Terrain Types

We've talked about Advanced A&A... Now I'd like to hear your comments on what YOU envision a DELUXE A&A GAME to be. What would it look like.

Should the game include more terrain types?

Yes, add mountains and other "difficult" terrain.
13
72%
No, keep all land areas plain.
5
28%
 
Total votes: 18

User avatar
adlertag
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:28 pm
Location: norway

Post by adlertag » Fri May 18, 2007 11:27 am

My 11 year old son can draw a better map than that. Only Europe looks good, you actually ruined the rest of the world.

The A&A Europe map is perfect, with convoy zones, it only need some mountain terrain in Italy, Norway and Caucasus. And it need to be conected to the A&A Pacific map, and we got the ultimate game.

Frimmel
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:46 pm

Post by Frimmel » Fri May 18, 2007 11:55 am

Game scale is all wrong for the inclusion of terrain.

Only terrain effect in BOTB which is a much smaller scale are rivers.

User avatar
Craig A Yope
Posts: 820
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:23 am
Location: Saint Clair, MI

Post by Craig A Yope » Fri May 18, 2007 3:15 pm

adlertag wrote:My 11 year old son can draw a better map than that. Only Europe looks good, you actually ruined the rest of the world.

The A&A Europe map is perfect, with convoy zones, it only need some mountain terrain in Italy, Norway and Caucasus. And it need to be conected to the A&A Pacific map, and we got the ultimate game.
My point wasn't how "good" a map that one is, it was about the fact that you have to have more territories (like that map has) for one to start including terrain.

Even that one has places where it oversimplifies things, but it is closer to the place you have to be to have terrain on the map.

Craig

User avatar
adlertag
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:28 pm
Location: norway

Post by adlertag » Fri May 18, 2007 3:42 pm

Frimmel wrote:Game scale is all wrong for the inclusion of terrain.

Only terrain effect in BOTB which is a much smaller scale are rivers.
Please do read a history book.

During the Italian-campaign, armoured units was useless, because all Italy is mountains. The only thing that worked, was artillery in co-operation with infantry. The Austrian army had only Gebirgs-truppen (mountain divisions) , because something else was useless in the alps. During the occupation of Norway, the bulk of the german army in Norway was Gebirgs-truppen, because Norway was, and still is, all mountain. There are no roads from southern Norway to northern Norway, you must sail a ship or drive through Sweden.

Mountains work this way, that if you want to go from Italy and into Germany, you must go through Brenner-pass. Now this Brenner -pass is very easy to defend, so the allies never succeeded in going that route, and choose the D-day landing.

Now if we take Revised map, all of Norway, South Europe and Caucasus is pretty much mountains, and so are China too, and Sovjet Far East, Buryata and Yakut, and Alaska and Western Canada.
So in this areas all units defend on 3 and Tanks move 1.

User avatar
adlertag
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:28 pm
Location: norway

Post by adlertag » Fri May 18, 2007 3:50 pm

Craig A Yope wrote: My point wasn't how "good" a map that one is,
Craig
(with deep Texas accent) :
Howdii mr. Yope, I want to rest my eyes on something that looks good.

Go to IL's place and look at the maps he make, because he sure made some good-looking maps. And if it was not for the fact that he is a natural born Hun, and I am short of cash too, I sure would by his maps.

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 » Fri May 18, 2007 7:02 pm

Craig would never do that. Hes not interested in nice maps. And BTW i offer many maps for free @ Board game geek. Just look under AARHE files. But he wont do that because he hates too much. :lol:
We really need an Axis and Allies World War one game so i can play that on August 1st, 2014.

User avatar
Flashman
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:32 am
Location: Greater East Yorkshire Co-Prosperity Sphere

Post by Flashman » Fri May 18, 2007 7:20 pm

Wait for my map. This will have approximately 2 times the territories of AAR, with about 1/3rd of them difficult terrain. It really does make sense at this scale; thew war in Italy was a very different campaign from that of northern Europe.
With few exceptions, though, the most important and valuable territories are lowlands, so mountains are not always worth defending as attackers will try to bypass them. It adds a whole new dimension to the game.

Black Fox
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:19 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

Post by Black Fox » Sat May 19, 2007 3:22 am

Black Fox wrote:
Jungle only provides an advantage in an ambush and even then only for the first few minutes. After that muzzle flashes start giving away everyones location. Jungles can also assist the attackers by allowing them to flank unseen. Another reason for no jungle advantage for defenders is that it never really helped the Japanese against our Marines!
But this is a description of a tactical situation... as you say we are talking at the Strategic level, and Junle helps the defender by proving to be a difficult terrain to attack through.
Templeton, I've should of expressed myself more clearly.

What I was trying to point out that since the jungle really didn't give the defender an advantage on the combat tactical level it really should give an advantage on the strategic level. Thus my comment
Another reason for no jungle advantage for defenders is that it never really helped the Japanese against our Marines!


The only thing I see the jungle doing is hindering movement. You could take it a step further and not allow armor but mechanized infantry would be okay.
It seems it was only really a factor around Burma, and Malyasia, where infrasture was not built as heavily as Indochina.
I agree.

If terrain is to be a factor I think the map will need to be broken up into smaller section. But would adding more territory increase the plaing time?

http://www.ww2wargame.com/game_design.html
As far as this map goes it's okay but I don't like the big distortion of Africa and it has too many territories. However, it does have some nice features.

The Oceans. I like the way the Alantic and the seas around England were done. I like the Atlantic because transports can not make land fall in a single crossing. this allows the german sub a better fighting chance to do some damage to transports and gives them safe haven in the center from aircraft. The current map gives very little opportunity to play the Alantic historically. I Also like the division of the seas around eastern Englans, Norway and Germany. Again it allows ship movement to be more historically accurate. The way the Medditerainian is divided has the same benifits. As for the Pacific there are too many. A 1/3 reduction would be good.

The lands. Europe looks pretty good. As for the rest, so-so. Again too many territories in central Russia and China.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests