• @RogerCooper said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

    is there any plausible reason to attack a major neutral except maybe USSR attacking the Arab league?

    It’s kinda been theorized that USSR might want to attack China, in certain situations.

    If China isn’t defending North Korea, or worse, if they’re actively letting NATO move units through their territory, the USSR might be better off attacking.
    The other thing is that the complication table is weighted more toward China’s outrage than the other 2 majors, so if the USSR has the ability to send nukes, it’s also generally assumed that they will, whereas the US is less likely to use them; in a long enough game, that will swing China towards favoring NATO, so the USSR might pre-empt that at some point.

    The other option is as a game-ender, towards obtaining an economic victory. In fact, such a thing is probably pretty impossible without invading most of the neutrals on the Eurasian continent.

    P.S. I still think modeling neutral contributions as N.O.'s is an option to keep in mind


  • @The-Janus said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

    @RogerCooper said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

    is there any plausible reason to attack a major neutral except maybe USSR attacking the Arab league?

    It’s kinda been theorized that USSR might want to attack China, in certain situations.

    If China isn’t defending North Korea, or worse, if they’re actively letting NATO move units through their territory, the USSR might be better off attacking.
    The other thing is that the complication table is weighted more toward China’s outrage than the other 2 majors, so if the USSR has the ability to send nukes, it’s also generally assumed that they will, whereas the US is less likely to use them; in a long enough game, that will swing China towards favoring NATO, so the USSR might pre-empt that at some point.

    The other option is as a game-ender, towards obtaining an economic victory. In fact, such a thing is probably pretty impossible without invading most of the neutrals on the Eurasian continent.

    P.S. I still think modeling neutral contributions as N.O.'s is an option to keep in mind

    Implementing the complication table would be difficult. The game rules already suggest dropping the complication table as an optional rule. Note that it would be possible to use having a nuclear weapon as trigger but not using a nuclear weapon. I think that in practice the high cost of nuclear weapons is more of a deterrent than the nuclear complication rules.

    Using National Objectives for neutral contributions is fine.


  • @RogerCooper East & West has a rule that allows tanks to move out of a territory in non-combat movement. As TripleA does not support this, should I just ignore it or increase the defense of tanks to 3 in compensation?


  • @RogerCooper if the fighter rules can’t be changed to allow tanks to “land” in recently captured territories, I would still not change the defense value. Players can/should just use the EDIT mode in these cases.

    My two cents.


  • @The_Good_Captain said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

    if the fighter rules can’t be changed to allow tanks to “land” in recently captured territories,

    Hi Good Captain

    Not sure what you mean here. Tanks can move in ncm to newly conquered TTys if they didn’t take part in combat.

    But yea, edit better than hardwiring it imo as well. It becomes second nature once you start using it.

    A map option to turn on or off with the tank boost can also work.


  • @barnee In this version of Axis and Allies, tanks that fought in combat can move out of the territory during the noncombat movement phase if they have movement remaining, just like a fighter. They can also stay in the territory they just fought in.


  • @The_Good_Captain said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

    tanks that fought in combat can move out of the territory during the noncombat movement phase if they have movement remaining, just like a fighter.

    This would be a good Feature request. Seems as if it might not be too hard to do. Idk. My understanding of java is almost zero.

    Anyway, can make a request with a git issue if you’d like.

    https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues


  • @barnee I don’t think there is anyone left there to do the work even if they were interested enough to do it. That’s been my experience anyway. Sorta backed up by panther as well. Roger doing whatever he is doing for East & West right now is a random miracle imo.


  • @The_Good_Captain

    Been some deveopler activity lately is why I mention it.


  • @barnee I will use an option on the defense strength of tanks, with a default of 3. I have started working on this for a bit every day. Right now I am adapting everything to the Big_World map. When that is done I will create a custom map for East & West.


  • @RogerCooper said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

    @barnee I will use an option on the defense strength of tanks, with a default of 3. I have started working on this for a bit every day. Right now I am adapting everything to the Big_World map. When that is done I will create a custom map for East & West.

    For completeness, there are two tank types: the tank attacks at three and defends at two. The heavy tank attacks at four and defends at three. The soviets start out with access to both tank types.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

47

Online

17.6k

Users

40.2k

Topics

1.7m

Posts