Having completed the conversion of all the older scenarios, I am starting a thread specifically to cover my own scenarios and to review existing scenarios. I prefer to play as 1 country against the AI and so I will not review scenarios not playable by AI.

(All of Roger's maps will be pinned at the top of this thread! Feel free to edit or add comments Roger. edited by Prastle)
(Roger's link is located here for all of his vast repository.)
http://www.rogercooper.com/AxisAlliesTriple-AComputerVersion.htm

My first review is of Camp David-1967
Source: Experimental scenarios under Camp David
Gameplay: The units are typical A&A units. The Arabs have higher income and more units. The Israelis have better quality and the central position. The scenario is interesting to play. No victory conditions are defined.
Historicity: The 6 Day War does not mesh well with the strategic focus of A&A. The vital role of air power is lost with traditional A&A combat model. Jordan's lack of strategic depth is shown.

Name Age_Of_Sturlungs_0.0.3
Description13th Century Icelandic Civil War. I added victory conditions
Download
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/889/roger-s-scenario-thread/www.rogercooper.com/Age_Of_Sturlungs_0.0.3.zip

Game Blood and Iron
Description World War II on a world map
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/889/roger-s-scenario-thread/www.rogercooper.com/Blood_and_Iron.zip

Map Middle Earth-Fords
Download
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/889/roger-s-scenario-thread/www.rogercooper.com/middle_earth_Fords.zip

Scenario Big World April 1940
Description World War 2 in 1940 using the Big World map. I added victory conditions
Download https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/889/roger-s-scenario-thread/www.rogercooper.com/big_world_1940.zip

Scenario World War II v5 1942 2nd Ed. (High Production Mod)
Download https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/889/roger-s-scenario-thread/www.rogercooper.com/WW2v5_1942_2nd_Edition_High_Production_Mod.zip
Description World War II v5 with higher production values

I have created a new scenario based upon the Axis & Allies & Zombies boardgame. AAZ.zip

I couldn't implement many aspects of the game, but Zombies will popup randomly and mess up your plans.

There are 2 scenarios, AAZ & AAZ-NZ. AAZ is the regular scenario while AAZ-NZ is the same game without the Zombies (and a default bid of 9 for Russia). The game is playable against the AI.

Have fun.

I am now using variables successfully..

@hepps Basically yes. The only mods I am not converting are mods designed specifically to use deprecated versions of the AI.I may have missed some mods over the years.

I have created a page for you on the Axis & Allies Wiki with some economic & military information from various sources on WW1. 1914 Economic Data

@cernel said in Roger's Scenario Thread:

@rogercooper Never really understood why that has never been in download list, but my issue with it, if I recall correctly, is having a single player for all the minors. I just cannot accept that Finland, Romania and Thailand are the same country.

It is a bit odd, but is it any odder than US & China being the same country?

@Name Yes, all powers start at neutral, with alliances set with triggers.

Here is the code

      <attachment name="relationshipTypeAttachment" attachTo="War" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RelationshipTypeAttachment" type="relationship">
      <option name="archeType" value="war"/>
      <option name="isDefaultWarPosition" value="true"/>
    </attachment>
    <attachment name="relationshipTypeAttachment" attachTo="Allied" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RelationshipTypeAttachment" type="relationship">
      <option name="archeType" value="allied"/>
      <option name="alliancesCanChainTogether" value="true"/>
    </attachment>
    <attachment name="relationshipTypeAttachment" attachTo="Neutrality" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RelationshipTypeAttachment" type="relationship">
      <option name="archeType" value="neutral"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="conditionAttachmentTurn1" attachTo="A" 
javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RulesAttachment"  type="player"><option name="rounds"  value="1"/></attachment>

<attachment name="triggerAttachmentJapanToA" attachTo="Japanese" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Japanese:A:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:2"/>
      <option name="when"  value="before:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentJapanToB" attachTo="Japanese" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Japanese:B:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:1"/>
      <option name="when"  value="after:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentGermansToA" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Germans:A:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:2"/>
      <option name="when"  value="before:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentGermansToB" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Germans:B:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:1"/>
      <option name="when"  value="after:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentItaliansToA" attachTo="Italians" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Italians:A:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:2"/>
      <option name="when"  value="before:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentItaliansToB" attachTo="Italians" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Italians:B:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:1"/>
      <option name="when"  value="after:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentChineseToA" attachTo="Chinese" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Chinese:A:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:2"/>
      <option name="when"  value="before:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentChineseToB" attachTo="Chinese" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Chinese:B:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:1"/>
      <option name="when"  value="after:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentAmericansToA" attachTo="Americans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Americans:A:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:2"/>
      <option name="when"  value="before:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentAmericansToB" attachTo="Americans" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="Americans:B:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:1"/>
      <option name="when"  value="after:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentBritishToA" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="British:A:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:2"/>
      <option name="when"  value="before:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>
<attachment name="triggerAttachmentBritishToB" attachTo="British" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentTurn1"/>
      <option name="relationshipChange" value="British:B:Neutrality:Allied"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
      <option name="chance" value="1:1"/>
      <option name="when"  value="after:ABidPlace"/>
    </attachment>

Each power has 50% of joining alliance A, and a 50% of joining alliance B.

Note that alliances chain together not wars. Declaring war on a member of an alliance does not put you at war with the rest. However allying with another country gives you identical diplomatic relationships (for the peace and war archetypes).

@Hepps You could handle that with events and political relationships. You could change the relationship when occupied to make the occupied country a neutral and then restore the relationship when the capital is liberated.

@rogercooper
Map Middle Earth-Fords
Download middle_earth_Fords.zip
Game Play Lots of unit types but without much differentiation in practice. Big advantage for Good.
Historicity No Tolkien feel. Unique beings like Wizards, Nazgul, Ents and the like can be built without limit. The Dwarves have cannon. No decisive battles. No race against time.

Not worth a replay.

It is worth noting that the "powers" in Axis & Allies are not always states/nations/countries/polities. In the base game, Germany, Britain and the United States are actually alliances. In the global game, UK-Pacific is a theater of operations. A number of scenarios use high-level military formations (such as Camp David). Non-state entities also show up in some scenarios such as zombie hordes, Japanese daimyos, Chinese warlords or New York criminal gangs. For that matter some of the "players" are not playable e.g. the Global Game has 5 non-playable "players".

As there is really no perfect term, we might as well leave it as "player".

Name Global 40 House Rules
Description The Global 40 with a bunch of house rules
link

Good Points

• China is more of opponent because of the guerilla rule
• Destroyer/submarines have a more interesting interaction
• Some interesting new units

Bad Points

• The rules don't do much to resolve the balance issues
• Some of the new stuff is hard for the AI to handle

Here is broken game. Under Red Sun Over China, the warlords_ffa.xml does not work. I am not sure what the issue is, it seems be not reading polygons.txt, but everything looks correct.

@beelee said in Lend-Lease (in singleplayer, not multiplayer games):

The Americans actually went a little too heavy with their air forces. They had to take a bunch of higher quality ? smart type guys that were supposed to have safe jobs into the infantry in 44. It actually worked out well for them.Ambrose talks about it in "Citizen Soldier".

I think the USA topped out around 9 million if I remember right. Soviets had like 47 million in their national guard. Forget what it was called.

According to Ellis, the US ended the war with 11,877,000 military personnel and the USSR with 12,400,000, pretty close in numbers.

Did the US overinvest in airpower? The ratio of Air Force to Army was only a little lower for the Germans. Airpower was and is extremely effective but is subject to diminishing returns. A&A underrates airpower.

Schulz's point is well-taken. The saying was "Iron is Cheaper than Blood". Air power consumed far fewer lives compared to the resources expended compared to ground power. This was definitely good for morale.

The disproportions between Russia and Germany was not as great as Unternehmer suggests. USSR forces peaked at 13,200,000 compared to 9,500,000 for Germany. Angus Maddison gives the Soviet Union a larger GDP in 1940 than Germany by 15% (if you count Germany's minor allies it comes out to about equal). The Soviet Union had 3 x as many people as Germany, but its backwardness resulted in fielding only 1.5 x as many soldiers. The hordes of Red soldiers was a myth promulgated by German generals after WW2.

Russia was able to build much the same type of army Germany had. For example in 1944, both Russia and Germany build about 40,000 military aircraft.

I have some older scenarios on my site link. They should all work with current version of TripleA.

@Unternehmer I was counting only front-line combat aircraft (from Ellis: World War 2: A Statistical Survey, page 231). The discrepancy between total production and front-line combat aircraft is from the large number of non-combat aircraft (about 40% of the aircraft) and losses.

Aircraft losses in the war were huge and primarily not combat. The US actually had fewer aircraft in August 45 then December 44 (Ellis, page 242). An aircraft that is worn out and used for parts is out of operation just as much as one that was shot down. Under wartime conditions, the attrition rate in remarkably high, so you can't just add up aircraft production.

My basic point is that it keeps a lot of people to keep an aircraft flying, even though only few of those people are actually in the airplane. Also, the industrial technology of the 1940's were far less automated than that of today. There was an actual competition between the manpower needs of military production and the needs of military operations.

There was no such thing as a country with lots of industrial capacity but little manpower capacity. There were places which were the reverse. India's huge population fielded only 2,159,000 at the end of the war, less than half of Great Britain's.

No power was defeated in WW2 because they ran out of manpower to field viable armies. If heavy losses were taken in combat, men would be transferred from support to combat to restore the proper ratio. This was the reason the Russians could basically loses their entire starting military and still keep an army in the field. (This is also how my father ended up in the Battle of the Bulge).

This is why I don't see I need to track manpower separately from overall production. It creates a complication in the game system without enhancing realism.

I suggest you pickup World War II: A Statistical Survey by John Ellise (ISBN 978-0816029716). It has every imaginable statistic,

@Unternehmer said in Lend-Lease (in singleplayer, not multiplayer games):

Here we come to the necessity to distinguish between the 2 kinds of TripleA units:

• units, who consume relatively more manpower and cost less PUs (like infantry). Their manpower to PUs ratio favours manpower.
• and units, who consume relatively less manpower and cost much more PUs (like naval units). Their manpower to PUs ratio favours PUs.

So for Japan CBI theater is more manpower consuming and Pacific theatre more PUs consuming.

I am not convinced that naval & air units require less manpower than infantry. The manpower in naval & air units is in the support units. For example the US ended the war with

• Army 5,851,000
• Air Force 2,282,000
• Navy 3,288,000
• Marine Corps 456,000

The US ended the war 31,335 combat aircraft. So there were 73 air force personnel per plane. An Essex class carrier had a crew of 3,500 to fly 100 planes. If you consider escort ships, supply ships and shore facilities, I suspect that the number personnel per plane was at least equal to the air force (and the planes were smaller).

As for how the Japanese divided their efforts, my guess is about 50/50. Battle casualties were about equal between the 2 (most casualties in China were non-combat). The Japanese stopped major offensive operations in China from Pearl Harbor to mid-1944 when they launched Ichi-go.

Historically, the Japanese had no reason to invade Russia. Conducting a military offensive against a major power on a single rail line was folly. Were the Japanese should have gone was India. They could supply by sea and benefit from local allies. British resources were strained in 1942.

In games, it usually pays to put most effort in Asia, as they way the Axis wins games is by taking out Russia so putting pressure on Russia is important. In many games, there is de facto Pacific cease-fire as both sides have greater profit with operations elsewhere.

@Unternehmer said in Lend-Lease (in singleplayer, not multiplayer games):

Speaking about Pacific theatre, I do not rely much on any information about the "Chinese warfront". Paying full respect to the Chinese nation, I can't even imagine how Chinese people could have inflicted any serious damage to the Japanese forces as:

• 90% of Chinese population and economics were (like nowadays) concentrated in the regions near the coast. And they were occupied by the Japan forces or are the part of the Manchukuo.

The Japanese had a majority of the military manpower in the CBI theater. The Chinese inflicted 2,500,000 casualties on the Japanese (mostly wounded). China was not a speed bump.

Many major Chinese cities were not occupied (Many people in China live inland)

3 times the Japanese failed to capture Changsha (1939,1941,1942) before falling in 1944. In general from 1941 to 1944 the front changed in little in China. In 1944, the Japanese launched Operation Ichi-Go which took some cities but did not break Chinese resistance (the Chinese actually took the offensive in 1945)

Even the areas occupied by Japan had widespread partisan activity.

I have extensively analyzed this issue database category in Axis & Allies Wiki, and the Allies had roughly 80% of the production capacity but started the war with about 50% of the military strength. With the US & USSR initially neutral, the Axis was strong enough to make major gains. The Germans came close to knocking the Soviets out of the war in 1941 and had another shot in early 1942.

Most WW2 games handle this by giving the Axis a shot at some sort of sudden death victory as well as a survival victory if they can avoid defeat for a sufficient period.

The A&A boardgames took a different route by exaggerating the economy of the Axis nations. This was so overdone that AAG40, AAP40, AA42 & AA42-2 strongly favor the Axis.

From a game point of view, it makes sense to strengthen the Axis, but the Americans are usually too badly nerfed in production. TripleA allows to try both approaches, an ahistorically strong Axis or an Axis that can win by surviving.

One thing which I don't think works is a separate manpower resource. Manpower is more of an economic resource rather than a military constraint, the Soviets actually demobilized soldiers in 1944 to send them to work in factories. Adding to the game increases complexity without increasing realism.

I am interested in helping out. I have an extensive collection of scenarios on my site [Axis & Allies Wiki](https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/Scenario_List. Some of these are not of sufficient quality to be in the repository.

I know of 1 broken scenario in the repository, NewWorldOrder1915Lebowski. Global 40 House Rules and Global1940 House Rules are duplicates.

I am reluctant to rate scenarios. Opinions will vary depending on what you want from a scenario.