Quantcast

Realistic Scenario Design Contest

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
Axis & Allies is a historical game but not realistic one. With the TripleA engine, free of the constraints of a commercial board game has the tools to be more realistic. Therefore I am sponsoring a scenario design contest with the following rules.

1.     A prize of $100 will be given to the person who designs the most realistic scenario for World War Two using the TripleA Engine. In addition, I will buy you lunch if you are in the NY Metropolitan area.

2. The scenario must be playable by the AI.

3. The scenario must cover the entire world (excluding the polar regions) without the use of inset maps or other discontinuities.

4. The scenario must not have no more than 750 areas. Do not feel obliged to create a new map.

5. The game can start at any reasonable point, although a good treatment of the early war years would be appreciated.

6.     Submissions must be made by July 4. I will pick a winner based upon my own subjective criteria.

7.     Individual nations should not have more than 20 units types to build.

There are types of realism I am looking for Strategic Realism, Operational Realism and Tactical Realism

Strategic realism covers the realities of producting & maintaining units. A&A ignores this in a variety of ways. There is no cost for maintaining units. Captured areas are worth full value to their captor. Economic values do not reflect the real importance of areas. The starting forces are arbitrary in size and placement.

Operational realism means that the forces can do what they were really capable of. In A&A, operations can be conducted as easily in interior Asia as in Europe. In A&A, the Pacific is little wider than the Atlantic. On the other hand, the ability to move forces quickly by sea or rail is ignored in A&A. The importance of weather on the Russian front is ignored by A&A.

Tactical realism means that forces interrelate with each other in realistic ways. In A&A the Attacker can fight endless rounds of combat, while in reality offensives often bogged down. Air units are important in A&A but not in the way they were important in the real war.

Keep in mind the difference between decisions and features. For example, the Fall of France was the result of poorly planned operations by the Allies. This could be a decision, allowing the player to make or avoid the same mistake, or a feature by just weakening the Allies. Both are realistic, just be explicit about in your notes.

Please be creative and keep it simple. Post your comments and scenarios here.




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

captaincrunch
sounds really cool and sounds like finding someone to add more abilities and breakdown/endurance stat type stuff and triggers etc. but definitely this game modding ability is capable. Interesting idea to pass onto other gamers and hopefully this game and its community grows and I'm sure there will be takers for this ... just need to put in the effort for this idea but a cool one. Brings to mind a boardgame called Squadleader that I think tried to be very realistic on a Hexagon-style map but TripleA is the most advanced right now I think
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
Squad Leader is a tactical game so it is not the best model. Some games that to recreate all of WW2 in a more realistic game include World in Flames(ADG), Blitz(ADG), Global War (SPI), Global War 1939 (HBG), Blitz General, WW2: The Wargame, The World at War (Xeno Games). The last 3 games are essentially A&A variants and suffer from many of the same problems as A&A.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

m3tan
In reply to this post by RogerCooper
I'd love to submit an entry, but is this going to require developing additional code to enable some of the features you're suggesting?

Has someone created a resource listing all the parameters that can be enabled to create custom games and rules?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

Zim Xero
Primary source: the Pact of Steel .xml file in the Games folder.
Secondary source: searching these forums for specific solutions/clarifications
Alternate source: the changelog, if you can find one that is readable
'thats the way it is' makes it neither desireable nor inevitable
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
In reply to this post by m3tan
m3tan wrote
I'd love to submit an entry, but is this going to require developing additional code to enable some of the features you're suggesting?
I think that the game has plenty of features to do what is needed. Just make the best use of the tools available.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
Here is some data from the Correlates of War database which may help guide designers,
http://axisandallies.wikia.com/wiki/Correlates_of_War

Note that the Axis starts with about 43.5% of the world's military but only about 20% of world's economy.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

m3tan
In reply to this post by RogerCooper
I'm much better versed on what AAA can and can't do now that I've had a few weeks to tinker with the XML. I'm on board with all your contest parameters except this one:
RogerCooper wrote
3. The scenario must cover the entire world (excluding the polar regions) without the use of inset maps or other discontinuities.
A global map doesn't easily lend itself to realistic scenario design. 95% of the fighting occurred in 20% of the globe. If you don't want panzers in India, the territories should really be drawn to scale. Unless France, Germany, and Spain are one area each, the map will consist of hundreds of territories (90% of which will never be used). I'm not interested in creating a map that large. If France, Germany, and Spain are one territory each, you're eliminating almost all the meaningful operational decision making. The game devolves to number crunching production and placement of units (basically stock edition A&A).

My suggestion is a map that covers Europe, North Africa, Coastal Asia, and the Pacific in sufficient detail to allow for meaningful operational action. The US can be represented as an abstract off map territory. Central/South America, Central/Southern Africa, and Central Asia can be ignored completely. There was realistically ZERO chance of any meaningful fighting occurring in those theaters. If it did, somebody has already been resoundingly beaten... The handful of off map theaters such as Dakar, Ethiopia, Madagascar etc.. that could/did have fighting can be handled by off-map boxes.

Your thoughts?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
I think that discontinuous maps (such as the Great War map) are really ugly. You can deal with the less interesting parts of the world by subtly altering the scales. The Big World map does this well.

In a board game, you need to distort the map to make if fit. In a computer game, this is a less of an issue as you can quickly move over uninteresting areas of the world.

It is worth noting that the some areas you mentioned did have some fighting and could plausibly have had more fighting. For example, Peron in Argentina was pro-Axis and the US actually had a plan for invading Brazil if it sided with the Axis.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

sneakingcoward
In reply to this post by RogerCooper
try
world_at_war_variants

get me at
wgbt@gmx.at

sneakingcoward
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
There are some nice unit interactions in these variants and good map. However, it lacks political rules and does not show Japan's relatively low production capability or the vast resources of the US.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

sneakingcoward
latest version uses also recruits, which limits production.

anyway with the existing ruleset of aaa its the best map for realistic play.

and thats the contest about.

want to play ??
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
Can you give me a link to the latest version?. I don't see it in the repository. At least not something with recruits.

My general preference is playing against the AI, rather than online. I am fortunate to have numerous opportunities for face-to-face play of wargames including A&A. What I like about TripleA is to convenience of quick games against the AI, playing only 1 country and trying different strategies.

World at War may be interesting to play, but it is not realistic, It has a 1939 start point, but the US & USSR are both immediately active. Japan has an income only 20% less than the US, when in reality the US GDP was more than x4 larger. There is no representation of the difficulties of waging war in the Asian interior. There is no representation of the superiority of the Germans in land warfare. All of these are things which can be achieved in the TripleA system.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

sneakingcoward

you have an email ??


we play pbem, not online.



On 12.03.2017 13:49, RogerCooper [via tripleadev] wrote:
Can you give me a link to the latest version?. I don't see it in the repository. At least not something with recruits.

My general preference is playing against the AI, rather than online. I am fortunate to have numerous opportunities for face-to-face play of wargames including A&A. What I like about TripleA is to convenience of quick games against the AI, playing only 1 country and trying different strategies.

World at War may be interesting to play, but it is not realistic, It has a 1939 start point, but the US & USSR are both immediately active. Japan has an income only 20% less than the US, when in reality the US GDP was more than x4 larger. There is no representation of the difficulties of waging war in the Asian interior. There is no representation of the superiority of the Germans in land warfare. All of these are things which can be achieved in the TripleA system.


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/Realistic-Scenario-Design-Contest-tp7591226p7595462.html
To unsubscribe from Realistic Scenario Design Contest, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
I am not interested in play-by-email. I don't want to make that commitment.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Aw: Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

sneakingcoward
that what you want, you wont get with aaa.
an exact mirror of the economics of ww2 is useless, because then the game is unplayable.
us was 10 times higher as japan.
this game cant be won by axis.
 
1. aaa should offer for each map the possibility, that axis starts with higher military and less pu and pu balance can be reached, when allies reaches military balance.
it should be an even fight.
2. a good ai is also a dream, because even now for e.g. selfdriving car no real ai is here.
in this small piece of software of aaa you cant expect a real challenge ai.
this game is here for human opponents.
 
everything else, an almost realtime warfare with all relevant tools, you can find in waw variants.
 
sneakingcoward
 
 
Gesendet: Montag, 13. März 2017 um 00:51 Uhr
Von: "RogerCooper [via tripleadev]" <[hidden email]>
An: sneakingcoward <[hidden email]>
Betreff: Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest
I am not interested in play-by-email. I don't want to make that commitment.
 
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/Realistic-Scenario-Design-Contest-tp7591226p7595465.html
To unsubscribe from Realistic Scenario Design Contest, click here.
NAML
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

berndtriplea
In reply to this post by RogerCooper
Hi Roger, hi community.

I'm playing TripleA for more than 5 years now. Together with five triplea veterans around the world we played/tried loads of different maps, always aiming to find the most realistic map, but of course aware that triplea is a game and will always remain a game, that developers only can revise or develop further as close as possible to reach (more) realism.

When we discovered/played first WAW_variants (fuel edition) we found one map that did suit our expectations best. But end of December last year we found a revised mod of WAW_variants. Called WAWXXX from sneak or sneakingcoward? It has the same game fundament like Variants, but additionaly now introduces the recruits model. So, not only fuel is consumed and needed to move or produce motorized units, which was a real PLUS for more realism in game play. From now on you also need recruit units which empowers you or gives you the allowance to generally produce units. And in it's latest version also strategic bombing raids against naval units is possible.

In my view and in view of my triplea combatants, WAWXXX is the most realistic triplea mod or map that has been developed by now.

What I agree or I am in favor of is to introduce also some kind of unit maintaining costs. This would again add an extra PLUS towards realism to the game in general. But that should be easy to implement...for developers. Unfortunately I am not a developer.

berndtriplea
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
I have to take a closer look at the fuel mod. However, I view AI-compatibility as important. The Hard AI has now reached the point were it poses a significant challenge. If you don't believe me, try to playing almost any WW2 scenario as Russia with all other nations as AI.

A TripleA game does not have to be realistic to be fun. But realism, can result in fun.

For example, let's consider the Pacific War. The US had about a 4-1 advantage in GDP over Japan. (Of course both sides had other wars to fight). However, the Japanese start superior in numbers and the US has a big Pacific to fight over. A realistic game could make this a challenge by giving the US a deadline to win and limit the ability of the US to quickly outproduce the Japanese. Limiting battle rounds would make it hard to achieve a single decisive blow. A realistic game would also need to show how the Chinese quagmire sucked up Japan's limited resources.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

Cernel
The main element countering the economic superiority of the U.S.A. is that it takes about 2 years to build a battleship or a carrier, while moving of a couple sea zones would be like 1 week.

Thus, a realistic map should require several tens of turns (somewhere from 20 turns to 100 turns, depending on the map) to build a battleship or a carrier.

However, if submarines are realistically represented, Japan is doomed anyways, because USA can just spam submarines, and there is no way Japan can counter that, nor just give away with merchant shipping, as it needs to import many raw materials.

One way or the other, only Germany can win the war, and only in Russia.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Aw: Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

sneakingcoward
In reply to this post by RogerCooper
waw vXXX exactly what you are looking for.
 
due that not updated at github now, give me your mail.
 
 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. März 2017 um 00:37 Uhr
Von: "RogerCooper [via tripleadev]" <[hidden email]>
An: sneakingcoward <[hidden email]>
Betreff: Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest
I have to take a closer look at the fuel mod. However, I view AI-compatibility as important. The Hard AI has now reached the point were it poses a significant challenge. If you don't believe me, try to playing almost any WW2 scenario as Russia with all other nations as AI.

A TripleA game does not have to be realistic to be fun. But realism, can result in fun.

For example, let's consider the Pacific War. The US had about a 4-1 advantage in GDP over Japan. (Of course both sides had other wars to fight). However, the Japanese start superior in numbers and the US has a big Pacific to fight over. A realistic game could make this a challenge by giving the US a deadline to win and limit the ability of the US to quickly outproduce the Japanese. Limiting battle rounds would make it hard to achieve a single decisive blow. A realistic game would also need to show how the Chinese quagmire sucked up Japan's limited resources.


 
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/Realistic-Scenario-Design-Contest-tp7591226p7595468.html
To unsubscribe from Realistic Scenario Design Contest, click here.
NAML
12
Loading...