Mega New Elk WIP

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I mean to me this seems sensible, although it is also a novelty, since in the vanilla game a major factory is downgraded to a minor factory upon trading hands, but the only way a factory can be damaged in that game is via the SBR mechanic. Also outside the first turn G1, the capture of a major factory is somewhat rare. It happens on France, then Moscow/India/Berlin etc but for the game at that scale (g40) a lot of times that's pushing well into endgame territory.

So if we introduce the concept of damage that needs to be repaired as something that can crack off as part of the ground game and happens much more regularly, there may be knock on effects there. I worry a bit for unintended consequences, but I think it could work well if implemented as a general rule. The edge case would be where defender abandons factory, attacker has to decide whether it's worth the 3 PUs to shut down opponent's placement (likely, opponent would generally repair in the case of SBR so a bit of a wash) but then on the clap back or deciding whether that is worth it to reclaim. Or if all factories can be bombed to twice the value after that, having factories that are disabled continually might influence the back and forth calculus on whether it's worth it to capture such a spot and risk just the money sink. I mean spot worth 2 PUs but potentially an albatross of 6 in repair. Of course nothing says one has to repair them, so at the basic level, if we're still just going off production value, taking a territory is still going to be a net gain, and it's only if one is trying to influence the placement/repair dynamic that the money involved starts to drift a bit. Still the values there are relatively low. I worry a bit about introducing too much variability through the novel stuff, but this seems like it could work fine, and it fits the theme.

I guess the logical extension would be "but what about the Bases being damaged in such a way too?" or like for a scorched earth mechanic perhaps, which could be similar at the controller's discretion. I think this could also work, but again I worry about biting off more than I can chew, so I would probably put the fork in it, as potentially worth pursuing, but may need refinement in the finer details. One would think computer repair is more predictable probably than what a human player might do, but it's also kinda variable. I think we see sometimes the computer will not repair immediately, other times it may blow it's whole wad on repair, or repair when that's not really needed, or maybe screw itself by not repairing enough hehe. It's a bit difficult because on the one hand it would be much easier to use v3 style factories I think, but the scale of the game otherwise and the g40 roster and bases being involved etc. that all suggests the g40 factory scheme. It's a bit weird though cause like you pointed out, in that game factories/bases are not meant to be completely destroyed, but then the game will sorta violate it's own stated thing with the Chinese auto-removing a factory on those territories if they recapture a spot that starts controlled by Japan, but which is original owner China there.

The territories at issue in vanilla G40 would be Manchuria 2, Shangtung 2, Kiangsu 3. Korea is worth 3 but China cannot move on that spot. Of course they also can't attack into adjacent sea zones with their flying tigers, they have different treatment for convoy blockade stuff etc. Pretty involved. On that board there are no starting Japanese factories along the coast, they have to be built. Here they're already in place. In G40 where China can move is indicated by the double control roundel, shown in that game drawn on. Again sorta involved since in this game starting control/current control is indicated by the paint over color. We do have a control flag option which could be used to show original control in the way the capital puck remains unchanging, but to me that is visually very busy. Also sorta an artifact of the China rules I'm not sure we really need, since we're treating original control somewhat differently here for liberation when faction is without a original capital (eg how stuff is working for them and France right now.) Anyhow, I think I like it though, it feels like it's almost there.

We could trial it see how it works out, or what the computer is doing with it. Provided it doesn't mess up the overall thrust of the thing, I think it's an easy concept to get the head around, capture = damage. It might make sbr somewhat less impactful, but already the computer bombs an alright amount, just on account of more SBR units being around that can do it round to round hehe.

For technology, I think we just need to ditch the standard tech development for now. Also since if the G1 tech phase is when stuff is getting triggered in for like the VCs and tt properties etc using that method. I think that was the issue I was having earlier when if the German player was assigned HardAI, the VCs weren't triggering in for the display, whereas if I started the game as human and had it initialize, then I could save and assign to whatever and all the stuff would show up. For now though, I would just go no tech, but it needs to initialize I think to do all other stuff right?

There some standard techs development advances from G40 the Computer uses well, others not at all. Computer also won't purchase based on the tech advances it has already unlocked. So for example, faction X might roll super subs tech development, but then won't buy any subs. Or they roll radar, which is actually not too bad in terms of something AI can make use of, since it's more passive, but then won't buy any AAguns. Techs that are more useful, stuff like Jets, Long Range Air, Heavy Bombers etc, mainly because all nations tend to buy aircraft, but it's more an accident of their regular purchasing that those techs are useful. Paratroopers it whiffs. War Bonds and super production is uses well, but it's a total mixed bag there. I think for now better not to have development, and to introduce it later with stuff sorta designed around a token scheme and more techs that are universally decent, whether for the human player or computer player.

Anyhow point of the digression being, maybe there is an Industrial tech advance which limits the amount a player has to spend on repair, but not sure we should key the basic thing off that. I think if we can see it working in the no tech game, then we know it probably works alright generally, like proof of concept, after we can then consider what sort of Factory type Techs might be involved, once we know it's working. Right now the rail +1 is tied to operational factory, so it really depends on whether the computer will do it consistently, and not goof their movements too hard as a result of the repair needs. Human player will know what's going on so they probably will make better decisions on the fly

[wc_sumpton]

@black_elk said in Mega New Elk WIP:

For technology, I think we just need to ditch the standard tech development for now. Also since if the G1 tech phase is when stuff is getting triggered in for like the VCs and tt properties etc using that method. I think that was the issue I was having earlier when if the German player was assigned HardAI, the VCs weren't triggering in for the display, whereas if I started the game as human and had it initialize, then I could save and assign to whatever and all the stuff would show up. For now though, I would just go no tech, but it needs to initialize I think to do all other stuff right?

I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing this. I can switch off tech in "Game Options" (Tech Development is unchecked), set Germans to Hard AI (I can set all players to AI) and I will still see the VCs and also the VC count column. But if you are having this problem, the "Tech Development" can be check and everything could be keyed off the first German purchase. No problem.

Cheers...

[wc_sumpton]

@Black_Elk, @beelee

mega_new_elk_1940.xml
Added Germans purchase to territory setup
centers, name_place and pu_place still working on Azores Is.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

Must have just been some weirdness in my folder then. I may have goofed somewhere when updating the individual files last round. I'll grab the next from the git see if I can get it figured.

ps. yeah not sure, I'm struggling to reconstruct it from the more recent. Probably I edited a file or let one slip, wouldn't put it past me hehe. I'm sure I'll sync up when I grab the next git iteration.

I think for the game notes I would clip everything except for the current changelog and just have something like "Work In Progress." Current notes are an artifact of porting the global game on top of the other one, but the Veq notes there reference rules and map specifics and change notes that don't apply. I think it might be nice to keep the structure though. Or similar wording, but it refers to lots of unit types or mechanics as 'new' which wouldn't be here, so I can probably just type something out. Put N/A or list whatever has been changed from the standard G40, rather than what was changed in G40 from previous boards. Then just add to the bottom. Example might be like in the units section. Veq's notes and refer to changes from the previous standard boards or stuff that was new from that perspective, so instead of listing new units like mech and airfields, it would just have the Factory Rail base +1 movement described with similar wording

"Units These changes to units are things other than price/movement which you can see in the buy menu.
[... and then it has]
Airfield: Any air that start their turn on the ground territory with an airfield get +1 movement points. Airfields allow up to 3 planes on that island to scramble (see Scramble section above). Airfields can be bombed, and if they have 3 or more damage then they do not provide the movement bonus."

for something that reads more like

'Factory Rail Base: Any ground units that start their turn on the territory with an operational Factory get +1 movement points.'

And if something works same as global that just goes unstated.

Or like where it mentions Politics in that section to say 'All nations start play at war' with the main bullet points there. For Victory Conditions whatever spread. For canals, whichever canals we kept (the standards from smaller boards Panama and Suez.) N/A 'not available' for anything that doesn't apply. Can always add to it later, or clarify what's going on once it's a bit more set.

[wc_sumpton]

@black_elk, @beelee

I have pushed capitals, centers, name_place, pu_place, vc and the base xml to GitHub.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

Just grabbed it

I still have the same issue with the zip giving a doubled or nested directory thing
mega_new_elk-master>mega_new_elk-master

I wonder if this could somehow be the issue? hmmm guess not. I did the same thing as last time, first extracting the folder manually, tried it both ways. If I select human for Germany the VCs will list and display.

If I click HardAI for Germany, the VCs will still list but won't display the visual.

That's after deleting the stuff that was in my downloaded maps previously, and redownloading from the current thing off Git. When I first download the zip, it will autoextract when tripleA fires up, but then for the game to list within tripleA, I have to copy out the contents of that nested folder and put it back in the downloaded maps folder with just the single directory. I think it probably happened initially when I posted that compressed zip of the map folder from drive. Basically to get the zip I first had to create an empty zip of the same name in this case 'mega_new_elk-master' and paste into that the folders called map, description, yaml preview readme etc. Otherwise it will reduplicate the folder inside a zip of the same name if I just right click and compress the folder into a zip. Pretty sure that's what happened there, but I still can't figure out why the VC display thing would be happening.

I wonder is it possible to create a new master with a folder name that matches the game name? Like uhd_wip_1940-45-master or whatever instead of mega_new_elk-master if maybe that will allow us to sync it all up at once? For me makes sense to have those match, so the name in the list would match the name of the directories under the hood.

[wc_sumpton]

@black_elk

The graphic display has not caught up. Your second picture shows the count of all victory cities, even though at this point the "stars" are not displayed. Because the setting is HardAI the engine has devoted its resources to computing Germans move. If you select the "Territory" tab and mouse over Netherlands, you will see that it is a "Victory City". While preforming the combat move, the display will refresh, and all the stars will appear. This is an engine threading issue, but by the time Germans HardAI turns finishes, all the stars, graphical information will be displayed.

Again, this is a "display" issue. After the Germans HardAI turn, you can select "View History" and check the Germans "Tech Development" and all the setting triggers will have fired prior to the HardAI starting to compute its "Move/Purchase", as the AI first computes movement prior to computing purchase, this is one reason the AI takes so long to perform its first turn.

So, I don't think you have to worry about this issue. The setup has completed, all the information is there for the HardAI to use to compute it's turn, and the display will be there before the Human Russians can begin their turn.

Cheers...

P.S If you watch real closely, you will notice the absent of the stars when Germans are selected as "FastAI/Does Nothing AI". But here the AI computes much faster and the display is set quickly.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

Fascinating! I just had a Spock moment I guess as this is all fairly new to me lol.

I checked and they do indeed appear after a few turns. So I guess this is probably more to do with me just pushing tripleA to the outer limits by using such a large map baseline image and taxing the rig? hehe

I'm curious, if the sequence for initializing delegates is making the difference like if we had say initialized the capitals after the victory cities instead of before them, if those would then stall instead for display? or if say something else would then stall on display based on the listings? I don't know say like all the PU values or something, where those don't fully visualize on first turn if they came later in the list hehe. It's mildly amusing to me because my feeling before was that VCs were treated as this sorta accidental thing to a lot of the standard games, like that they'd just sort of float as a technical thing for determining victory, but less relevant for the actual gameplay in those cases. More like an afterthought in how the computer or even player would prioritize what they're going to do. So like in this instance, would indicate that tripleA computer player cares a great deal about the PU values, since it's trying to crunch all that before it moves or purchases, or like for Capital control same deal, it cares very much, but then perhaps for VCs, the HardAI is like 'well I don't care about them, since no one pays attention to those anyway' as if it could speak about what it's doing hehe.

Here at least they'll all be worth that 2 PUs and production capable, to sorta make them always relevant to the gameplay mechanics no matter what.

Or curious maybe for this we could just use whatever method to jumpstart their display, since ostensibly victory would be about controlling these VC, that'd they'd be highlighted like first to drop? Sometimes I have to watch for a sec as the map tiles in at various zooms or when panning around if I reset the map zoom display. But this was the first time I had seen the display stall out on the stars haha. Guess first time for everything

But now I'm just curious about it. Example, in standard world war II global, initializing delegates just does original owner and Kamikazes I think, but if we are trying to initializing more stuff during that phase with the variable lists, maybe the length of that trigger list compared to how many moves the hard is trying to calc to do the movement prior to purchase, it will sorta clip towards the end of that list?

I was unsure how this worked now, since in the file I was copying initially VC was listed as an option under territory attachment, like victory city =1 or whatever for all the stuff listed by a given territory, but the newer is organizing by variable thing, so still learning it as I open the stuff you lay down in notepad and try to reveal the mysteries to myself hehe. For the tiling thing I compared the tiles in the relief folders...

Standard world war 2 global Bung's is basically 7500px by 3200px with a tile folder 30 rows by 12 columns deep for each.

The UHD version is basically 11000px by 5000px, 40 rows by 20 columns for the tiles.

This current thing is ~16000px by 8000px, 65 rows by 30 columns deep for the tiles.

These last 2 are comparable in terms of the overall file size, example there 40 mb compared to about 60mb for the reliefTile folders, but the latter has many more individual tiles that it has to reconstruct and stitch together for the full image to display on screen. So probably a bit more heavy lifting there in terms of whatever my GPU is trying to do

To me having the the VCs visualize at launch would be optimal, even if it only effects the solo thing, as I'd anticipate people may use Germany's first turn (if controlled by HardAI) to study the map and try to parse what's going on generally with the view at a glance. Or I guess to take advantage of the slight delay there on HardAI's part to get their bearings. After G1 computer always seems to move at a much steadier clip, and as units sorta coalesce into stacks and consolidate across fewer tiles. For now this works fine for testing the computer behavior, I thought it must be maybe just the display cause was still seeing all the stuff in the stats bar. Didn't think to let it run it's paces and then check again, good looking out!

It may introduce confusion to see things suddenly change on USSR's first turn from what the player sees on G1 hardAi though, if there's a workaround we can use. I mean even if it may be more efficient for the HardAI to start crunching numbers instantly before the display updates in this way, but then I think I would still prioritize the users initial display, like whatever user is seeing upon first launch. Doesn't seem to be mission critical right now, as it catches up pretty quickly and then appeared as expected on the follow up Russian turn. That's a relief

Right on!

[wc_sumpton]

@black_elk

There is a lot here, let's see if I can simplify it a little. Before play can begin all territories (units, relationships, etc) needs to have a defining attachment. In G '40, everything is done at the attachment level:

 <attachment name="territoryAttachment" attachTo="Novgorod" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TerritoryAttachment" type="territory">
	<option name="production" value="2"/>
	<option name="unitProduction" value="3"/>
	<option name="victoryCity" value="1"/>
 </attachment>

Because of this, all information is presented at map drawing. In UHD '40 the territoryAttachment looks like this (after foreach, which can be seen in an exported xml):

<attachment name="territoryAttachment" attachTo="Stalingrad" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TerritoryAttachment" type="territory">
	<option name="production" value="2"/>
</attachment>

There is just enough information to get the territory drawn on the map, and triggers are used to adjust this territory information/attachment.
These triggers are called during a players turn, at which point a modern computer will fork processes into different treads. So even though the process for adding "victoryCity=1" has been completed, the map update process/thread may still be waiting to be executed.

Granted this is a simple explanation, it can get even far more in depth.

Cheers...

P.S You may have noticed that when Germans are AI @beelee 'Welcome' message does not appear. The trigger still fires, it can be seen in the "History", but the AI ignores pop ups.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I just realized that all I have to do is click into the game tab right after starting it up and click 'show current game'

Then everything for the display instantly pops up.

If I forget they'll sorta stage in over the game round anyway. I thought I was seeing stars, like the full VC ko heheh

ps. I would say from my last series that FastAI is still playing a stronger game than HardAI. It opens more effectively at least, seems more likely to trade and throw it's stacks forward, also just a smoother experience as it takes less time to make it's moves. It seems to attack and take territory somewhat more consistently during it's combat move, whereas HardAI seems a bit more preoccupied with it's non coms, or positioning to counter often leaving it's transports more vulnerable with floaters. For the opener FastAI just seems to play more forward using it's transports for amphib, or just generally trying to destroy more TUV as it goes.

Oh also, I think G needs a starting airbase in Mecklenburg to cover their Baltic safe zone with the scramble. Just so they have a bit more coverage vs the allied airblitz vs their main fleet. Leningrad provides it later on if they can take and hold, but sometimes computer really takes it's time on that one. Both HardAI and FastAI may take, but then fail to hold, so I think they probably need a coastal AB somewhere closer to home in the baltic, just so they don't get wiped too hardcore from the air. Otherwise though the computer does a pretty good job of positioning on the water I think.

ps. I ran a game FastAI Axis vs HardAI allies to a dozen rounds

2025-3-25-UHD-WIP-1940-45_G13.tsvg

computer France got their revenge vs computer Italy, but then also had their purse snatched several times, same for China with Japan grabbing the bag. I think it may be hard to ever really get AI to latch onto the capital trade for cash situation. They'll sometimes decline to take a capital, even for a simple walk in, to trade like maybe 1 transport and 1 inf 10 PUs to take a capital worth 100 to the opponent. Maybe it would be better to dispense with capital rules altogether and instead frame them as generalized objectives. So like when a Capital is captured the purse is awarded only once, like the first time the Capital falls, then afterwards the game just sorta falls back onto more regular production values. But I think it's where say the computer can lose it's income multiple times that it starts to snafu. Computer USA was poised to drop on Italy I think but then Brits liberated Paris and they lose their production foothold, though they recovered by taking Libya and Southern France they pushed on Italy overland after the Italian fleet was sunk. Germany managed somewhat better since they took over the north first and tucked their fleet up to safety. Japan made like they were going to cut for Anzac with the sprawl, but then backed off and just went for the brawl towards the middle in China. It was amusing to watch, I'm not sure who will prevail. Will it be FastAI with it's reckless but relentless advance, or HardAI with it's more cautious calcs? heheh Seems like it might hinge on what FastAI G does right there. I may leave myself on the cliffhanger and spectate on the HardAI Axis vs FastAI Allies.

[wc_sumpton]

@black_elk said in Mega New Elk WIP:

Maybe it would be better to dispense with capital rules altogether and instead frame them as generalized objectives. So like when a Capital is captured the purse is awarded only once, like the first time the Capital falls, then afterwards the game just sorta falls back onto more regular production values.

This can be done. Thanks for providing your recent play through. There were a couple of turns that Chinese were not receiving any reinforcements. So, I've made some changes. Also, French buys it's own factory_minor for Gabon, even though it still possesses Algiers.
The game starts with the Allies having more production, as they should, but they also start with more units. Germany begins with 50 production, and can get to 100+ with the fall of France, but two off the biggest producers, Americans and British, both at over 120, go back-to-back, with China, another allied player, between them. Without a more balanced production a balanced starting unit count/TUV seems to heavily favor the allies. So much so that by round 6/7 both America and British are both in France.
Hope you understand what I'm saying.

UHD WIP 1940-45 1.38.1.zip
airfield added to Mecklenburg
NoPU Purchase changed from 2 territories to 3
NoPU Purchase requirement change so Chinese are not being skipped from receiving reinforcements.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

Yeah this was my sense too, that Axis would require much more starting TUV to offset. Or that Axis would begin the game in round 1 with significantly more starting cash than the Allies, or both. Also since I've yet to observe the computer purchase infrastructure, we can probably assume it never will, short of dramatically altering what stuff costs, something I'm reluctant to embrace since I want the purchase screen to remain familiar. I think we could try giving AI a free per turn or something similar to catch them up round to round, and just let the player purchase, or just stage in a few more. Perhaps could be randomized with a roll, example 1-3 AI gets a factory, 4-6 they get an airbase, or something along those lines, since otherwise computer probably would never buy a base hehe. Maybe for factions with no Capital or purchase that roll is for a Fighter or a couple Artillery piece deployed using the china rules.

I also agree that the turn order heavily favors Allies especially with the US lead/UK follow type turn order, although I think keeping the turn order sequence will help for familiarity, so prob Axis need the leg up for parity.

My initial thought would be that we have the Allies begin the game with only half of their starting production value in starting cash. Then Axis with their full production value in starting cash.

Example if Russia has 110 PUs to start in production their cash on turn 1 is 55 PUs.
If Britain has 120 production their cash is 60 etc. Whereas if Germany has 50 PUs in production their starting cash is the full 50 on G1. I guess the rationale would be that the aggressors are already on the war footing on their first turn, whereas Allies have to scale up first. I think we could tinker with the totals just so they're all even, not having to round down or up. So if Britain is 121, we just find another spot to raise so it can be 122, or another spot to lower so it can be 120, just to keep that clean for the quick read in the stats columns. Basically the idea that for starting cash Allies are at 1/2, Axis at 1/1 for that, since it's pretty straight forward.

Makes the German haul from France slightly smaller in that case, but I think having Allies with less cash to burn on the first turn, and Axis with more cash to burn, should be pretty impactful. It might be enough to even the scales, or at least get closer.

Then we can consider raising Axis starting forces or production incrementally. Since we lowballed everything initially for production there are a fair number of territories that could be raised from 1 to 2 to pad the Axis totals. Basically in areas which are not trading hands initially to level it slightly. Example if we set the floor for Axis starting territory at 2 PU value rather than 1 PU that's a pretty big haul. That'd add another 15 or so PUs to Germany, I think a dozen to Italy, Japan something like 20 PUs. It's an abstraction to have Axis starting territory weighted more heavily, but I think it works for what the game is meant to do, where Axis sorta burst in the opener. Not that we need to raise them all at once, but gives a range for increasing Axis totals. They have more TUV at the outset to do a big flashy drive typically, so I think we could add more forces to their pile now that we got a sense for where their stacks like to position. Allies sorta more on the backfoot playing catchup and reacting to what Axis have done in their opening round, with less cash for the magnified builds.

Similarly if a territory is routinely captured by Axis the first turn from Allies or Pro Side Allies, I think more of those spots could also be at the higher value like 2 PU if we need more swing. So for example most of Metro France and North Africa or South East Asia could swing to Axis. The front line territories in the USSR or Balkans that Axis take over on the first turn, we could jump most of those to 2 and that would also pad the totals. But I think I'd start with just halving Allied starting cash and see how that effects the tilt.

Now that I'm caught up again, might be a good time to revisit the starting unit set up. In Alaska I think I had kept whatever Victory laid down initially, although in the standard Allies don't have anything up there, so I might nix. Axis could probably use a few more Air units. I'll take a look when I get home later tonight

[Black_Elk]

quick Q, do we know if there's a way to have armor blitz at the m+1? Like advancing across two enemy territories in the same blitz?

When testing the set ups, thus far I haven't been able to persuade the HardAI or FastAI to blitz at the m3 distance with their tanks. For example, if I blank the Eastern front of USSR units and give Germany a bunch of tanks on their starting factories, they will still only advance at M2, whereas under human player control they can advance another space. Example would be like from E. Prussia (with no enemy units on the path) could blitz to Estonia, but here they'll always stop short at Latvia. Curious if the blitz is something that's set somewhere or if we can get it working at further distance somehow, cause that could shape where starting units are best placed.

Since I had reconsidered what G1 is meant to reflect (the whole idea of first turn =recap turn) I think it makes sense for us to set it up such that Computer Germany with blitz forward to basically their Sept 41 lines or something close to it.

So like for this image, that G1 would have them basically between the Yellow/Orange, G2 follow up closer to the Purple/Green.

Right now they will advance to the July 41 line since that's basically the M2 distance from their starting position. Although if we could get the tanks/mech to dart around at M3 from the factory spots we could probably get something that is caught up out of round one. Meaning that at least J1/G2 would both be more into the 1941 frame.

Similarly if on the France side of the board, the tanks could strike at the M3 distance off the starting German factories, I might be able to cajole the Computer Germans into taking Brittany and Poitou on G1, like if I removed the starting factory from Normandy to clear the blitz path. Currently they wont do that though, cause they stop up at M2 with the tanks.

[RogerCooper]

@black_elk Does TripleA support the possibility of multiple move/combat phases?

[Black_Elk]

@rogercooper I'm not sure, but that could be an interesting idea, like to have a double combat phase, with a specific blitz phase. I remember at one point thinking it would be cool if we could do something like a same time TripleA, sorta how RiskII handled it's same time, but I could never figure out how to set such a thing up.

[wc_sumpton]

@black_elk said in Mega New Elk WIP:

When testing the set ups, thus far I haven't been able to persuade the HardAI or FastAI to blitz at the m3 distance with their tanks. For example, if I blank the Eastern front of USSR units and give Germany a bunch of tanks on their starting factories, they will still only advance at M2, whereas under human player control they can advance another space

By rule, the attacking tank may move through (blitz) an unoccupied enemy controlled space, as long as that space is the first one moved into, the next space move into may be friendly or enemy controlled. And this is how the AI is programmed, if the adjacent territory is enemy controlled it will attempt to move through it and end its movement in the next territory entered. If this first territory entered is allied controlled it will continue it movement until it enters the closet enemy territory, movement allowed, Blitzing is only checked for the first adject territory, so no you will not be able to get the AI to "blitz" 2 territories, or move 1 territory and blitz the second territory.

Cheers...

[wc_sumpton]

@rogercooper said in Mega New Elk WIP:

Does TripleA support the possibility of multiple move/combat phases?

Yes TripleA will support as many Tech/Purchase/Movement/Combat etc.. They even can have the same name as the engine will move through each step as they are listed. The problem comes when you want triggers to fire off of certain steps, then each step should have a unique name.

Cheers...

[wc_sumpton]

@black_elk said in Mega New Elk WIP:

I remember at one point thinking it would be cool if we could do something like a same time TripleA, sorta how RiskII handled it's same time, but I could never figure out how to set such a thing up.

Something like "Movement/Battle check if battle won, if won reset/Movement/Battle etc.. for maybe 10/15 turns. If a battle is lost, set all movement to 0. Not that impossible.

Cheers...

[Black_Elk]

@wc_sumpton Ok cool that's sorta what I was figuring was going on. In that case I think the goal should be just to hit that first line in yellow, which we can achieve with the regular tanks at M2 blitz

For France, I think we can say that there G1 is modelling May/June 1940 till basically the end of the year, since the eastern front would reflect late summer 41 with the German invasion of USSR being compressed into that same opening 'Recap' turn.

With this date in mind for the opening fireworks display, I think we can just assign control of Calais to Germany on the first turn, put 2 tanks or mech there and then HardAI will reliably blitz to take Brittany and Poitou. I can then rearrange the forces in Southern France, so that the dominoes fall sorta how the line would look in most books. With Germany overrunning the North and West and the South being taken the follow up turn. It might make sense to see if we can get a German transport to launch units from their position in Libya to take over most of North Africa on G1, otherwise Brits tend to send their air to prop up Algeria, a bit sooner than we'd want a Torch to really crack off. This may take some tinkering since it's hard to test with edit mode. Usually the computer will fail to utilize it's new transports if I simply edit them in, I have to edit the entries to check, so it's a little hard to model on the fly. Though I think we can get it to work. Say either from sz 96 A or sz 95 A, like with a transport or two to use on G1, and then they might have a bit more flexibility to reinforce North Africa.

Transport behavior is a little different between HardAI and FastAI, but I think I'd use hardAI since it's going to default to them anyway unless the player clicks in.

Since Germany routinely uses it's pair of Strat bombers vs the British fleet, I think it might make sense to give them another in N. Africa, probably a fighter or two on the new AB we gave them as well. I think I will empty the Soviet front line, move some of the German forces more forward there, since we don't have to model the one round delay anymore if I do the whole recap concept for the first turn.

I'll play around with some stuff when I get home in an hour

[wc_sumpton]

@black_elk said in Mega New Elk WIP:

Though I think we can get it to work. Say either from sz 96 A or sz 95 A, like with a transport or two to use on G1, and then they might have a bit more flexibility to reinforce North Africa.

Tried this in the XML, HardAI Germany retreats them to zs 97A. Fast AI goes after Gibraltar with one, the other is used to reinforce the Tunis battle.

@black_elk said in Mega New Elk WIP:

I think we can just assign control of Calais to Germany on the first turn, put 2 tanks or mech there and then HardAI will reliably blitz to take Brittany and Poitou.

These units reinforce the Paris battle. Brittany and Poitou are the only 2 territories left in France not captured/controlled by Germany.

UHD WIP 1940-45 1.38.2.zip
Calais changed to German control w/mech and tank
2 German transports in sz 96A

Cheers...