Matrix Games Forums

If someone drops out I would consider taking over his position.

Be glad to have you, trouble is that we can't just flip Antonio. last I heard he was having problems with Dropbox, and of course he is the thread starter, and I did say that this game would be slow paced, for players that fit academic family work and social commitments into their lives. Twotribes is putting a fast GD1938 game together we are looking for more players, and we would be pleased to have you.

Antonio has returned turns for games GD1938 4 and 7.

There is one turn I am waiting for from Antonio he is playing USA/China and I am waiting for The German/Italy turn. Its e-mail only game with the following players GD1938 Game ? Axis Germany/Italy Bombur USSR Juergen UK France Jeff Japan USA China Antonio. Its unnumbered.

Antonio may not have received the next turn from Juergen. That would be turn 27. Turn 28 being the German turn when I receive it.

China's turn is waiting since 7 May.

Yeah, I noticed, ... that is Hatem if I am not mistaken... Anyone want to take contact to him?

Seems to me hatem quit the 3 by 3 game has anyone heard from him?

I did contact Hatem regards a ETO game we are were playing. And recently about Hatem passing on his password for game 7.
He did reply about the ETO game but not about surrendering his password for game 7.
Hatem is what I would call a advanced player but he has a finite time for ATG due to course work and other commitments.
I would renew the request that if he does not have time to play the China turn that he surrender his password and we hand the password over Jonathan who has offered to step in.
And would be going for a double as China. If Hatem does not come back I suggest a restart using to GD1938 2.17N It has much more balance and gives China much more of a chance against even the most advanced players.

hi,

apologize for the delay, I had no internet access for a week.. all turns will be uploaded now.

Thanks Hatem no internet [X(] hard to imagine [:)]

I thought that it was agreed that phoney wars are not allowed, however Germany and Italy players have done it again, this time with Albania?

I think you will find that Germany has no knowledge of this action Italian turn is after the German turn. Historically Italy did invade Albania and then attacked Greece so what he has done is not inaccurate. Its fairly obvious that Germany would not get involved and back Albania so Albania should be on its own. It would be better if the protecting Nation, in this case Germany was given the option to protect the Minor power. If they decline then the Minor Power would be on their own. And I am sure that is what would happen in this case Germany would not get involved.

I am considering limiting the declare war on minor card, to only those countries you are not best friends with... Any other fix would be very very hard to program.

Historically and realistically one will not attack country which is a good friend of your ally. In this case Albania was a good friend of Germany. If Italy/Germany wanted Albania, they should have invested PPs in this matter.

Yes, Kombrig, I agree...

While I agree that this is a infringement of house rules. A slap on the wrist to Antonio, and a apology to ernieschwitz who was unaware of this event. Albania did historically lean towards Germany but was invaded by Italy in 1939 the green light was given by Germany. So Historically a country that was pro German was invaded by a Larger country Italy in this case Germany needed Italy but it did not need Albania, so Albania was sacrificed to political expediency.

I was thinking that if two cards were available say a minor power is attacked and you are the power with the most influence would it not be better to have a card that you play to support that country example.

Minor power is invaded it does not automatically join the power with main influence, but remains neutral on the turn of the player with most influence he has the option to play a card to bring that minor power under his control.

Just to add to the above if the influencing nation decides to play the card then they will be at war with the attacking nation. Also it might be necessary to pay a PP cost to play a card supporting a minor nation under attack, since such a action would require that a political price had to be paid.

Twotribes up for a turn with Japan ?

Twotribes has to install the game on a new computer. Hopefully it will not take too long. This game, especially, is crawling.

Chuck

ORIGINAL: ironduke1955

I was thinking that if two cards were available say a minor power is attacked and you are the power with the most influence would it not be better to have a card that you play to support that country example.

Minor power is invaded it does not automatically join the power with main influence, but remains neutral on the turn of the player with most influence he has the option to play a card to bring that minor power under his control.

Just to add to the above if the influencing nation decides to play the card then they will be at war with the attacking nation. Also it might be necessary to pay a PP cost to play a card supporting a minor nation under attack, since such a action would require that a political price had to be paid.

In an ideal world, you are probably right. It would be much better to have nations run independantly (AI driven) if they where not supported by their friend. And allow some sort of card to allow players to take over control.

However, even the world of ATG is not ideal. There is such a thing as RAM constraints. Each independanty run AI takes up memory. And it takes up alot more every time you add a new one. In the old days before I made the programming change to the current diplomacy way, regimes where just that, all independant. And the up to 55 AI run countries were simply too much for some machines. I had reports of players that got out of memory problems, and game crashes as a consequence.

The new method of making regimes (faux regimes) was revolutionary in more than one sense. Firstly it allowed the diplomatic system that you now see in games, secondly it reduced 55 AI regimes, to 4 non-AI regimes. Thus freeing up alot of RAM, for other stuff, like more detailed SFTs and Items, which translates to more varied units and thus more fun.

If I had to program the game so that an AI took over fighting for a country that was attacked, instead of it being assigned to a players country, that would require exactly up to 55 regimes again.... because (in theory) each country could be at war with the totality of all nations. And it doesn´t make much sense to say, let Finland and Thailand be the same AI power.

So I am going to have to reject this proposoal from you Ironduke1955.

Maybe in a different version of ATG (ATP?) It may be possible to have 55 regimes... and who knows an even bigger map. Personally I am not completely satisfied with the map... so given the choice between 55 regimes, or 4 faux regimes the way it functions now, and a bigger map, I would choose the bigger map

It was a idea just that, as usual a solution to one problem the compelling of major powers into wars that they may not want to become involved in, causes problems somewhere else ie RAM and AI constraint's. If I remember correctly it was Italy and Germany going to war over Albania, a unlikely scenario. If it can't be done so be it.