Roger's Scenario Thread
-
@RogerCooper said in Roger's Scenario Thread:
@Hepps It may be the same. I maintain a long list of all scenarios and playable nations and play them at random, deleting the entry after play. Sometimes I play a scenario again with a different nation. A nice thing about TripleA is playing the same game with a different nation makes a different experience.
In addition, there is Global 40 and a Global 1940 scenario.
I'm not very interested personally in Global, but I think @Hepps was just correctly pointing out that the second one of these two posts is a duplicate of the first:
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/889/roger-s-scenario-thread/266?page=14&lang=it
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/889/roger-s-scenario-thread/280?page=14&lang=itThey both link to the same page and all I can understand is that not only do they refer to the same map, but they also refer to the same game, this one:
https://github.com/triplea-maps/global_40_house_rules/blob/master/map/games/Global_40_House_Rules.xmlMaybe you would prefer to delete the second post and edit most of what you wrote in there into the first one, then. All the points you made are not duplicative except only the "Some of the new stuff is hard for the AI to handle" and "The AI has problems with some of the rules" ones, which could be merged into a single sentence.
Or maybe you played two different games, and one was the game without Canada and the other one was the one with Canada, for the same map.
Since you are mentioning "scenarios" at the first post of this topic, which I don't believe is part of any TripleA nomenclature, maybe you should clarify whether you are reviewing maps or games. If maps, then one would expect to see only one post for the "Global 40 House Rules" map. If games, then one would expect to see two of them, but one of the two referring to the "Global 40 House Rules with Canada" game.
My understanding is that a "scenario" is a game, not a map.
@Schulz I'm not sure what you mean. The more the modifications, the better. Not like they are doing anything bad to the original anyway.
-
@RogerCooper Cool thanks... I may have missed something. Thanks for the response.
-
Fwiw the G 40 HRs mod gets updated periodically. Probably no major impact on the review, as there are so many possibilities one could use.
-
@Cernel As a long-time board wargamer I am used to using the term scenario. To me, TripleA is the game and the map is the virtual board that the scenario is played on.
When posting, I don't review my previous posts and see if I already played the same scenario.
The purpose of this thread is to give some exposure to the many different scenarios that TripleA can run, and their suitability for play against the AI. I am not trying to create a definitive set of reviews.
-
Name 270BC Cernel Variant
Description The Mediterranean into the time of the Punic Wars and the Diadochi
link
Good Points
- An interesting historical situation
- Beautiful unit art
Bad Points
- No victory conditions
- Low movement allowances does not reflect the sweeping campaigns of the period
-
Name Large Middle Earth
Description The War of the Ring on a large map
link
Good Points
- An interesting and varied set of units with many special unit & terrain effects
- Appropriate national objectives
- Most units are move 2, speeding play
Bad Points
- AI needs to be run at Hard level because of the many specials, which slows the game
- Unique units like Wizards and Nazgul are buildable
- Unlimited unit building is unlike the small armies described by Tolkien
- No sense of great numeric strength of Mordor
Note: If you play this with the AI use the "Terrain Effects Allow All Units" option are the AI will build units to attack mountain strongholds that can't reach mountain strongholds
-
Name World at War
Description World War 2 on a large map
link
Good Points
- Lots of conflict all over the map
- Reasonably well-balanced
Bad Points
- Slow because of map size (but better than other large map variants)
- No victory conditions
- Lots of ahistorical oddities on the map
-
Name Big World 2: Rise of the Axis
Description Big World Map with National Objective, National Advantages & Politics
link
Good Points
- Lots of interesting options
Bad Points
- The AI does not handle the politics correctly
- No victory conditions
-
Name WW2 Path to Victory
Description Global game on modified map
link
**Good Points
- Balanced game
- Russia and China harder to knock out
**Bad Points
- None really, this is a very good scenario
-
Name World War II Global 2nd Edition
Description Implementation of the second edition of the Axis & Global 1940 game
link
Good Points
- Faithful to the boardgame
Bad Points
- Favors the Axis
-
Name 2020
Description Alternate History WW3 pits Europe/Canada/Japan/Australia against Russia/China/India
link
**Good Points
- Standard rules set
- Not another WW2 game
**Bad Points
- Strategic situations lacks strategic tension (both sides are equal in strength) or operation tension (similar forces)
-
Name NWO 1915 LebowskiED
Description World War 1 in Europe on the New World Order
link
Good Points
- Balanced
- Interesting strategic situation with many options
- Some colorful WW1 units
Bad Points
- No victory conditions
- Board can get crowded later in the game
- Air power is ahistorically important
-
Name Axis General
Description V3 rules on the revised map
link
**Good Points
- Balanced
- Plays fairly fast
**Bad Points
- The AI has some problems with the neutrals, with the Americans putting to much effort into conquering neutrals while the Japanese focus on Russia rather than easy pickings in neutral Southeast Asia
- Everyone is immediately at war, despite the 1939 start point
-
Name Big World: 1941 - Factions(Allies)
Description Big World scenario with more nations, unit types and some minor map changes
link
Good Points
- Some interesting new unit types
Bad Points
- The Allies do not have enough income to overcome the Axis strategic advantage
-
Name: Cold War Asia: 1948
Description: The Chinese Civil War, the Korean War & the Vietnam War all at the same time
link
**Good Points
- Standard unit set
- Lots of conflict all over the map
- Reasonably balanced
**Bad Points
- Weird looking map
- Ahistorical conflation of 3 non-overlapping wars
- Not much effort to distinguish the differing capabilities of the combatants
-
Name Classic-Kremlin
Description Classic edition with some optional rules
link
**Good Points
- Fast-playing
**Bad Points
- The mega-stacks on the East Front
-
Name World War I 1914
Description Based upon Axis & Allies: 1914 Boardgame
link
**Good Points
- One round combat limit gives a trench warfare feel
- Unit set reflects WW1 conditions
**Bad Points
- Low movement allowance makes for slow game
- Odd territory boundaries and build rules make for very ahistorical strategies
-
@rogercooper said in Roger's Scenario Thread:
- No victory conditions
From the page you linked:
https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/World_At_WarUnconditional Surrender: Victory is achieved at any moment the enemy alliance owns only 5 capitals or less
-
Name World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition
Description Port of boardgame
link**Good Points
- Port of the Axis & Allies Global 1940 game
- Lots of interesting options
**Bad Points
- Favors the Axis
- Japan gets too strong
-
Name CTF2 Good Versus Evil
Description Fantasy Warfare on an abstract map
link
**Good Points
- Fast-playing even with Hard AI
- Challenging puzzle-like situation
- Balanced
- AI hard to beat
**Bad Points
- Bland, symmetric situation limits replay value
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