Posts made by RogerCooper

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

@RogerCooper

@The-Janus yikes…I can’t tell.

I will extend the boundary for the sea zone to the East to Mexico.

How does Mexico connect to the sea zones to its east? Is there a separate small sea zone that connects to Mexico & Western United States or does connect to sea zones off the Eastern United States and/or containing the West Indies?

@FranceNeedsMorePower Start with https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/Category:1939 and see if there are any scenarios you like. You will download them from the in-game downloader or the TripleA site.

@FranceNeedsMorePower said in Triple a Western Front Question:

@RogerCooper @barnee I mean ww2

I don’t know if any scenarios covering the Western Front as a whole, but there are scenarios covering the Normandy Invasion and Operation Market-Garden. You can check the categories for the war years.

@barnee I don’t know of any West Front only scenarios. Check my wiki under https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/Category:1914 and the other war years for WW1 related content.

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

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

@The_Good_Captain I have been following this discussion with interest as I work on my East & West mod for TripleA. It is basically working, but I am using the Big World map rather than the East & West map. I have started the process of creating a new map.

I also noticed that the best of use of Nukes is to hit the counterattack force, when I playing against the AI.

Which side is nuking who and where? Be advised, you cannot attack a territory on the same turn that territory was nuked.

I have no way of enforcing in TripleA that you can’t nuke and conventionally attack. The best I can achieve is that conventional forces can’t fire in the first round.

As a player, on any side, I find nuking counterattack forces is best. This is true for other mods with similar rules like The Grand War.

The AI in TripleA does not generally buy nukes. When it has them, it generally tries to inflict the maximum PU loss, rather than integrating the attack with other tactics.

@SuperbattleshipYamato The TripleA mod does not fully implement the rules and the AI has problems (it doesn’t retreat out of losing battles during its turn). It is still fun to play.

@The_Good_Captain I have been following this discussion with interest as I work on my East & West mod for TripleA. It is basically working, but I am using the Big World map rather than the East & West map. I have started the process of creating a new map.

I also noticed that the best of use of Nukes is to hit the counterattack force, when I playing against the AI.

I have a request then. Can you make the random tech and neutrals being handed out through random events an optional rule? Or just leave it out? In this way, we can use the EDIT mode and layer them in using an independent dice roller.

Same with the Major Neutrals. Edit mode to the rescue is A-okay with me.
I will probably handle as a separate scenario without tech & gaining minor neutral control.

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

@RogerCooper I forgot there even was an option for AI in TripleA. I think you’re doing the lords work just to make the TripleA align with the rules. WELL DONE @RogerCooper

This is going be more inspired by East & West than a port of East & West. The complex tech & espionage rules can’t be done in TripleA. I am just randomly giving out tech & neutrals through events.

The major neutrals are also an issue. I think that it works better to make them distinct powers rather than awarding their units & territories to the major powers. Having China as Russian ally and OAS as Western ally seems natural. The problem is that whoever gets the Arab League wins. My probable solution is to give the Arab League to the Eastern alliance and suggest playing the West with an income bonus.

@FranceNeedsMorePower I doubt that it will ever be done. There are a number of mods that implement Axis & Allies: D-Day some form but no one ever made the engine mods needed to have all the rules.

You can check this thread https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/4074/north-africa-triplea-module?_=1750968264860

@The-Janus I have almost finished, the preliminary version of East & West in TripleA.

The TripleA AI does not make good use of nukes and generally will not buy them. I do see that Russia has an advantage with its cheap infantry and central position.

@FranceNeedsMorePower There are people working on it, but North Africa differs a lot from the mainstream A&A games and would require significant changes in the game engine.

To me, Axis & Allies is WW2 in afternoon. The additional play interest and historicity of every rule needs to be balanced against complexity and time burden.

I have find that the political rules in the Global game, add substantial complexity with adding much to interest of historicity. It would have been better to have political events occuring at specific turns.

The recent North Africa game was also burdened by too many rules. All though, the individual mechanisms were interesting & historical, overall there was too much going on, too many little things to keep track of.

@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 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?

@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 After reviewing maps, I concluded that the East & West map is closest to the TripleA Big World map, so I will implement it first on Big World and then use the actual map.

In terms of neutral handling I see the following possibilties

• Major neutrals impassable except that Russia may attack the Arab League.

• Major neutrals are fully playable and can be allied through the diplomacy technology table.

• Major neutrals can be allied through the diplomacy technology table and are absorbed into the allying power. They are impassable until then.

@The-Janus So is there any plausible reason to attack a major neutral except maybe USSR attacking the Arab league? It sounds like there isn’t . Which is easy enough to handle in a scenario.

It seems a shame to have deployments defined for major neutrals, and not get to use them.

As always, I can have multiple scenarios which handle the major neutrals differently.

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

@RogerCooper said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:
Have you considered the knock-on effects of changing those mechanics?
Would you want China and OAS to become active powers?
Or would they just swing all their income, units, and territories to USSR/USA in one dice roll?

I was assuming they would become active powers on their own. But that is not the only possibility. You could have them join the power recruiting them.

The problem with E&W rules for neutrals is that they are just passive sources of income, that can also be attacked. That is not very interesting.

We could also try eliminating major neutrals entirely. The major neutrals could be handled like minor neutrals and recruited through technology or events. That is arguably more realistic and probably more interesting with wars breaking out in unexpected places.