Share your thoughts... Contribute to the ultimate A&A game design.
Ok, what I want to show with these maps are IPC income from sea-zones and neutral coast-lines, representing international trade and benefit from using sea-lanes. See Griffy's excellent posts about this.
Another issue is the sea-zones. This map is paintet on a real 1:40 000 map, so all distances are true. Making all sea-zones the same scale will give a more realistic feeling. Plus its easyer to move sea-units.
The mountain terrain is just some playtesting I did. The big idea is that only one land unit can combat move through a mountain pass/ bottleneck each time. No more Japanese tank-routes to Moscow.
The territories really should have political colours from 1939, even if Advanced game starts in 1942. This is about respect for the nationalities that got occupied before 1942, and dont love to see their country in grey og khaki.
- Posts: 951
- Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:32 am
- Location: Greater East Yorkshire Co-Prosperity Sphere
refining it: (bear in mind I can't see all of the map yet).
Carpathians. Mountain range dividing Austria from Poland and Ukraine.
Pripet Marsh. Swamp dividing Belorussian from Ukraine.
Poland. This really should be further west, as this Poland only contains those areas annexed by the Soviets in 1939. I would shift it west, and do the same with Belorussia which can be combined with the Baltic states.
Kazakhstan. I would divide this territory, shrinking Kazakh to it's true borders and adding KUZBAS as a new territory bordering China.
Korea. Seems a strange omission from this map.
Malaya. Combined from Malaya and Siam (UK territory).
India. The northern portion is more properly called KASHMIR. I would extend Baluchi east to make SIND, and add GANGES to the north east containing Delhi. Southern India becomes DECCAN.
Congo. I would make this a landlocked jungle (equivalent of desert). Consider French Eq Africa perhaps also as a desert.
See some of my maps for comparison:
Have you determined location of VCs or resources for this map yet?
- Sabre Von Manteuffel
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:22 pm
- Location: Rusafa-(East) Baghdad, Iraq
Flash your knowledge of geography, esp WW2 'mappage' is pretty impressive, but with the focus on RR and other LOCs, with Oil and Convoy routes, and pieces representing "a mix of what they contained" (i.e. an infantry piece should be representing an infantry division, complete with the loggies, cooks, supply, medics, etc it would need). That being said, what terrain is really impassable? Ok, yo're not going to drive a tank through the Carpathians, so maybe there should be some terrain that "slows" movement, or provides a +/- for whatever country is owning it when an attacker comes in, but in a game with a global scale, the impassable, and even the "pay to violate" neutrals from classic never made sense to me.
If that was the case, then Japan should never be allowed to attack USSR.
We use to play that the Western Allies could never invade a Neutral, and had to pay the 3 IPCs to fly over it (unless it was conquered by an Axis). It always made it interesting to see how fast UK would bolster the Gib defense when Germany went through Spain. What we did do is allow 2 inf to be placed on the battle board by the Allies when an Axis power invaded a Neutral---this allowed some "price" to pay for taking it, and it disallowed Tanks from Blitzing through them.
For eye-ball appeal, terrain should be displayed on the map, and possibly addressed in advanced, advanced rules, but it should not drive the overall play of the game...in that units can NOT pass through period, or must go around, etc. slow them up, make them pay a DEF penalty if attacked in a bottleneck, etc, but impassable....doesn't make sense.
On another note---I really like the evenly spaced Sea Zones, and never understood the randomized zones of the past. It should take America a bit longer than one simple turn to beef up the UK or commence Operation Torch....plus, something else we half-a$$ed playtested here was for Islands that the owner did not count the first space from Isl to SZ as a movement---so owning those islands all over the Pacific came in handy. Plus, even though it required us to "move" Midway a bit left, we made Miday smack in the middle of Pacific between Japan and US West Coast, and then made a SZ border cut it in half, so that it was thre exact amount of spaces to fly to either Japan or W.Coast----owning it became a big deal for Offense and Defense.
If you are reading it in English, thank an American Veteran!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests