If I have suggestions for improving gameplay in TripleA, where should I post them?

[CrazyIvan]

Is this the place to post requests for modifications or additional features to TripleA?

[Panther]

@CrazyIvan I would suggest to do that here:
https://forums.triplea-game.org/category/42/feature-requests-ideas

[CrazyIvan]

@Panther Thanks, and will do!

[CrazyIvan]

Hmmm…

Somethings fishy.

I tried to post this on a thread there, and it keeps getting called ‘spam’ and fails to post. Not sure what is up with that, but not going to waste any more time with that software at the moment, as repeatedly having to re-type, over and over again, my intended idea has gotten old real quick, i’ll just post this here and later, if an admin can sort out what the heck is going on, I can repost it there and remove it from here.

**So, my very first post was repeatedly denied ‘as spam’, and as that was a kind of big post, I got a bit frustrated and was just going to forget about it, as the saying goes, but then I thought to simply re-write a short post, and see if this too gets rejected as spam.

Ok, so LL is great and all, as far as it goes, but there are still an incredibly large number of rolls in the game, that can see probability tossed out the window, and the chaos of randomness rule. My idea, while not able to take this entirely out of the game, can make things far better, by simple enforcing a simple change.

In every battle, one and only one die is rolled, after LL is factored in, and this roll result will be applied to any remainder that either side may have, on a given round of any battle.

Mutually Assured Destruction, if enabled, uses this single die roll, and since both sides are using this same number, the weaker side cannot outscore the stronger side with “Lucky shot, Sir” situations.

Attack that lone transport with your fighter/bomber? If they hit you, you hit them! No more annoying little transport killing aircraft and living to tell about it.

Play out 12 battles where the defender had just one infantry, and have them hit you 12 out of 12 times? My idea doesn’t prevent that from happening, but it does make sure, that in any and every battle where your forces had an advantage but suffered a lucky hit, it also makes sure that you hit them back!**

Any thoughts?

[redrum]

@CrazyIvan I created the post for you here: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/1317/unified-low-luck

We have a spam module on the forum that will sometimes flag very long posts for new users. Sorry that it flagged your thread.

[CrazyIvan]

@redrum Lol. Welp, that explains it then, heh heh. I was trying my hand at writing a bit more than needed, to try to flesh out the idea a bit, and that must have triggered the “SPAM DETECTED” filter.:jack_o_lantern:

[CrazyIvan]

Arrrgh!

I first tried to respond with this:

Oh yea, for sure.

I was looking at the situation of a BB + Transport getting ‘hit’ by an attacking sub. Using this idea, the sub’s roll could have been either a ‘1’ or a ‘2’, and with the sub ability to kill without a return shot, the norm would be 1@1, and that’s not a really good chance for a very bad exchange, but with MAD, the same roll the sub used would be used for the return shot, so in the case where a player is loosing a BB for a sub, they would now have a 50:50 chance of killing the sub.

So, an attacking force with 1-2/d6 vs a defending force with 1-5/d6 {before sub hit}, ends up being 1/d6, but as the subs hit had to be either a 1 or 2, we then get a 50:50 chance that the transport kills the sub, which is still a very bad exchange, but hopefully a more palatable one.

and when that too was spammed out, I tired this reply:

Trying to respond, still “Spammed” How many characters can I type is without triggering the filter?

but, you guessed it, also flagged as spam.

[redrum]

@CrazyIvan I think we have this resolved now :)

[CrazyIvan]

Looks like it. Thanks for the help, it was getting frustrating…

I have many ideas, but not much time to share them. That said, I’m going to make another suggestion about LL/MAD.

[Panther]

@CrazyIvan Ouch… glad that @redrum and you sorted it out over there now.

[CrazyIvan]

Yea, it was a bit of a bother there for a minute, lol. Got the thread up and running, and just have to wait for folks to start responding…