can be around 35 production and a backup option, secondary sea zone just to feel more viable or dynamic down there, or for Axis targets along that path, more south pacific stretch by Japan.

I would lowball Allied starting TUV across the board, and starting factories lowballed for both teams. Basically a cluster for each Nation's core should be sufficient, and then allowing them to build out the rest on the tiles that could support a minor/major or upgrade. Since the income is relatively high compared to G40, I think better to let the players, and especially Allies guide the pace on that. Factories at the standard G40 prices can be a bit of a sink there, along with giving the player a way to really shape the pattern through choice of minor factory builds.

Italy I think needs a Major in Milan to work, probably another minor as well to keep one pace with the placement. I'd say Venice and just keep them like a block. Italian player can choose to expand in other directions at their discretion via Minor factory purchase.

My thoughts for now, think that should work though. Pretty close at any rate

[Black_Elk]

Proposed Income collection for the board on this playscale...

So in order to maintain a more familiar amount of cash being spent per game round, I suggest we use Options > Resource Modifiers > 50% Income.

To calculate their cash per turn, player takes home 1/2 their production total during the Collect Income phase

Effectively this makes all territories worth 1 PU = .5, while still allowing us to preserve the whole integers on the board. So the map that way is really something between the base 0 PU spread of vanilla global and the base 1 Pu spread I had envisioned initially.

The number of units in play would not effect these totals, so it's not really maintenance, although it could be understood abstractly in that way. Here though the nations would not be slipping into the red over time as more TUV gets added round to round, instead it's just a simple way to bring the totals more in line with standard gameplay expectations.

I think for starting units, TUV on the board on turn 1, this should likewise be somewhat lowballed. So trying to take perhaps a similar number of units to what we see in the vanilla G40, and distribute them among subdivisions of that same spot on the new board. Example all the stuff in E. Germany in G40, gets distributed between Berlin, Silesia, Mecklenburg, Pomerania etc. The stuff in W. Germany gets distributed between those tiles. A single factory capable location on the G40 board, might be slit into 2 smaller minor factory sub divisions. That sort of thing

Current totals we end up with something like

Germany production 150 > 75 PUs
Italy 50 > 25 PUs
Japan 80 > 40 PUs etc

So a bit closer to the standard G40 scale there. Similarly for Allies you get numbers that are a bit more manageable given the purchase prices of units the standard roster.

ps. Using such a scheme, player challenge vs the computer or by sides could use a more extreme modifier, though I would suggest we try it at 50% to see how it feels at that level.