Another WWII Game

[Jeffrey H.]

Once I clear out some of my existing games, I'll gladly jump into this, it sounds very interesting.

[icym]

I now have the graphic files in the right folders.

There is a little more that needs to be done with the mod. I will post the occasional update as it gets closer to release.

[Bombur]

Great mod, I´m anxious to put my hands on this one....[:D]

[ernieschwitz]

Seems like solid work, looking forward to it

[icym]

I have made some progress.

As expressed earlier, I was concerned whether I had placed all the graphics in the correct folders. [Edit: Graphics have been confirmed as correct]

If anyone has the time or inclination to take a look, I have loaded the Triumph Scenario onto Dropbox.

I haven't used Dropbox before, so I hope I've done it right. [Edit: I messed up my first attempt to grant access, apologies to those concerned.]

I'm based in Australia, so please allow for the time difference if I am slow to respond.

The folder is available to share, if anyone wishes to volunteer to download it (its around 23.5 MB), please send me your email address and I will grant access.

The scenario is still in Beta status, so I would recommend not getting too involved in a serious game yet.

[Bombur]

Send it to me, please.
afenelon@terra.com.br

[icym]

Bombur, I have sent you a link to the Triumph folder on Dropbox.

[icym]

It is now confirmed that all the graphics are in the correct folders.

[Bombur]

Thank you for the scenario, icym. It seems very promising. If I were you, I would send it to ernie too...he is very good with the event editor. When you´re finished, I would like to know if you would agree with a version with custom units. The only trouble I see with this scenario is the number of regimes. How do you want to deal with them?

[icym]

I have no problem at all if anyone wants to create a version with custom units or nato counters. I realise a lot of people highly value those options.

The number of Regimes is a legacy of the scenario as originally created. It was designed as a 2-player game, but I made the Regimes separate in case I needed to make events specific to certain counties. E.g. Russian cost to create a new unit is cheaper in 1941, and a whole heap of others.

When my intended opponent had to drop out due to eye problems, I realised that if it was ever going to get played it would need to be playable by 3 or more players, but by that time the Regimes were set and events were too far advanced to change anything.

To play now, some players will have more than one Regime to play. I don't imagine that is a major problem, provided in each round they can play all the Regimes they control one after the other.

It starts getting a little weird with five players, but at least the US will have something to do before US entry.

Norway can't do anything much unless one of their major cities is recaptured by the Allies, so Britain playing them is fine.

Spain and Turkey have limited production but they must remain neutral unless they are attacked by the Axis, so it doesn't matter a lot which Axis opponent plays them. Britain is the logical choice because Britain's turn follows on from Turkey's.

I guess for six players, the US could be separated from France/the Commonwealth.

I envisage the player Regime allocation could go something like this:

[ernieschwitz]

Sure send it to me too. I will send you my email in a PM.

[icym]

Bombur mentioned that you were very experienced with the editor.

Since I have not done any programming in my life, I would suggest you not look too closely at my attempt to write events. The sight of my code would probably age you ten years. [:)]

[ernieschwitz]

I have logged many hours coding for ATG, and know alot of the kinks, cracks and dubious places of the Editor. There are also places I do not know alot about... Always looking for people who can compliment my lack of understanding of those areas.

I have a background of getting to know computers at a very early age. Back when the original movable computers became sold. Back then it was more of a suitcase, than a lap top. I would rather not sit with that on my lap. I am also from before the time of HDdrives. I did some of my earliest programming in Basic. Back when DOS was king and windows was something you looked out of. Since then I have done alot of programming, but like alot of others I am self taught.

Don´t worry about the looks of your code to start with, efficiency is nice, getting the code to do what you want it is better.

[Bombur]

I looked at the scenario and I would like to make some questions/suggestions....
1-What is the purpose of aircraft cargo? Why you don´t simply transfer your aircraft across the oceans by using the transfer button?
2-What do you think about modifying the map in order to allow real (as opposed to abstracted) ASW opperations (including the use of ASW aircraft and carriers). it would spare you some code and allow a more challenging naval game.
3-Why did you take out Vichy France of the game? With France playing the allies, it´s possible the war in North Africa and the Med will be too easy for the allies

[icym]

Bombur,

Thank you for your suggestions. All valid points.

Please keep in mind that this is my first attempt at a scenario, so if some dumb ideas or misunderstandings of the game mechanics have crept in, I am prepared to take the flak.

The aircraft cargo idea had its origin in the way I set up Murmansk convoys to operate. I figured that if the US in particular was going to be able to ship land units to Russia, why not use the same mechanism to ship air units. I believe there was some historical precedent for that. The way this shipping works is that when the air cargo arrives in Russia it can be converted to Russian air units with Russian people. There are other possible uses too, for example should the Italians enjoy particular naval success in the Med, Britain has the option of getting air units into Egypt the long way, around Africa and through Suez. It is not a big thing for me though and if players don't like it, I can take it out or make it an optional rule.

The ASW idea came about simply because I disliked the fact that the USA could send oil to Britain and Germany couldn't do anything about it (please correct me if I am wrong that resources can't be intercepted). ASW is simple to use and is biased to somewhat favour the German player. It was designed purely to allow overseas oil shipments from the US to be contested using only submarines (Axis) and destroyers (Allies). Logically, raw shipments should be affected as well but it took so long to get the damned event to work properly I wasn't enthusiastic about fiddling with it any further. The mechanism has no impact on all other Atlantic warfare which operates normally. I know it ties up some German subs, but it ties up Allied destroyers as well. Once again I rely on feedback. If this idea is unpopular I can remove it.

The Vichy question has particular merit. Frankly, it is so long since I set that up I have forgotten why I did it. I agree it would make more sense to have Vichy in the game and I think I should change that. From solo play testing, just as you predicted, the North African war probably favours the Allies. What is best for the French colonies? Randomly set them up to be Vichy or possibly Free French at the start of the game? Suggestions are welcomed.

Thanks again for your feedback Bombur.


Ernie,

Ernie raised a number of valid points in a PM. In particular he agreed with Bombur in noting my tendency to over-complicate things, necessitating special "house rules" to deal with the exceptions that result. I intend to take a big stick to most of these situations and batter them into complying with straight forward play wherever I can. Ernie has offered to take a look at one problematic early game situation and I must thank him for that.

[Bombur]

Thank you for your suggestions. All valid points.

Please keep in mind that this is my first attempt at a scenario, so if some dumb ideas or misunderstandings of the game mechanics have crept in, I am prepared to take the flak.

-There nothing dumb about the ideas you had, I am actually impressed by the way you developed the ability to simulate some events

The aircraft cargo idea had its origin in the way I set up Murmansk convoys to operate. I figured that if the US in particular was going to be able to ship land units to Russia, why not use the same mechanism to ship air units. I believe there was some historical precedent for that. The way this shipping works is that when the air cargo arrives in Russia it can be converted to Russian air units with Russian people. There are other possible uses too, for example should the Italians enjoy particular naval success in the Med, Britain has the option of getting air units into Egypt the long way, around Africa and through Suez. It is not a big thing for me though and if players don't like it, I can take it out or make it an optional rule.

-I understand, packing aircrafts in a ship, in order to send them to other locations is a great idea, but it also can be made by naval transfer. The trouble I see with this particular feature is that, if you want to create more aircraft categories, or even custom aircraft (I think your scenario is worth the effort to build more historical equipment), you should also create more types of cargo aircraft (correct me if I´m wrong)

The ASW idea came about simply because I disliked the fact that the USA could send oil to Britain and Germany couldn't do anything about it (please correct me if I am wrong that resources can't be intercepted). ASW is simple to use and is biased to somewhat favour the German player. It was designed purely to allow overseas oil shipments from the US to be contested using only submarines (Axis) and destroyers (Allies). Logically, raw shipments should be affected as well but it took so long to get the damned event to work properly I wasn't enthusiastic about fiddling with it any further. The mechanism has no impact on all other Atlantic warfare which operates normally. I know it ties up some German subs, but it ties up Allied destroyers as well. Once again I rely on feedback. If this idea is unpopular I can remove it.

-Excellent idea, I wasn´t able to understand it...interdicting oil and raw materials is not possible in ATG. I must say that we (ernie and me) simply gave up any attempt to develop a fix for this limitation in our GD1938 scenario.

The Vichy question has particular merit. Frankly, it is so long since I set that up I have forgotten why I did it. I agree it would make more sense to have Vichy in the game and I think I should change that. From solo play testing, just as you predicted, the North African war probably favours the Allies. What is best for the French colonies? Randomly set them up to be Vichy or possibly Free French at the start of the game? Suggestions are welcomed.

I would set Vichy French to be a neutral regime, with control over France and the colonies. If the allies DOW Vichy, it joins minor axis (80%), or capitulates, thus joining France (which would exist only as an embassy). If the Axis DOW Vichy French, the opposite happens (80% chances of joining Free france and 20% chances of joining minor axis)

[Bombur]

Btw, icym, would you like to try a playtest match?

[icym]

I am pleased to have clarified the intention of the oil interdiction process.

You are right about the shipping aircraft limitations. The air shipping action cards were the very first ones I created, well over a year ago now. As written, the events would not cope with different aircraft types. My coding has hopefully improved a bit since those days, but shipping was always going to be a minor part of the game, and I doubt it would be worth rewriting it to cope with multiple historical aircraft types, even if I could do it.

I don't think it does much harm if left in for now (apart from action card and event clutter) even though it has limited usefulness. If in the process of development more SFTs are introduced, I will take it out.

Your suggestions re Vichy are good. I also had some feedback from Ernie which was along similar lines.

Currently I have a moderately long to-do list I am working on (I am kind of slow at this stuff). On the other hand the only way to find flaws is to play it, which means a playtest.

If you are willing to give it a try, understanding that 1) The game may fall over in some unanticipated way or 2) - my biggest fear - the whole thing is horribly unbalanced, I am willing to try a playtest. Thank you for offering to participate.

I am currently working on some improvements and also adding Vichy. I will advise when the next version is available.

[Bombur]

Hi, icym:

Since we already have a shared Dropbox folder, we could use it to send both upgrades to the scenario and saved turns.

[icym]

Yes, Dropbox would make it easy.

Currently the Scenario is with Ernie who has kindly offered to take a look at implementing Vichy France.

Since he has already been very helpful, would you object to him joining the playtest, if he is interested in doing so?