@Stucifer 2176a44d-8289-4f50-a902-39614650fba4-9ba1m8.jpg
WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread
-
@Amon-Sul said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:
why do Russia, China and USA start with less PUs then production?
-
@Amon-Sul Russia and China is for their purge and civil war penalties, US will be fixed.
-
@Adam514 said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:
@Amon-Sul Russia and China is for their purge and civil war penalties, US will be fixed.
so for Russia and China its only in rd 1?
-
@Amon-Sul Precisely.
-
@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.
-
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.
-
@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.
-
@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.
-
@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?
-
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!
Suggested Topics
