Star Wars Is a fun map-thanks for the efforts so far!
The Star Wars maps need the "Move existing fighters to new carriers" option. When a faction is unfortunate enough to lose its only star fleet it is virtually impossible to rebuild and expand when opponents have a small to medium group of start fighters in range. Even saving up resources for a round and expending 2 rounds worth of resources on the cheapest sea vessels can easily be defeated by a medium sized group of star fighters.
Allowing the "Move existing fighters to new carriers" will allow factions a small chance to break out of this doomed state by building up some fighters defensively, then shifting to the offensive by purchasing only carriers and placing a force capable of rebuffing all but a large force of fighters or a group of fighters supported by a fleet. Otherwise, players in this sad state can enjoy 10 rounds of being pinned down by a small mobile force of fighters which continues to complete attacks but also renders a faction unable to expand...it is boring building up an island that will inevitably be overcome.
Yay! Someone actually plays the Star Wars maps? I am the creator of the map. I hear you and see the problem. Actually, I have experienced and thought about it just like you did. And I also think someone pointed this flaw out long ago (?). I have edited the map XML and already made these changes:
"Produce fighters on carriers" "true" (Now carriers can be build and have new fighters placed on them.)
"Produce new fighters on old carriers" "true" (And new fighters can be placed directly on orbiting carriers.)
"Move existing fighters to new carriers" value="true" (or one can move old planetside fighters to the new carriers)
I will set the new versions up for udpate soon (with some other minor changes).
Is this what you had in mind, Goat of Doom?
Hey there, I also have to say thank you for this map it´s really fun to play, just a few more human players as opponents would be nice =)
I´m curious about the update with the "new fighter on carrier" option. When do you think you will publish it?
I also have to ask about the long-range-fighter range of 10 fields... how did you get to this distance? It appears a bit far for me, any chance to implement a game option that allows to ajust this range?
I have already tried to get it released. I guess you could say that it is pending release. I guess you have v1.2 installed on your computer? If the wait for v1.3 is unbearable, here are the download links for the updated map: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B32S8ObEkqQuOHF6RXJZSlN1M0k/view?usp=sharing Version 1.2 to 1.3 changes (By Frostion):
Allied and war relationships now have names.
New carriers may now be build with fighters on deck. Furthermore, any planetside fighters may move to the newly build carriers.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B32S8ObEkqQuU3dBbjBGa1RzM2s/view?usp=sharing Version 1.2 to 1.3 changes (By Frostion):
Allied and war relationships now have names.
New carriers may now be build with fighters on deck. Furthermore, any planetside fighters may move to the newly build carriers.
Changed several unit placement spots.
Regarding the 10 move long range fighters, it is because the fighters are supposed to have the ability to strike from one star system to another neighboring system and return again. In star wars this is possible, normal and described in several sources. I know that it differs a lot from standard A&A fighter stats and tactics, but this is one of the things that should make this map different. I don’t think I will change this, and I don’t feel like making an “all-short-range” version. Sorry.
I hope you have fun trying out v1.3
just read your "Help me Obi wan-thread", impressive how fast you made these maps, "chapeau" ; )
To be honest, the reason for me asking about the fighterrange is that they`ve got me by surprise and kicked me in the butt several times. They traveled acros the whole galaxy sometimes and I was angry about my Stardestroyer beeing unable to hunt them down or even keep them away.
So I guess I have to ajust my gameplay. =)
Thanks for the Downloadlinks btw, I will try them asap.
P.s. I just found out that I´m able to read an to write, so I switched the fighter-range myself ; )
Good evening everybody, hi Frostion, i just got another question"s"...
Since in multiplayergames the neutral factions don´t work as in singleplayergames I´d like to know:
- are you still trying to implement an AI option for the neutral faction in multiplay?
-...if not so, is there a way to produce new units for the neutrals in multiplay?
I am not 100% sure what you mean. But…
In the “Star Wars: Galactic War” standard map, all the non-human player planets and units (like Pirates, Ewoks, Sandpeople, Wookiees and so on) are played by a single AI player called AI-locals. This player is not meant to be played, therefore the “AI” name. All AI-locals units and planets are meant to fall and be defeated by the other players. And the AI-Locals player cannot build anything, as they constantly have their resources taken away by a trigger.
There is a little difference between the standard and the FFA/4v4 map.
• On the standard 4 vs. 4 map, the Pirate planet in the top gets new pirates every third round. They get 1 Pirate, 1 Pirate-Starfighter and 1 Pirate-Ship every third round throughout the entire game, so this planet might not fall.
• On the FFA/4 teams maps, the AI-locals pirates do not get reinforcements at all and should be defeated much easier.
As all AI-locals play as one single AI controlled player, theoretically you might see pirates fly buy and pick up Ewoks from Endor and attack a player planet with them. However the AI does not seem to be very active and creative when using the AI-locals on the Galactic War map. Pirates seem to just head south and maybe attack Fondor. The all-in-one-player AI-locals is because I did not want to add like 10 neutral players who all had to play their rounds separately.
About your two questions, the answers are no and no. But, you can edit the XML file and fool around with making the AI-locals playable. If you make them very playable and balanced, I would really like to see your setup and try it out. Maybe it could be fun?
When playing in multiplayer mode there is no AI option, one of the human players has to control the neutrals.
When playing the neutrals you can move the units as desired but not produce anything... and I didn´t see any newly spawned units every third round in multiplay either...
Right now I have a new question.
What is it about these air-attack and air-defend values of fighters and Bombers, when are they used?
In game they seem to use only the regular attack and defend values against ships and land units as well as against other fighters and bombers. Even the battle calculator seems to know just the regular set of attack and defense values.
Well, I have only played the “Star Wars Galactic War” map in single player and multiplayer LAN with 2-3 friends, never over the internet. I have not experienced any problems with the AI not wanting to take control of the AI-Neutrals. Are you sure you are setting the host to play them as AI? If I start a game with the following setup, then everything works:
In this game, 2 human players play all eight good/bad guys, and the AI takes control of the AI-Neutrals (and the AI-Locals do move around, the pirates fly around, and they get reinforcements every third round.)
You could also set it up as the two human players only controlled Empire (host) and Republic (join). Then the setup would be to “check” ALL players as “Local”, except the New-Republic, as the joiner would play them. Then ALL players, except Imperial and Republic should be Hard-AI.
Maybe you already knew all this, but I don’t know what else to say. If anyone on this forum knows of any issues that prevents the AI from working in multiplayer (like you see), then I hope they would speak up.
Regarding the air strength: All fighters can try to protect a factory from getting bombarded (“can be Attacked By Raids”), and thereby preventing a raid being successful / removing PUs from the owner of the factory.
All fighters can intercept when/if the “bomber” units of the map (the ones that “can Preform Raids”, like TIE-Bomber and Y-Wing) tries to attack a factory. Bombers are normally weak in Air stats, so they might want to bring escort fighters with them. And the defender of the factory might want to have strong interceptor fighters protecting the factories.
In the Star Wars maps, fighters with 10-move can also fly from one planet to another, bomb/raid-attack, and then fly home in the non-combat move (if they are not shot down by air defenders or anti-air).
On screen it looks like this:
A TIE-Bomber is sent to bomb/raid a factory:
The bombers are weak and vulnerable (defends with 1) … and the defender wants to intercept (with three 4s):
All the A-Wings strike a hit on the singe TIE-Bomber and the bombers die trying raid are destroyed.
Maybe it should have brought along the 3 TIE-Fighters I hope this explains it.
Sadly, I don’t think the AI can handle bombing raids or defending against them. I think it is only a Human vs. Human thing.
If you play the Star Wars Galactic War map, with/against the AI, and feel that the AI is kind of inactive, then try playing with Medium or Easy AI. They are much more active on the map. For some reason the Hard AI is pretty inactive on this "Island" map. It does not seem to want to attack the AI-locals that much, even though it is at war with them and also often is in a position to grab some land and PU.
Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but since the topic is the SW Galactic War map...
Why do speeders have 3 movement? No planet has more than three territories, and all the territories are adjacent, so at most a unit would move 1 space, 2 if blitzing. Why does a speeder need 3 movement?
The speeders have 3 movement, and walkers 2, as I made this map alongside the Star Wars Tatooine War map. The units on the two maps are identical, so that players can get to know them and it makes things easier. I know land unit movement ability is nearly not in use when playing Star Wars Galactic War (and therefore the actual unit effectiveness/value is different compared to the Tatooine map), but that is just the way it is at the moment.
BTW: Post number 4 in this thread has links to an updated version of the maps, if you are interested
I know, I already installed 1.3 earlier today. I can't actually tell what change to unit placement you made, but the ability to place fighters on newly-built carriers and orbiting carriers is a great improvement over having to build them on a planet and fly them up the next turn.
I think I'll just go edit the unit movement ranges in my personal modded version of the map. Not that it's really necessary, I'm just slightly bugged that the movement range is higher than will ever be used.
I also took a suggestion from earlier in the thread and made it possible for AI-Locals to collect PUs by changing the trigger down to only -100 instead of -1000. I also added a few factories to allow them to use those PUs. So far, it seems to work. The AI-locals are more annoying with the ability to build units, but they don't collect enough income and aren't quite smart enough to really threaten the other players. That, and their space unit diversity is really lacking, so all they can do is stack Pirate-ships.
When you are satisfied with your custom version of the map then please share your XML. I might use your “improvements” in a new official version PS: When I say "changed placement spots" I don’t mean actual units, just the places on the map where the units sit after being placed or moved into an area. It is the place.txt
I've primarily worked towards two goals:
1) Making the map "more realistic"
2) Creating more interesting land battles (as it is, it definitely falls prey to the whole "Map of all islands" thing.
I must admit I do not know as much of the Expanded Universe history as I should... but I do know this: Hoth was never held by Mandalore, and even as late as 5 ABY Hoth was still held by the Empire.
As such, I have changed many of the starting territories around, while still keeping the total PU production for Light Side vs. Dark Side the same (currently 211 on my map).
Hoth is now an Imperial Remnant planet.
Kessel is Neutral.
Duro Wastlands (Wastelands is spelled wrong, you should fix that) is now Black Sun, but the southern half of the planet is still AI Locals.
Tatooine is Hutt Cartel controlled (yeah, this doesn't exactly fit with your side map, but it makes sense).
Bothawui Coastal Areas is now Imperial Remnant, but the Inlands are still AI Locals. (mostly just for balance)
Naboo Swamps is now New Republic, but the Naboo Plains are still the Jedi Order capital (because it doesn't make sense that the whole planet would be controlled by the Jedi Order).
Coruscant Residential Zones is now Jedi Order (to represent the Jedi Temple there, which would probably actually be in the Senate Zone, but that's already the New Republic Capital)
Bakura is AI Locals (because Corellia should just have Corellia, right?)
Dantooine Grasslands is now New Republic (Rebel Alliance base was there at one time... I guess), but the Dantooine mountains are still AI Locals
Bespin is now New Republic (because Lando Calrissian was a New Republic member?)
Endor is now New Republic (because that's kind of where the New Republic began...)
And the most exciting map changes (in my opinion)
-Sullust Caves are now Imperial Remnant, but Sullust Mountains are still AI Locals and Sullust Deserts are New Republic. Land forces are defense-heavy and balanced so no one side has a good chance of conquering the other, reinforcements must be sent to the planet to help capture it.
-Taris Industrial Zones are now Corporate Sector Authority, but Taris Residential Zones are AI Locals and Taris Reconstruction Zones are New Republic. As on Sullust, the forces are defense-heavy and balanced so no first turn attack is likely to seize control of the planet. The difference here is that the Corporate Sector Authority has a factory, and so can directly deploy new ground units to capture the planet if the Light Side does not reinforce it.
-AI Locals factories on Telos, Bakura, Kessel, and Rodia allow the AI Locals to deploy new units in small amounts to annoy the other players.
What do you think? I personally don't think it would make a good replacement for your map, but maybe it could be another map version "Realism Mode" or something...
I'm currently testing the map to make adjustments in starting unit placement, and also changing the unit stats to remove 3 move units.
It was hard for me to make an 8-player map that gave every part a fighting chance and approximately equal start resources. And of course the star wars universe was not balanced like this at the time where the map is taking place. I imagine the map taking place in 18 ABY (18 years after the Battle of Yavin). That would be like 14 years after the Battle of Endor.
One thing is sure, Hoth was not under Imperial Remnant control at that time. But neither was Kuat like it is on my map. On my map the imperial control of Kuat symbolizes a strong imperial sympathies from the Kuat side. They profited a good deal from the former empire’s huge war machine buildup.
I made Hoth mandalorian as the mandalorians needed some income. I could imagine them taking over an old military base like Hoth. Hot, like it was described in the movies, would also be a nice place for pirates and smugglers to have a base. But, also some Imperial Warlord (maybe cooporating with the Imperial Remnant?) might have taken over the base for military purposes.
Before you go any further down your map project road, maybe you should think of making a totally new setting. Maybe instead of making a version of my 18 ABY setup, you should try to build a new setup in another time period? Maybe a version where the main players are the Rebel Alliance and the Galactic Empire, and others forces are minor powers or removed? Like just around the time of the Death Stars during the old movies? (Maybe also have a new Death Star unit!!!) You can easily modify the xml to fit a new setting. However, you could have more freedom and more possibilities if you made the map in a new standalone zip. Like the possibility to remove the 4 vs 4 picture in the top left of the screen. If you post it here on the site, I and possibly others would gladly test it out and give you feedback. Then you could also think about it getting released for people to download?
Also, if you want it, I could try to make a new capital and new flag Pictures if you want to replace "New Republic" with "Rebel Alliance" or "Alliance", and maybe even some new units? Like the Death Star!
Ben, I have been working on this map to get it ready for TripleA v220.127.116.11. So now it is actually at map version 1.4. This version is ONLY for TripleA pre-release of v18.104.22.168.
You can download the latest TripleA pre-release of v22.214.171.124 here:
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/releases Be aware that at some point the “real” TripleA v.126.96.36.199 will be released, and then you would have to update your game. I would also say thatyou at this point should delete all downloaded maps and redownload them. They may also have changed even though the map version has not.
Version 1.3 to 1.4 (By Frostion)
• Color adjusted some unit pictures.
• Jedi-Knight, Assassin-Droid, Hutt-Expedition and Saboteur units now have a support attachments.
• Strategic bomber units now do 7-12 PU damage.
• All land units now take up 1 transport capacity.
• All fighters now take up 1 carrier capacity.
• All capital ship transport capacity and carrier capacity changed.
• Most unit prices have changed.
• XML is changed to ready the map for TripleA v1.9