G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

[simon33]

@Baron:

Do you think such StBs A2 D1 M6-7 C10 D6+2 damage would fit in BMode?

Since, we will include BMode amongst all other features, if it allows people which like to play on BMode to try this variant of StB unit, why not add this little toggle, not very different from TcB C10?

It it one way to rebalance somehow StBs without depriving its regular combat capacity.
At least A2 is more reasonable compared to StBs real tactical combat capacity (Midway and Tirpiz).

Can’t see why not. Yeah, the link seems more historically accurate and more fair.

Regarding Newfoundland, a starting fighter, airfield and a connection to SZ106 would have a pretty big effect on the G1 opening. Could be hit anyway and the gamble taken. Either way, unless the TT is sunk would help massively with defense against sea lion and even if it is sunk would still provide help via the fighter.

[simon33]

Even better - move the DD to be off Newfoundland. There is way too much swing in a 2sub vs DD+TT+ftr attack. http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=&aTra=&aSub=2&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=1&dBom=&dTra=1&dSub=&dDes=1&dCru=&dCar=&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat-Tra&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=

That more or less dictates that the the tt will be sunk but the sub will also be sunk.

[Black_Elk]

@CWO:

@Black_Elk:

Yeah if a map redraft was on the table, I’d try for something like that in 103 because it makes for the whole Sub refueling thing haha, since the German’s had agreements in place.

Actually, it would have been unhealthy for a U-boat to try refueling in the Azores.  To quote my G40 map analysis:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36590.30

Portugal was under the authoritarian rule of Antonio de Oliveira Salazar at the time of WWII, but it traditionally had close ties to Great Britain.  Although nominally neutral, it allowed the Allies to lease air bases in the Azores from 1943 onward and thus technically became a co-belligerent against the Axis.

Haha I was just going off what I saw in the North Atlantic Ferry Route wiki, where it said the prior to basing agreement in 43, Azores was like the only Portuguese territory where German ships were allowed to refuel. And then you got that lone sub there in the starting set up, all alone, just sweating. Just a silly aside.
:-D

As for CANZAC/Commonwealth, there is already a wealth of ideas for that in the Halifax thread. It would be easy enough to implement.

I still think a separate Canada might be worth pursuing though. It makes for a nice split on Allied powers with 8 total instead of 7. I think what likely happens with CANZAC is that rather than a dual theater approach, all the money will just go one direction. (Similar to what happens with the US, or what presumably would have happened with British global economy if it wasn’t broken up to begin with.) That’s not necessarily a bad thing. I just thought it might be cool to see Canada in the mix as it’s own thing, since we’ve never had it before, even though people have been asking since Classic haha. Seems like a pretty easy sell, and a pretty quick turn.

[baron Münchhausen]

I see.
It is possible to create CANZAC via edit mod.
But not Canada as a minor power.
So, it seems better to prioritize Canada first.

NOs are not ready either.
Is it necessary to have the lowest number of NOs?
Sometimes it seems easier to have more like 3 or 4 or even 5 for major like US.

USA original TT NO is hard to not split into regional TTs.
Otherwise, it becomes all or nothing NO bonus.

[simon33]

@Baron:

I see.
It is possible to create CANZAC via edit mod.
But not Canada as a minor power.
So, it seems better to prioritize Canada first.

NOs are not ready either.
Is it necessary to have the lowest number of NOs?
Sometimes it seems easier to have more like 3 or 4 or even 5 for major like US.

USA original TT NO is hard to not split into regional TT.
Otherwise, it becomes all or nothing NO bonus.

You did get the zip I linked to above which already has Canada as a power?

[baron Münchhausen]

It is for Barney to incorporate your codes from your file to the on going and growing Redesign Triple A xml doc.
I hope he will chime in.

@simon33:

Perhaps 8 for minor ICs and 10 for bases? The point would be that damage from a strategic bomber won’t normally be lost.

Anyway, I’ve updated the maps to add another power. Canada has decidedly ugly units (I inverted ANZAC’s colours) but it works. Most of the things I outlined above are included in this zip. I kept the US objective for Western Europe and went back to 5IPCs for UK Original Territories.

I also made Kamikazes purchasable for 4IPCs for Japan.

Had to include a link - the 25MB or so is too big to attach.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/08g4rwkul6kq3ow/canadianmod-master.zip?dl=0

Just include this zip in your downloadedMaps directory for 1.9 of Triple-A.

[barney]

@Baron:

It is for Barney to incorporate your codes from your file to the on going and growing Redesign Triple A xml doc.
I hope he will chime in.

Don’t have time for that Baron. simon knows what’s up way more than I do on the whole triplea code thing. :) It’ll be on github soon for anybody to work with.

[simon33]

@barney:

@Baron:

It is for Barney to incorporate your codes from your file to the on going and growing Redesign Triple A xml doc.
I hope he will chime in.

Don’t have time for that Baron. simon knows what’s up way more than I do on the whole triplea code thing. :) It’ll be on github soon for anybody to work with.

BTW, I wasn’t planning on putting Canada up on github unless a consensus developed on a map that people wanted to play.

[barney]

@simon33:

@barney:

@Baron:

It is for Barney to incorporate your codes from your file to the on going and growing Redesign Triple A xml doc.
I hope he will chime in.

Don’t have time for that Baron. simon knows what’s up way more than I do on the whole triplea code thing. :) It’ll be on github soon for anybody to work with.

BTW, I wasn’t planning on putting Canada up on github unless a consensus developed on a map that people wanted to play.

Didn’t mean to imply that you were simon, just that the xml with all the house rules will be available to those that can navigate the Git world :)

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I mean, if all the modular HR materials are pretty much in place. The next logical step is to start using them to make an actual mod, or mods as the case may be, which would be the fun part.
:-D

I don’t know, but it seems to me that Canada might be a cool jumping off point.

How many hands do we need for a consensus? I got mine up hehe

https://www.dropbox.com/s/08g4rwkul6kq3ow/canadianmod-master.zip?dl=0

The above just feels right to me, with the red territories up north like that. It’s got the look

hey Simon did you like the red Canadian units I threw together? I just pushed the hue on all the British stuff I could find, including all the HR units, to make them red.
https://www.sendspace.com/file/ohrjdx

ps. I say we give Yukon to the Canadians with no connections (the way Barney made it Brit in the HR file). Having it blanked out gray just feels like a weird relic from first edition to me.

[Black_Elk]

Just too a quick screen cap of simon’s file with the recolored units added in. Looks pretty slick to me…
:-D

[baron Münchhausen]

Nice.
It fits the bill for me.

To reach a 12 IPCs minor Power and increase action in PTO:

Yukon: 2 IPCs
North Western Canada: 2 IPCs
Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba (AlSaMa): 2 IPCs
Ontario: 3 IPCs
Quebec: 2 IPCs
The Maritimes: 1 IPC

If wanting to give Labrador NFL 1 IPC,
then I would reduce AlSaMa to 1 IPC.

Just a 10 IPCs would be:
Yukon: 2 IPCs
North Western Canada: 2 IPCs
Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba (AlSaMa): 1 IPC
Ontario: 2 IPCs
Quebec: 2 IPCs
The Maritimes: 1 IPC

And if wanting to give Labrador NFL 1 IPC,
then I would reduce Yukon to 1 IPC.

Canadian NO
+5 PUs for each of these three: if controls all original Canadian TTs, if no Axis warship in Atlantic SZs (except SZs 113, 114, 115) OR  if a Canadian unit is on an Axis TT in Africa or in Italy or is in Normandy.

@Baron:

It would need a territorial NOs such as +3 PUs for all Canada TTy,
and another for +5 if no Axis warship in ATO to be somewhat viable.
And +5 if a Canadian unit is on an Axis TT in Africa or Italy or +5 if a Canadian unit is in Normandy.

This might be a workable minor Power.

UKE NOs however needs an increase compared to OOB for the 7 less IPCs income each round.

[simon33]

Alright, I’ve pushed that up.

If you remove and download your global map set, you’ll be able to see the two new maps although I haven’t incorporated the above suggestions.

[baron Münchhausen]

I put together most of NOs related posts.

G40 Redesign NOs specific thread
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39627.msg1646514#msg1646514

[Black_Elk]

@simon33:

Alright, I’ve pushed that up.

If you remove and download your global map set, you’ll be able to see the two new maps although I haven’t incorporated the above suggestions.

Sounds good, I’ll swoop it when I get off work to check it out.
 :-D

I’ll admit, my primary interest in Canada would be to serve as a lab rat for more radical HR changes haha, so using it as basically a template on which to graft other materials.

I think there are easy ways to adjust income/production for Canada. For example a simple HR that reads something like “All Canadian territories receive +1 production over the printed OOB values.” That one is fairly easy FtF.

I suppose also from an FtF perspective (using the boxed materials) if one wanted to preserve the dual economy but same units for the British and UKP, you could perhaps try the same for Canada using Anzac sculpts. Where the same sculpts are used for both nations during combat/non com whatever, and only income/placement is different based on the side of the map. (In that case you just treat W. Canada would be treated kind of like W. India in reverse, on the other side of the map but counting ETO.) But my favorite for FtF would be the straight up Commonwealth (all dominions), and just eliminating UKP weirdness as discussed in Halifax, but I think that requires some British tweaks. Separate Canada seems more like a tripleA thing, or for the dedicated customizer willing to purchase materials from HBG or paint sculpts.

Hey Simon, how do you feel about changing the HEX color for Pro Allies Neutrals, so it isn’t exactly the same as the HEX color for True Neutrals?

If adding a new color value for Canada anyway, I think it makes sense to have a color for Pro-Allies Neutral that can be distinguished from True Neutral even without the diagonal relief lines. That should have been a feature of the original 1940 game file. Almost any similar shade of tan or beige would work, as long as it isn’t the exact same HEX number that True Neutral uses. That way if someone wants to HR a True Neutral into a Pro Allies Neutral via edit mode, they will have a visual indication of the change.

FtF I use an upside down roundel for this, but in tripleA it’s all color.

[Black_Elk]

Just deleted and re-downloaded the G40 files. I get a mapmissing prompt when trying to open the Canada one.

Is the actual mapfile listed in the experimental section or somewhere else? I can get it to work with the outside link from earlier.

I noticed it’s cloned from the BM3 mod, rather than OOB, is the idea there just for a Balanced Mod variant? Or do you want to try this Canada thing with Barney’s xml that has all the other optional HR materials?

My thought there would be to have a standard G40 house rules download (perhaps in the experimental downloads section), and then one that includes an HR Canada mod as an add on. That way we can tweak it on the fly using edit mode with some pick and choose and options on the expanded roster. That way you could try Canada without Marines or Vichy if desired, or using the expanded VC idea or whatever, and have it be modular with customizable game saves rather than as just a single set mod with all options pre-selected.

Just as an aside, I know having Global 1942, Ozteas 41, and Balanced Mod etc, all bundled together with the World War II Global package seems convenient for popularizing them, but shouldn’t all these really be in a separate bundle called Global Variants/Variations the way it was done for other standard maps in the past?

Might not be a popular view anymore, but I’m not sure I dig having any custom Mods tacked onto stuff that has “World War II” in the name. They should really be a separate entry.

Its certainly nice to have a combat before purchase option available by default, which would be cool to have for every standard game really, but having so many entries for the default World War II Global package seems kind of cluttered to me.  I guess that ship has already sailed, and I wouldn’t rock the boat and suggest we start yanking things that might break current savegames or whatever (not before the next stable anyway). But having “World War II” in the name was supposed to be a clear signal to the casual tripleA player about what kind of materials were included under that heading.

Not sure how much this was discussed before allowing an exception for the BM mod and Oztea’s 1941 or any other new stuff that might come along, but it kind of breaks with the established tripleA naming conventions.

[simon33]

Fixed the download prompt for the canada+bomber map.

[Black_Elk]

Yeah works for me now. Looks nice too with Yukon cleaned up.

I’d still say that going forward only official materials should have the standard “World War II” designation, even if we have variants available in the default Global download section.

It would be nice if all Mods were clearly distinguished from the official materials by name, the way Oztea’s 1941 is, so that they don’t clutter up the World War II list. Even Classic Iron Blitz 3rd Edition didn’t make the World War II cut. All the Classic mods, (Anzio, Kremlin, Sword etc) which were established decades ago, and even 2nd edition Classic itself are a separate download entry in the Experimental section, where all other map variants are located. So it seems a little weird to me to buck that convention just for draft concept G40 stuff. Nothing should be creeping into the middle of the World War II entries that wasn’t in a box at one point or another.

As a player I should be able to scan down from from World War II Classic all the way to World War II v6, and see an unbroken list of only the official materials.

Also, for the map properties, this is the problem color I mentioned…

Neutral_Allies=d8ba7c
color

It should be something like dbc089, so that its possible to distinguish from True Neutral even without the diagonal relief the way the Pro Axis neutral color is currently.

Also, apologies to anyone reading the thread that doesn’t play tripleA, since this probably all sounds like Ancient Greek or something haha. But part of our goal with the HR concept was to get something that works in the machine too for maximum appeal. I’ll post the full game notes once they’re fully edited for spelling etc. Then I will post a version with notations for how to implement all this stuff FtF with suggestions for methods of achieving the same on the table top.
:-D

[simon33]

I catch your spirit and particularly on the bomber map. I don’t really think that one is production quality.

A bit of a pain to have multiple downloads of the same stuff.

I’d like to incorporate barney’s tech stuff but I can’t see where to download that from?

I’m going to remove the canadian + bomber map. You can still use it by putting the attached zip in your downloadedMaps directory. It depends on having a recent version of global.

Redesign.zip

[barney]

Hi simon

Here’s the latest HouseRules file. I haven’t got it on git yet.

https://www.sendspace.com/file/gmux43

xml needs some clean up but i’m going back to work in a couple days and won’t be doing anything for a while. Would like to have all techs activated by one player and also individually (the ones that apply). Also want to add all of BM and Halifax Rules. And continue with more house rules as well.

Anyway the Canada thing sounds way cool to me. I know a lot of people here would probably be into it