Oztea also has a 1942 setup
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/20575/oztea-s-1942-global-setup
Argo's Middleweight Map for 1939 & 1942
-
Sure I would like to add it to Triplea and we can test each other’s maps I’am currently waiting for someones help for making relief tiles. I don’t know about painting relief.
You are absolutely correct having countless territories doesn’t magically make maps good. Its art of giving players maximum options with the least amount of territories. Ok I am trying to be more specific based on my map to explain.
The things that I tried to achive on the Eastern front that most other maps lack that I could see;
-Germany doesn’t have to rush Leningrad first like most of mid sized WWII map. Its possible to simulate Leningrad siege just keeping novgorod with infantries+trenched to avoid high casualties. Russia and Western Allies can reinforce Leningrad too via Ladoga Lake. Russia has special combatant transport for this task.
-With 1942 Borders Germany-Italy outporduces Russia-Britain which means Germany doesn’t automatically lost if they fail rapidly taking Moscow and they have an option to play defensively too.
-Taking Moscow doesn’t mean absoluteAxis victory either. Nations continue to collect incomes and produce units.
-Due to low value of Stalingrad, Germany have option of bypassing Stalingrad and rushing Baku too or trying to take both as historically.
-With Baku factory, Russia gains helping British option in the Middle East.
-The rivers show which sea zone connect what this mean its possible to build ships in Caspian Sea and moving to Black Sea (a bit far fetched but not absurdly unrealistic)thus we get also a Black Sea campaign.
-Even the Chinese have opportunity to participate the Case Blue campaign with their mobile units. (Very unrealistic but I had to, nations with only one front is boring)
-Lastly Germany also starts with a factory in Finland considering also blockade zones we have a full front from Arctic to Black Sea to Caspian sea which not a just German-Russian battle front as seen.
-
Very interesting! I see what you’ve done with Novgorod; that’s very clever. I’ve wanted to do something along those lines, but couldn’t quite figure out how. I guess you’ve enlarged Lake Ladoga far beyond its actual size, but if you include the marshes and tundra and areas like that which were difficult for infantry/tanks to cross, then it makes sense. I very much like the way that stacking Novgorod with German infantry would (1) allow the Russians to continue fighting the Finns from Leningrad, (2) prevent the Russians from attacking Army Group Center out of Leningrad, and (3) not put any particular pressure on Moscow itself.
I also like the river connections; that’s interesting. I might add one myself to connect the Caspian and the Black Sea, maybe only usable if you control both North and South Caucasus, or one of them, or something like that.
I think we have some similar design goals; I agree that Germany should not be forced to capture Moscow, and that nations should continue producing income and building units even after losing their capital (that was one of the first rules changes I made in my map). I like the idea of optionally sending a few Russian units south; in my 1942 setup, I have Persia waiting to be claimed by either Russia or Britain (Allied player’s choice). I like the idea of Baku, but I left it out of my map because I didn’t have room for it. All of my ‘circle’ territories are the same size, and all of them are victory cities – that helps me keep the map cleaner and easier to read, but it does limit some of my options.
Part of what you need to make good relief tiles is a strong sense of graphic design – you have to know how to paint a map in a way that will look attractive. That I can’t help you with; I’m not an artist in that sense. On a technical level, though, the relief map is just the regular map with the white land color and the navy sea color both replaced by transparent nothing. You make all of the solid areas of the map transparent, and then you add on a translucent layer with whatever features you want to include in the map. E.g. if you want to show canals, or rivers, or forts, or stalin’s smiling face, etc., you just put it on the relief map where you want it to appear, and you make sure it’s at least 30% (preferably closer to 80%) transparent so that players will be able to see the map underneath your relief art. Then you use the Tile Breaker in the Map Creator Utillity to create relieftiles for you automatically, the same way you create your basetiles – just select the relief map instead of the main map, and select the reliefTiles folder instead of the baseTiles folder.
You may find this thread helpful:
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/2315/trouble-getting-relieftiles-images-to-appear-in-the-game?_=1601592309277 -
I had to enlarge Ladoga to give significant space for ship placement. Its even possible to connect Ladoga to Baltic and this route was established in 1933. I just didn’t do it for balance purpose.
-
Yeah, no complaints on Ladoga, man. I’ve enlarged dozens of my territories for the same reason. What’s the balance concern? You could make a canal attachment so that the Germans can’t move ships through Ladoga until after they take Leningrad. You could even have the canal be Russian-only, I think, simulating the Russians blowing up the locks as they retreat.
-
Correct but it would make taking Leningrad option too railroaded and compulsory task for Germany instead of a real choice but I am still a bit undecided maybe I will change that.
-
I’ve made a little progress on the Middleweight Map! The canals should all be working now (they’re marked on the map with graphics, and they’re enforced by the game engine), and the stats for air units have been rebalanced – instead of “jets”, which were hideously overpowered, I now have “divebombers,” which have a strong offense against land units but have a short range and are weak to enemy interceptors. The other air unit stats are also adjusted a little to compensate. Thanks to Karl7 for playtesting and Mike K. for advice on the air stats.
As before, you can download the .zip file that has everything you need to play at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RTTR2kzgPeV82avij5ZI6mXuN5M9ezmi/view?usp=sharing. Unzip the folder and put the contents in C:/Users/[your name]/triplea/downloadedMaps.
-
@navalland Thank you again for the feedback on the Caucasus – I have finally implemented the split.
-
@vodot @barnee @Black_Elk @General-6-Stars @Karl7 @Navalland
After years of development, I am pleased to report that Argo’s Middleweight Map is live on TripleA! Look for it as “argomidweight” under the Experimental tab from the “Map Downloads” button, and let me know if you have any trouble. Karl, the paratrooper controls have been fixed; I promise they work now. Vodot, the Azores are a usable territory. Navalland, Case Blue is totally a thing now. I think you’re all going to have some fun. :)
-
@argothair our conversation on modular AA50 overlays is bringing me back to this awesome thread after a couple years - and I missed this official tripleA release during all the pandemical insanity!! This looks incredible. I’ll check it out for sure.
-
V vodot referenced this topic on
-
@vodot Thanks! Let me know if you ever want to try a game; I think the balance still needs more playtesting from humans. :-)
-
@argothair that would be sublime.
-
Continued playtesting suggests the map is biased in favor of the Allies. To correct this, I’m thinking of making Berlin worth $10 instead of $8, adding 2 German infantry to Berlin, 1 German jeep to the Ruhr, 1 French fort to the Maginot Line, 1 Italian infantry to Rome, a Japanese carrier with 1 biplane to the Yellow Sea, and 2 Japanese commandos to the Japanese home islands. The idea is to give the Axis a bit more staying power in rounds 2-4 without unbalancing the turn 1 battles, which I am generally still happy with.
If anyone has objections or concerns, speak now or forever hold your peace! I will post an updated map file to the server in a couple of weeks.
-
After further thought, I have also altered the South Pacific Sea Zones, mostly for the benefit of the 1942 scenario.
The Coral Sea Zone has been split in half to make it harder for the Japanese to reach Sydney – they can still raid northern Australia and even Queensland, but now New South Wales is at its proper distance. I also added Guam, New Caledonia (a Free French Pacific colony), and Samoa to the map, along with the Polynesian Sea Zone to hold New Caledonia and Samoa. Guam and Samoa will boost the American income a bit to help even them up with Britain and Japan, and the extra $1 of French income will help give the French player more choices about what units to buy after the fall of Paris (as well as give the French the theoretical option of building a barracks in the Pacific and focusing against Japan instead of Italy). Meanwhile, the reshaped Solomon Sea Zone leads to more interesting and accurate decisions around the Guadalcanal Campaign, and Guam provides a final stop on America’s central Pacific route if they want to follow the historical strategy of island-hopping and then bombing the Japanese mainland.
Finally, we have some unit tweaks – the price of 5/4/2 battleships will drop from $16 to $13; the price of 1/2/2 carriers will drop from $14 to $11. This will help keep them competitive with the surprisingly useful 3/3/3 cruisers, which already only cost $9 and seem well-balanced there against subs and destroyers. Meanwhile, interceptor planes’ movement will be boosted from 2 to 3 to enable them to play a more relevant role at sea.
If anyone has any complaints, concerns, or feature requests, please send them in – otherwise, I will post the game to the server.
-
BB shore shot 5 and CR 3 ? BB shore 5 even if damaged ?
Does your BB and AC drop in AD if damaged ?
3 move CR is basically a fast attack boat with shore shot for islands ?
If your destroyers is 2/3/2 C6 that is to strong compared to a CR C9 3/3/3. -
@general-6-stars The BB and AC (like all units in this game) are 1-hit, so the issue of them dropping in attack and defense when they’re damaged doesn’t come up – if they’re damaged, they’re dead.
The cruiser, unlike the destroyer, can carry a commando and/or bombard, so that’s part of what you’re getting for the extra $3 in addition to the +1 attack and +1 move.
Historically, in WWII pretty much all the ships travelled at the same speed, except for some slow merchant transports and older destroyers and escort carriers that were assigned to guard them. By giving the cruiser an extra point of move, I’m not really suggesting that it’s a separate type of ship – buying and using cruisers is more about saying “we’re just going to strike fast and hard with whichever ships are available right now, instead of waiting a few weeks or months for the entire fleet to be repaired and refueled and available.” The game turns for this map are about 5 months long, which is plenty of time for warships to sail around the world and back, so it’s all an abstraction anyway.
-
New version is available for download from the server! In addition to the changes discussed above (ship costs, Guam, Samoa, boost to '39 Axis starting units, etc.), I have also playtested the '42 scenario a few more times and have added additional Allied starting units in the '42 scenario, as well as a few strategy notes for that map. I believe both maps are now reasonably balanced, although as always, more human playtesting will have the final vote.
-
If interested. Crunched your numbers. Just what I would go with for values based on getting my moneys worth for each piece.
BB C13 A4 1.13 D4 1.13 2 hits Sh4
CR C9 A3 .89 D3 .89 Sh3 M3 1 inf
DD C7 A2 .98 D2 .98 Bl Sub FS
SS C6 A2 1.33 D1 .67 Fstrike
PB C5 A1 .96 D1 .96 Bl Sub FS
CA C11 A1 .20 D2 .40I go by the decimal number and the DD, SS and PB are good and balanced for numbers.
The CR is always weaker but with the added M3, carry 1 inf and Sh3 is a very nice piece to have now. Most games have CR & Tac just to weak.
I’ve been using the decimal numbers in my games for years.
I may try the patrol boat now in my game. Group may get iffy ! lol
Other wise good luck with what your doing.Just IMO
-
@general-6-stars Thanks for weighing in! I am potentially interested in your feedback, but if you want me to adjust stats based on your numbers, then you will need to clearly explain both what the numbers mean and how you are calculating them. For example, for the battleship, I don’t know what “1.13” or “Sh4” means.
Also, it appears that you have already changed some of my combat stats. For example, my battleship has A5, not A4. My destroyer has D3, not D2. Are those your recommended changes? If so, what is the reason behind those recommendations? Please do as much as you can to explain your logic in plain English, rather than just posting strings of abbreviations and numbers.
-
@argothair said in Argo's Middleweight Map for 1939 & 1942:
@general-6-stars Thanks for weighing in! I am potentially interested in your feedback, but if you want me to adjust stats based on your numbers, then you will need to clearly explain both what the numbers mean and how you are calculating them. For example, for the battleship, I don’t know what “1.13” or “Sh4” means.
Also, it appears that you have already changed some of my combat stats. For example, my battleship has A5, not A4. My destroyer has D3, not D2. Are those your recommended changes? If so, what is the reason behind those recommendations? Please do as much as you can to explain your logic in plain English, rather than just posting strings of abbreviations and numbers.
Your BB is to weak. Your DD are to strong.
I changed your stats so if I buy a DD, PB, BB or CR I’m getting my moneys worth.
The SH is for shore shot.
The decimal number shows how your piece stacks up to costs for punch.Your values.
BB C13 A@5 .71 D@4 .57 Shore shot @5 .71
against
2 DD C12 A@6 4.00 D@6 4.00 decimal number tells me DD to strong.2 DD C12 A@6 4.00 D@6 4.00
against
CR C9 A@3 .89 D@3 .89 But since your CR has the shore Shot @3 .89
and the move 3, plus carry 1 Inf makes up for it being weak against the DD
if it only the CR had AD values plus shore.Your values
1 BB C13 A@5 .71 D@4 .57 1 hit
against
1 DD C6 A@3 2.00 D@3 2.00Most people base there Values on Hit % which is fine.
But here I’m buying DD and won’t even come close to a BB.
Mostly its the DD that is to strong in games and CR to weak.
IMO
-
@general-6-stars That’s part of the answer I’m looking for, but I still don’t understand your analysis. For example, for the battleship, 5 punch divided by 13 cost is not 0.71. So where does the number 0.71 come from? Are you normalizing the punch/cost ratio against some hypothetical ideal unit that has a ratio of 1.0? If so, what is that unit? If not, what is going on?
Suggested Topics
