Axis & Allies: Lunar Cascade (Deathmatch)

Show off your A&A photographs and Game maps.
Post Reply
Comrade Tiki
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:38 pm
Contact:

Axis & Allies: Lunar Cascade (Deathmatch)

Post by Comrade Tiki » Mon Apr 02, 2007 11:19 pm

After getting a set of A&A:Pacific in addition to Revised, I couldn't help but think the bright red Japanese resembled Chinese. So, why not have 6 sides?

It is called "Lunar Cascade" because the continents resemble something akin to the moon landing on Earth's surface...no real need for special rules, but I do suggest the following: the "loading" and "unloading" of a transport should count for one of its moves each due to the shore arrangements allowing more distant transport capacity (unlike the perpendicular "four corner" method in A&A).

Image
(Warning, large file size, at ten times shown resolution.
Many thanks to Imageshack.us)

It opens the possibility of 1v1v1v1v1v1, 2v2v2, or 3v3.

The nations are mostly balanced, and capitals are excluded to allow more dynamic gameplay. There is no starting placement, but I was thinking every player could choose two industrial complexes to be located within their empire, and place one fighter at each IC. Furthermore:
- Place one infantry on each territory per IPC value (3 IPC = 3 Infantry)
- Place one tank in a territory for every enemy territory it borders
- Place either one transport or submarine in every seazone which borders three of your territories

Starting incomes:
- Britain-28
- China-29
- Russia-30
- Germany-31
- Japan-32
- America-33

Any suggestions/commentary/requests/critiques? Yes, I know it's "crowded" but it is a deathmatch.
Last edited by Comrade Tiki on Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
elbowsanchez
Posts: 1324
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 1:45 am
Location: Western Boogerland
Contact:

Re: Axis & Allies: Lunar Cascade (Deathmatch)

Post by elbowsanchez » Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:01 pm

Comrade Tiki wrote:
Any suggestions/commentary/requests/critiques? Yes, I know it's "crowded" but it is a deathmatch.
Aloha Comrade Tiki!!, welcome to Larrys' Message board. interesting version you have here, it reminds me of axisNdallas version.

Domination

thank you for posting !!

ES
-The evil Bert & friend

User avatar
Imperious leader
Posts: 5207
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:04 am
Location: Moving up to phase line red...

Post by Imperious leader » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:08 am

OMFG!!

This is the funnyist thing ever!

talk about varients...lol!

Its like the Battle of the Hawaiian Islands!!! LMFAO


But the artwork is done very well... what program did you use?
We really need an Axis and Allies World War one game so i can play that on August 1st, 2014.

User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Wed Apr 04, 2007 3:06 pm

I actually think its pretty slick...

goes to show that Axis & Allies inspires creativity...

I generally like to hold any judgement of the game, other than components, until I have actually played it with another human...I dont consider solitar play (unless specificly designed that way) a good determination of game play...very little satisfaction gained by beating your alter ego.

thus the reason I have made very limited comments to BotB. I have the game, just missing the other human...

EM

User avatar
Larry
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:42 pm

Elbowmaster you've got to make some friends...
Comments and game noted

Comrade Tiki
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:38 pm
Contact:

Post by Comrade Tiki » Mon Apr 09, 2007 7:06 pm

Thank you for the comments; the program which I used was Photoshop 7.

If it's of any importance, I've printed it out and taped the chunks together using a nice printer at the library. Looks a lot shinier than my regular printer could manage, but the territories appear darker than my monitor (not so bad, actually).

I've tested the setup so far. I've found three potential problems.

Problem 1: China's colour isn't instantly distinct from Russia's on-paper
Problem 2: To use it, you'll need to either improvise with fewer sides or have a sixth colour side
Problem 3: Japan didn't come with many tanks in revised :P

(The first map I made was 3x3 squares on 8.5 inch wide paper and was very biased towards Russia. This second map prints at 4x2 squares on the same paper size.)

Comrade Tiki
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:38 pm
Contact:

Post by Comrade Tiki » Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:55 pm

Out of boredom and a recent lack of being able to organize an A&A game with friends, I set the board up (and corrected a few minor issues with the map, reflected in the first post's image and links). Eek, it was a nightmare setting up six countries alone.

According to my placement suggestions, Japan (revised) is low on tank tokens and Britain (revised) runs low on infantry. The other countries manage well enough. Germany has the largest navy due to having the most contiguous coastal territories.

British (pacific) pieces (in the tan wardrobe) made an exceptionally effective "mercenary" role, being used for any country which would run out of something. The piece counts really aren't a problem later on in the game unless somebody builds more than they lose...and by that time it is likely that they have already taken over a country which could be further salvaged.

When it came down to balancing navy, I came to the following decisions:
- Each territory could "sponsor" a sea zone
- For every sea zone that had at least three sponsors, a transport was placed
- Four sponsors provided a transport & submarine
- Five sponsors gave a transport & destroyer

And I tended to place German navy towards the north. It's very restrictive to use transports if loading and unloading each count as a space moved, so I think that only loading should count as a move. Unloading should be as fast as possible, like an invasion.

I then proceeded to carry out each country's first turn, in the following order:
- Russia
- Germany
- America
- Britain
- China
- Japan (then repeat)

This order promotes a circular gameplay. Alliances should be made opposite of the turn order, as in a zodiac, in order to ensure that most every front is hostile. Also according to my placement suggestions, most tanks (all placed on the borders) are knocked out after the first round of combat due to *ahem* aggression against myself.

Here's my opinion on the major fronts. Maybe slightly affected by rolls.

Russo-Japanese:
Many Russian losses in failed attacks against the highly defended southern area. Japanese counterattack is harsh...but seems slightly doomed as Russia sends reinforcements.

Russo-German:
Germany loses some ground in initial moves, but is destined to keep Russians out of the fatherland via chokepoints if provided sufficient backup.

German-American:
Germany gets greedy and suffers horrendous counterattacks from the Americans.

Anglican-American:
After many losses after an American barrage, the British can push the Americans back to the initial border on the mainland yet also make great progress on the southern island if provided reinforcements. But that may expose them to the looming Japanese and undermine land-based efforts...

Sino-Anglican:
Britain doesn't want to open itself up to a second front. China doesn't want to waste resources until it knows it can build a fuller navy and have its island assets secure. The two lowest income nations feel a certain degree of camaraderie with one another...but after a while I'm sure it will turn into, as the British may say, a bloody battle( as both nations see Peace turn into Opportunity).

Sino-Japanese:
In a scramble to reinforce the far-western Island to prevent the Japanese from rushing over, China is compelled to build a navy and discourage the Japanese efforts at taking over. Alternatively, China could decide to accept its losses and turn instead against the rest of the land-based horseshoe.

Overall, every other nation hopes that Japan and America will face eachother in combat.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests