So recently , i decided to make a new version of AA based in 1940. I need someone to finalize a map for this. I do not have the tech know how or the software required to make this a reality. This map will be released to the masses and you will be credited as the map desginer.
Modified 1914 Map file
-
Awesome work, IL!!!
Some minor corrections/suggestions:
1. Bulgaria should not be activated by the Turks (they were enemies in the 2nd Balcan War just 2 years ago! Absolutely not!)
-> Make it a German activation (historically correct) or a German OR AH one.
-> Turks is totally wrong, almost as wrong as Moscow as the Russian capital! :wink:2. Names
-> Keep Prussia for the tt with Berlin
-> Name Kiel “Northern Germany” (that is the proper term for this region “Norddeutschland”, Kiel is just a city)
-> Name the intended Talinn tt Estonia (btw the Estonian capital was officially called Reval until 24th February 1918!)
-> Name Sewastopol Caucasus
-> Name St. Petersburg Karelia
-> Name Moscow Russia
This way all tt names are consistent in having tt names (major cities in like Moscow where you are allowed to produce in addition to capitals can be printed on the map to indicate production capability! This way Russia could produce in St. Petersburg AND Moscow, Germany in Prussia (Berlin) AND Ruhr (Essen).3. Production
Production capacity in Russia:(derived from statistical data)
a) Poland was the most industrialized region in Imperial Russia; Germany conquering it early was a big blow to the Russian war effort
-> Poland: 5 IPCs (if you think it is too much balancewise make it a 4 IPC at least!)
b) Moscow 4 IPCs (2nd advanced region)
c) St. Petersburg 3 IPCs
d) Ukraine 3 IPCs (granary of Russia!)
e) Estonia 1 IPC (each Baltic state ought to be 1 IPC)4. Neutrals
a) Albania hardly was a sovereign state anymore at the start of the war. RUled by a German governor who left when war broke out to serve his fatherland it was in total disarray. It should have no diplomatic tendency. 1 IPC.
b) Greece was strictly neutral for a long period of the war because of its German friendly king. Joining the Allies should be made possible only later in the war.
IDEA: Print a round specification beside the roundel for activation! This way the game could flow even more historically!
-> Examples: Greece R5, Bulgaria R3, Romania R4, etc.So, again, overall AWESOME work!!!
(….and I surely want this map!) -
Awesome work, IL!!!
Some minor corrections/suggestions:
1. Bulgaria should not be activated by the Turks (they were enemies in the 2nd Balcan War just 2 years ago! Absolutely not!)
-> Make it a German activation (historically correct) or a German OR AH one.
-> Turks is totally wrong, almost as wrong as Moscow as the Russian capital! winkYea I know that, and Greece should not be connected to Ottoman areas. I will fix those
2. Names
-> Keep Prussia for the tt with Berlin
-> Name Kiel “Northern Germany” (that is the proper term for this region “Norddeutschland”, Kiel is just a city)
-> Name the intended Talinn tt Estonia (btw the Estonian capital was officially called Reval until 24th February 1918!)
-> Name Sewastopol Caucasus
-> Name St. Petersburg Karelia
-> Name Moscow RussiaI don’t want to invalidate the OOB setup with all these name changes. Only new areas get a new name.
This way all tt names are consistent in having tt names (major cities in like Moscow where you are allowed to produce in addition to capitals can be printed on the map to indicate production capability! This way Russia could produce in St. Petersburg AND Moscow, Germany in Prussia (Berlin) AND Ruhr (Essen).
3. Production
Production capacity in Russia:(derived from statistical data)
a) Poland was the most industrialized region in Imperial Russia; Germany conquering it early was a big blow to the Russian war effort
-> Poland: 5 IPCs (if you think it is too much balancewise make it a 4 IPC at least!)
b) Moscow 4 IPCs (2nd advanced region)
c) St. Petersburg 3 IPCs
d) Ukraine 3 IPCs (granary of Russia!)
e) Estonia 1 IPC (each Baltic state ought to be 1 IPC)Looking more into how does this effect Russian collapse. I don’t want to change those ratios. Perhaps some changes could be made
4. Neutrals
a) Albania hardly was a sovereign state anymore at the start of the war. RUled by a German governor who left when war broke out to serve his fatherland it was in total disarray. It should have no diplomatic tendency. 1 IPC.
b) Greece was strictly neutral for a long period of the war because of its German friendly king. Joining the Allies should be made possible only later in the war.
IDEA: Print a round specification beside the roundel for activation! This way the game could flow even more historically!
-> Examples: Greece R5, Bulgaria R3, Romania R4, etc.Historically correct, but only minor changes. Too many changes the game balance
-
http://www.mediafire.com/?6jnas3n11bgrnb4
This is Phase 3 AKA “Flashman” file. Note i don’t change OOB territory names, just add some areas with new names. Not all things were changed but alot of them are spec with Flash.
Some neutrals changed alliance
Added Gibraltar
etc. -
Can’t see the map, but please don’t add Gibraltar as a separate tt. Make it a UK nb in Spain, which can only be attacked by attacking Spain itself. No shipbuilding there.
xx:
Petrograd is not in Karelia; if you need a regional name the correct term is Ingria.
Ukraine breadbasket and industrial region stats include the western part of the “Sevastopol” tt.
I agree that it is prefferable to have a consistent naming policy rather than the mix of regional and city names, borrowed from Diplomacy and anachronistic as the supply centres from that game have not been used.
“North Germany” should be Lower Saxony; for other changes see my map above.
-
http://www.mediafire.com/?6jnas3n11bgrnb4
Here is a fixed version that made some changes. Note i am not interested in changing names of OOB areas. It serves no purpose except to further confuse people who set up.
The added new areas will have forces drawn from specific areas, again the goal is to fix the OOB’s glaring mistakes and also give Russia some border between Ottomans and Germany.
Added some of Flashmans ideas and kept the IPC ratio by nation intact.
-
How did you get the idea of naming Northern Germany Lower Saxony?
Lower Saxony as a state did not exist in 1914.
Former Kingdom of Hannover became part 0f Prussia 1866 already so in my opinion the best solution naming the tt AND include Holstein, Oldenburg and (parts of Königreich Hannover though politically Prussian) is a clear-cut summarizing region name like Norddeutschland. This method is also often used in former A&A games.Northern or North-Western Prussia does not fit, though!
-
@IL
The OOB setup/IPCs greatly favors the Allies!
So why not give the CPs some meat (like Poland with 4 or 5 IPCs) if it correspondends with history?
(needs some playtesting, sure) -
The OOB setup/IPCs greatly favors the Allies!
So why not give the CPs some meat (like Poland with 4 or 5 IPCs) if it correspondends with history?
(needs some playtesting, sure)The tournament RULES address that issue.
The map file addresses obvious Historical points raised by others and makes corrections.
The space between Russian capital and Berlin do allow Germany to grab less IPC than before due to the new distribution, but also makes it harder to reinforce them due to the capital’s location. That means a tradeoff.
I don’t make a map to address balance, rules are used to correct that.
-
Lower Saxony I use as a general regional name; it doesn’t have to correspond to an exact state.
Its much closer than, for example, calling the whole of Northern England and southern Scotland “Yorkshire”.
North Germany does not fit, at a pinch North-West Germany, but LS sounds less arbritrary.
I should also have made “Tyrolia” into Upper Austria, but it doesn’t fit…
“Wales” should be Western Britain.
How did you get the idea of naming Northern Germany Lower Saxony?
Lower Saxony as a state did not exist in 1914.
Former Kingdom of Hannover became part 0f Prussia 1866 already so in my opinion the best solution naming the tt AND include Holstein, Oldenburg and (parts of K�nigreich Hannover though politically Prussian) is a clear-cut summarizing region name like Norddeutschland. This method is also often used in former A&A games.Northern or North-Western Prussia does not fit, though!
-
Same map illustrating rail nextwork.
Resisted temptation to add Mexico, Baghdad & Athens as VCs.
Nice if rail could link Cape Town with Petrograd; remember these are potential rail links when they are between enemy vcs.
Any effect of the UK enclosed within 2 SZs?
-
I don’t like spider webs on the map, poor aesthetic.
Move 2 spaces on land fixes the movement issue.
-
@Imperious:
The OOB setup/IPCs greatly favors the Allies!
So why not give the CPs some meat (like Poland with 4 or 5 IPCs) if it correspondends with history?
(needs some playtesting, sure)The tournament RULES address that issue.
The map file addresses obvious Historical points raised by others and makes corrections.
The space between Russian capital and Berlin do allow Germany to grab less IPC than before due to the new distribution, but also makes it harder to reinforce them due to the capital’s location. That means a tradeoff.
I don’t make a map to address balance, rules are used to correct that.
Why make a new map neglecting the historical economic strength of the regions (again)?
OOB is wrong enough! -
@Imperious:
I don’t like spider webs on the map, poor aesthetic.
Move 2 spaces on land fixes the movement issue.
They’re to illustrate potential moves, I’m not suggesting they’re drawn on the map.
Though I like 2 space moves (it was I that first suggested it) there’s something appealing to me in limiting it to VC to VC moves. It simulates the feeling of having set strategic objectives, and after attaining one you have to take time bringing up reserves to reinforce before targeting the next, as well as repairing and laying down the transport network.
For example Germany cannot just dash stright into the heart of Russia; consider the importance of Warsaw - control it and you can send new units stright there from Berlin. Serbia/Belgrade suddenly become worth attacking on A1!.
Faster transport within industrial areas you control and then slower progress into contested and enemy tt seems more authentic to me.
-
Why make a new map neglecting the historical economic strength of the regions (again)?
OOB is wrong enough!Because that is less important than making a more balanced game.
-
@Imperious:
Why make a new map neglecting the historical economic strength of the regions (again)?
OOB is wrong enough!Because that is less important than making a more balanced game.
Correct, but in my opinion it is possible to deliver to both camps!
Example: If Poland gets more IPCs it:
1. helps CP balancewise
2. correctly refelcts Poland as the No1 industrial region of Imperial Russia.So, where is the problem?
-
Correct, but in my opinion it is possible to deliver to both camps!
Example: If Poland gets more IPCs it:
1. helps CP balancewise
2. correctly refelcts Poland as the No1 industrial region of Imperial Russia.It has not been proven and I can’t make Poland worth more because you are Polish. It doesn’t work that way. I don’t even think it was worth the most. What is Polands GDP in 1914?
-
Sorry guys I was very busy with other stuff in the last days and couldnt spend much time on the great new map.
Changes in the Set Up for Russia, Germany, Austria, Italy, Ottoman Empire, BE, France:
Russia:
Lithuania: 6 Inf 2 Art
Tallinn: 3 Inf 1 Art
St. Petersburg 6 Inf 2 Art
Sevastopol 6 Inf 2 ArtAustria-Hungary:
Trieste 3 Inf 1 Art
Tyrol 3 Inf 1 ArtItaly:
Venice 11 Inf 3 Art
Piedmont 1 Inf 1 ArtGermany:
Ruhr 12 Inf 4 Art
Alsace 7 Inf 4 Art
Hannover 6 Inf 3 Art
Pommerania 6 Inf 2 Art
Prussia 2 Inf 2 ArtOttoman Empire:
Meopotamia 2 Inf 1 Art
Armenia 1 InfNaval Set Up:
BE
Sea Zone 4: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 9: 3 Battleship, 3 Cruisers, 2 Transport
Sea Zone 14: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 19: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 29: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 2 TransportGE
Sea Zone 10: 2 Battleship, 2 Cruisers, 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 11: 1 Cruiser 1 Transport
Sea Zone 24: 1 CruiserFrance
Sea Zone 15: 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 16: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 1 TransportI will post reports and pictures in the next days!
-
Check out the new map file. I understand that you made that setup for the Phase 2 map. Can you have a look at phase 3 map and see if you like it?
Also, what do you think of making Poland worth 3? Which other place will be reduced -1
-
Poland should not have more IPCs than Ukraine which was (because of cereals) more important for the CPs.
(search for the “peace for bread”)Don´t like neutral Albania because it includes also Montenegro which was at war with the CPs and was a tough enemy for AH… (maybe you could give Serbia a coastline and name it Serbia/Montenegro with 4 IPcs while Albania has 1 IPC left)
I understand the correct historical alignement of Bulgaria to Germany, but I dont like to see this Balkanarmy represented by German units… It would still be better to see them represented by AH or OE…
Angola should be changed from frenchblue to the colours of the BE.
What about Flashmans suggestions ?
(Dividing Seazone 17 - Mark could be the bottom of the printed Fighter,
Finlands unhistorical coastline and the dividing of Trans Jordan)Why did you change US IPCs back to 20 when they enter war in R6?
I was thinking about maybe splitting up Budapest into Transylvania and Budapest…
All I can say is that I like Phase 2 map very much and enjoyed playing with it last weekend.
-
Why did you change US IPCs back to 20 when they enter war in R6?
Because they build while neutral and having 40 IPC for 6 turns becomes a ridiculous horde of pieces. All this balancing is lost if you trade two turns for a cash cow of double income.
The other things i will look into.
Suggested Topics
