WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread

  • '19 '17

    @Amon-Sul Precisely.

  • 2022 2021 '20

    @simon33 Thanks for the suggestion. Not sure what the Xmx and Xms options mean, but I doubled the memory allocated to each and the game does seem to scroll along much nicer.


  • @Amon-Sul correct.

  • 2022 2021 '20 '19

    Paratroopers: I recently posted proposed change for G40 play to make paratroopers standard. Currently, allowing paratrooper tech, would still require an amphib invasion as well. I saw the explanation posts that paratroopers were not added and that changes were made to make Malta and Crete more important. Paratroopers would significantly affect Med isles. My other recently posted suggested change to G40 was having minor ICs and air and naval bases receive max damage when captured. Please consider adding this to PTV.


  • @regularkid Wow, 5 pages after a week from the original post is impressive.

    I think it can be said that Outer Mongolia was for the Soviets almost what Inner Manchuria (Manchukuo) was for the Japanese.

    If the game doesn’t want to add scarcely worthwhile complexity, the most reasonable way to represent all of what we today know as Mongolia is simply as Russians but originally owned by none (or Chinese). However, the importance of the Mongolian military itself was negligible.

    By the way, when (in violation of the non-aggression treaty) the USSR declared war on Japan, “Mongolia” was a base of operation for the invaders. So, the Russians didn’t need to have someone else declaring war on them, to turn their Mongolians into Russians. That already practically happened before the start of WW2, regarding the Russians ability to move freely within Mongolia.

  • '20 '16

    @Cernel said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

    @regularkid Wow, 5 pages after a week from the original post is impressive.

    I think it can be said that Outer Mongolia was for the Soviets almost what Inner Manchuria (Manchukuo) was for the Japanese.

    If the game doesn’t want to add scarcely worthwhile complexity, the most reasonable way to represent all of what we today know as Mongolia is simply as Russians but originally owned by none (or Chinese). However, the importance of the Mongolian military itself was negligible.

    By the way, when (in violation of the non-aggression treaty) the USSR declared war on Japan, “Mongolia” was a base of operation for the invaders. So, the Russians didn’t need to have someone else declaring war on them, to turn their Mongolians into Russians. That already practically happened before the start of WW2, regarding the Russians ability to move freely within Mongolia.

    I’m picturing Mongolia as a pro-Allied neutral, from what you described, but that takes away from the purpose of the somewhat complicated rules, which try to penalize aggression between the USSR and Japan.


  • @Cernel Hey Cernel. Great historical insight. I do feel like PTV captures the essence of what you’re saying better than Global, if imperfectly. In Global, Japan not only had to declare war on Russia for the Mongolians to turn, but also had to invade specific territories. Here, its an automatic transfer to the Soviet Union.

    Like Captain Napalm observed changing Mongolia to pro-allied neutral would, perhaps, most closely replicate the relationship you describe in your post, but it would have far-reaching and not-necessarily-good gameplay consequences.


  • Maybe I missed something, but in the notes it says that carriers may scramble to sea battles. I made an amphibious assault, but then the opponent gets the choice to scramble to the land battle. This seems conflicting. I suppose the option is correct, so the notes just need to be clarified.

  • '19 '17

    @trulpen said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

    Maybe I missed something, but in the notes it says that carriers may scramble to sea battles. I made an amphibious assault, but then the opponent gets the choice to scramble to the land battle. This seems conflicting. I suppose the option is correct, so the notes just need to be clarified.

    Yeah carriers can scramble to sea zones, and land territories that have at least 1 defending unit. Notes will be changed in the next update.


  • Hey, all. WW2 Path Victory version 2.0 is now available for download/update on the TripleA download maps page. Here is a list of the substantive changes:

    -Corrected objectives panel with correct territory and sea zone names.
    -Changed PU marker on Central America to reflect actual value.
    -Added German mech to Austria.
    -Added two TrueNeutral infantry to Switzerland.
    -Removed British infantry from United Kingdom.
    -Moved Japanese marine from Japan to Caroline Islands.
    -Added victory city to Central United States.
    -Fixed Americans starting income to match starting production.
    -Supplemented discussion of rules in Game Notes.
    -Fix connections between territories.
    -Fixed Siberia factory bug to ensure destruction upon capture.
    -Fixed guerrilla spawning in Honan.

    Please note that downloading the updated map will not affect playability of your existing saves.
    Screen Shot 2020-06-13 at 2.08.28 PM.png


  • @regularkid said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

    Hey, all. WW2 Path Victory version 2.0 is now available for download/update on the TripleA download maps page.

    I’ve tried, but can’t find the map. Can’t remove it to install again. How do I proceed?


  • @trulpen Hey trulpen. It should give you the option to “update” the map in the Download Maps folder. Please let me know if it does not.

    If this option is not presented, there is a work-around. Go to your user/documents/tripleA/downloadedmaps directory. Delete the file called ww2_path_to_victory-master.zip. Then when you load TripleA it will give you the option to download the most recent version of the map.


  • Thanks! Didn’t get an update option. I’ll try the work-around.


  • It worked.


  • Hey guys. Adam and I are contemplating a possible change to the PTV map, in response to recent play-testing, and we’d like to get your feedback.

    The change would be to redraw SZ 6 so that it envelops Korea completely, meaning that SZ 20 would no longer be adjacent. Here is a rough rendering of what the SZ would look like. Thoughts? Screen Shot 2020-06-17 at 1.11.51 AM.png


  • Haven’t contemplated it, but sounds good. Presume the idea is to make it less easy to attack Korea from the south.


  • @trulpen, yup, that’s basically it!


  • @regularkid said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

    @trulpen, yup, that’s basically it!

    Like in the original map. I’m in favour.

  • '20 '16

    Yeah, probably the right change.


  • Hey fellow Nerd Herders. We’re happy to announce the release of WW2 Path to Victory v 3.0, available for download now on TripleA. The substantive changes were made based on the results of further playtesting and community feedback:

    • Sea Zone 6 is redrawn to fully encompass Korea (see image below);

    • Japan’s “Honolulu, Sydney, Calcutta” National Objective now requires direct Japanese ownership to get the +5 PUs, rather than just Axis ownership;

    • Tsugaru Strait now permits passage of submarines, regardless of ownership (like Gibraltar).

    That is all.

    Also, if you ever want to chat with Adam and me directly about Path to Victory, or enjoy live chat during games, please come and join our PTV discord server at: https://discord.gg/kSbeKFa. Adam and I are there most days and eager to hear from you.

    Enjoy!

    screenshotofversion3.png


  • @regularkid said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

    NOTE: Because this map involves redrawn Sea Zones, it is not compatible with saved games using older versions of the map. I recommend finishing your current saved games before downloading.

    I’m happy to announce that this isn’t the case.

    I updated the map and it works fine in my on-going game with @aequitas-et-veritas.

    Good work! 🙂


  • My second game. This time with Andrew.


  • @trulpen Thanks Trulpen. . . Adam and I had some trouble last night when we were playing an older saved game against two other guys in the lobby. . . I assumed it was because of the new version, but maybe not!

    I’ll edit the post to remove the warning.

  • '19 '17 '16

    @Adam514 said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

    ICs cannot be built on islands, same rule as G40.

    Manilla, Sumatra, Java, Borneo are no longer islands under the G40 definition.

    Regarding Canada, I really hate the part that the income becomes lost to the allies in the event of a Sea Lion. Weakens the allies certainly.

    Regarding paratroopers, there are some maps with “air_transport” carrying a special infantry. These things work but you require edit mode and/or player enforced rules under some circumstances.

    Regarding Sicily<->Rome I would have thought that weakens Italy too much and it lacks logic to be able to walk across the water without a transport. Yes, that applies Eire-Scotland but the effect on game play is minimal.

    Sorry about the delayed reaction.


  • @simon33 the decision to attach Sicily to Italy was so that it might serve as a viable staging ground for an invasion of Southern Europe, which it was historically, but is rarely in Global 1940.

    For what its worth, in dozens of games, this option has only been used once or twice, that I have seen. So it doesn’t seem OP.

    Regarding islands, the rule is simple: if it’s an island you can’t build a factory there. Japan and UK are the obvious exceptions.

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 114
  • 1
  • 4
  • 9
  • 1
  • 8
  • 237
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

23
Online

16.2k
Users

37.9k
Topics

1.6m
Posts