DK's Hybrid Axis and Allies Map and Rules

[baron Münchhausen]

Here is two other maps of China.

And now, we can see how AA50 made a bad choice, geographically speaking, by naming the Western part of China: Chinghai.
It should have been Sinkiang! (I hope this will be addressed in new re-print of AA50.)
And Sikang should have been named Szechwan (due to importance of Chongqing (Chungking)).

[baron Münchhausen]

@Baron:

Also, along with Novosibursk which should be Novosibirsk, Buriatia should be written Buryatia.
If willing to put another patch, this might connect these 2 TTys above:

I think that Yenisey should be renamed Krasnoyarsk because the territory called Yenisey on the map appears to encompass most of Krasnoyarsk Kray (Kranoyarskiy Kray) or Krasnoyarsk Territory.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38677.msg1588207#msg1588207
This map help see major cities and region:
http://www.vidiani.com/maps/maps_of_europe/maps_of_russia/administrative_map_of_russia.jpg

I’m making some baby steps with paint.
Since a picture worth a thousand words.
Here is what I think is more accurate from a geographical POV.
Yenisey basin has been put north where it poured into Arctic Ocean.
Scarcely populated, I chose to name this TT according to geographical terrain. (Same as Urals on left and Siberia on the right.)

Yakut SSR has return where it belongs, same region as Sakha, since it is simply a different older name, prior to USSR.

It was created on April 27, 1922, during the Yakut Revolt and was transformed into the Sakha Republic in 1991.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakut_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republic

If you prefer to use G40 map names, you can use Tunguska (wrongly spelled Tim-guska) for southern Yenisey but it is part of administrative region of Krasnoyarsk (and Trans-Siberian make a stop in this city, too).

Krasnoyarsk is a city and the administrative center of Krasnoyarsk Krai, Russia, located on the Yenisei River. It is the third largest city in Siberia after Novosibirsk and Omsk, with a population of 1,035,528 as of the 2010 Census. Krasnoyarsk is an important junction of the Trans-Siberian Railway and one of Russia’s largest producers of aluminum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krasnoyarsk

Tambov TT was quite misnamed since it is in fact west of Moscow.
So, you can use the G40 map name instead: Samara but Soviet name was Kuybyshev.

Samara, known from 1935 to 1991 as Kuybyshev, is the sixth largest city in Russia and the administrative center of Samara Oblast. It is situated in the southeastern part of European Russia at the confluence of the Volga and Samara Rivers on the east bank of the Volga.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samara
Also, Samara was planned to be Capital-in-Exile for Stalin if Moscow had fallen.

Stalin’s secret bunker was built in Samara so that he would be protected if Moscow fell to the German Army. It built not only to house Stalin but the Soviet government, The Central committee of the CPSU, and 22 missions if they needed to be evacuated from Moscow. Samara (Kuibyshev) was to become the official capital of the Soviet Union had this occurred. It was also considered to become the base from which all military operations would have been dispersed since it sat at a good strategic point on the Volga river.

https://hague6185.wordpress.com/2013/08/08/world-war-ii-best-held-secret-revealed-in-samara-russia/

You can rather chose Chelyabinsk, which is further east than Samara, on the eastern side of Urals Mount.

By the mid-19th century, Chelyabinsk was a major trade center in Ural, and after the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway in the 1890s it became an important transport hub that connected Siberia to the rest of the Russian Empire.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk_Oblast

During the first Five-Year Plans of the 1930s, Chelyabinsk experienced rapid industrial growth. Several establishments, including the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant and the Chelyabinsk Metallurgical Plant, were built at this time. During World War II, Joseph Stalin decided to move a large part of Soviet factory production to places out of the way of the advancing German armies in late 1941. This brought new industries and thousands of workers to Chelyabinsk. Facilities for the production of T-34 tanks and Katyusha rocket launchers existed in Chelyabinsk. During World War II, it produced 18,000 tanks, and 48,500 tank diesel engines as well as over 17 million units of ammunition. In the press of the time Chelyabinsk was informally called “Tankograd” or “Tank City”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk

[baron Münchhausen]

Another things which puzzled me as I look deeper into Siberia’s part of your map is that going off the trail of Trans-Siberian is a faster way to reach Moscow. And from Amur to Moscow, the shortest way (5 TTs) is no longer than Berlin to Moscow!
1- Amur
2- Buryatia
3- Evenki National Okrug
4- Vologda
5- Moscow

And from Trans-Siberian:
1- Amur
2- Buryatia
3- Yenisey
4- Novosibirsk
5- Vologda
6- Moscow

To be more realistic, I will not use Evenki National Okrug as a short cut toward Vologda.
This can be done by linking Evenki to Urals (north) or Novosibirsk (south). See picture below.

I would instead probably push westward actual Yakut SSR (I called Yenisey) on your map. So Evenki will be put eastward and blocked access to Yakut (my Yenisey) to north and west and Yenisey (I called Tunguska) would get direct access to both Evenki, Yakut (my Yenisey) and Novosibirsk.

So, my Tunguska and my Yenisey basin will mark the Asian part of the G40 map. And Urals, Novosibirsk make for the Europe side of G40 Map.
And using this moved Evenki road would be 7 TTs:
1- Amur
2- Buryatia
3- Evenki National Okrug
4- Yakut (my Yenisey) or south Yenisey (my Tunguska)
5- Urals or Novosibirsk
6- Vologda
7- Moscow

Keeping Trans-Siberian railroad the fastest way toward Moscow with 6 TTs:
1- Amur
2- Buryatia
3- Yenisey (my Tunguska)
4- Novosibirsk
5- Vologda
6- Moscow

[baron Münchhausen]

Here is the pic for the second option with 7 TTs north of Trans-Siberian.
So, my Tunguska and my Yenisey basin will mark the Asian part of the G40 map. And Urals, Novosibirsk make for the Europe side of G40 Map.
And using this moved Evenki Nat Okrug road would be 7 TTs:
1- Amur
2- Buryatia
3- Evenki National Okrug
4- my Yenisey or south Yenisey (my Tunguska)
5- Urals or Novosibirsk
6- Vologda
7- Moscow

Keeping Trans-Siberian railroad the fastest way toward Moscow with 6 TTs:
1- Amur
2- Buryatia
3- Yenisey (my Tunguska)
4- Novosibirsk
5- Vologda
6- Moscow

[baron Münchhausen]

I also found that Siberia as TT is kind of lame name for this Eastern part of Soviet Union…

If you ever decide to revise all these Siberians TTs DK, I found this administrative division of Russia.
This might help giving more accurate name. Of course, it is not WWII Soviet map but still better than nothing.

Soviet Far East seems a nice twist.

The Russian Far East (Russian: Дальний Восток России, tr. Dal�niy Vostok Rossii; IPA: [ˈdalʲnʲɪj vɐˈstok rɐˈsʲiɪ]) is the Russian part of the Far East, i.e. the extreme east parts of Russia, between Lake Baikal in Eastern Siberia and the Pacific Ocean. The Far Eastern Federal District, which covers this area, borders with the Siberian Federal District to the west. The Far Eastern Federal District has land borders with the People’s Republic of China and North Korea to the south west and maritime borders with Japan and the United States. Although traditionally considered part of Siberia, the Russian Far East is categorized separately from Siberia in Russian regional schemes (and previously during the Soviet era when it was called the Soviet Far East).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Far_East

You can also see that Vologda is a strange choice because on all AA map it is east of Arkhangelsk but it is truly between Moscow and Arkhangelsk, which is to the east! But, Finland forces captured part of this TT during 1941 toward the Moscow invasion.
On Global map, Vologda is partly between Archangel and Moscow, this TT have to be crossed to reach Moscow from the north.
However, it is not the case in AA50 or 1942.2.

[baron Münchhausen]

With all these games on your map, did you see some weakness or bias which encite some play patterns over others. Does Atlantic is too small compared to Pacific, or PTO too large compared to ATO? Enough Convoys zones? Etc.

I provided Spring 1942.1 and 1942.2 PTO SZs map to get comparison points with your hybrid map.

[Der Kuenstler]

@Baron:

With all these games on your map, did you see some weakness or bias which encite some play patterns over others. Does Atlantic is too small compared to Pacific, or PTO too large compared to ATO? Enough Convoys zones? Etc.

I haven’t heard any complaints. I think the Axis have more of a struggle - but that can be balanced more with the setup. If I made a new map I would make the Pacific bigger and make it harder for Japan to get to Moscow, but we have fun with it as it is, so I doubt it would be worth all the extra effort.

[baron Münchhausen]

Hi DK,
I never ever believed there would be any complaint on such awesome map.

It required that you pointed out the Siberian Japanese Tank Drive to Moscow issue for me to inquire into these details and find out geographic discrepancies, which are not very relevant to the game anyway.
Even Vologda TT is not an issue in itself. It is just about being more accurate.

However, enlarging Pacific SZs numbers and cutting, clearly would have an impact on PTO dynamics and time to invade Japan. I’m curious, AA50 map was already large, and you partly use Spring 1942 too. Do you feel like Pacific in 1942.2 map would be better?

Hawaii is 3 SZs away from Japan. In Spring 1942, it is only 2 SZs from Japan. Is it your main issue you feel about Pacific SZs?

I also like that you put Iwo Jima into same SZ as Japan. It is a distinctive feature of your map which I only found in the smaller 1941 map. What was you reason for not following AA50 or 1942.2 maps on that one?

As far as I understand, you followed 1942.1 SZs in Pacific.
This map makes for same distance path from Japan to Borneo Celebes (2 SZs) or Dutch East Indies (Java, Sumatra) (3 SZs), as it is to reach Hawaii (2 SZs) or USA West Coast (3 SZs).

Is it what bother you?
Japan cannot defend efficiently nearby Islands on this map compared to 1942.2 (in which Philippines is the shortcut toward both New Guinea or Borneo within 2 SZs move).
Solomon Islands, Australia and New Zealand are quite far on your map: 3 SZs, 4 SZs, 4 SZs.

On 1942.2, it is 3 SZs (Australia) and 4 SZs (only for New Zealand).
Somehow, it makes me think this map SZs are more dynamic than previous from 1942.1 and AA50.
Mainly because of Philippines SZ (adjacent to Japan SZ) short-cut toward New Guinea.

---

Do you have any reason to put Lines Islands east of Hawaii in SZ53 instead of due South in SZ44?

Fiji SZ42 and Samoa SZ43 are well placed, for game purpose.
If SZ44 is empty, Fiji would be better in SZ44, but Lines Island is a better fit for SZ44.

A 1 IPC Johnston Island could also be added on your map into SZ44 and leaving Lines Islands in SZ53 (pretty organized in the same pattern as in G40 Pacific map).

Looking for a SZ54 candidate?
Galapagos Islands are just in this SZ. These would make an interesting way point, toward Panama or South America, too.

[baron Münchhausen]

Unless there is some features you like in Pacific 40.2 map?

West Coast SZ is 4 SZs away from Japan and Hawaii is only 3 SZs from Japan, but 2 more to reach West Coast SZ.
In AA50, Hawaii and US West Coast are 3 SZs away from Japan.

[Imperious Leader]

Excuse me but this is essentially my map with a few crude edits. It is not any other.

[baron Münchhausen]

I knew that DK’s basis was your map, as it is written on DK’s hybrid map credit.
“Original Artwork: Imperious Leader, Adaptation: Der Kuenstler”
So, what is your point?

I was not that deep into these maps comparisons as going from yours to DK’s hybrid to see differences.
Actually, I was just comparing official AA maps with DK’s hybrid.
I just realized his Pacific SZs is based on Spring 1942, not AA50.
But, as far as I know, your map was based on AA50.
That is where I am in my understanding of maps.
I was not deeper in my analysis, it takes time to see all details and changes.

OK, I found your maps.
It seems DK’s put together your AA50 Continental map with your Spring 1942 SZs map.

But, it seems DK gave a lot of love and passion onto your basic final maps, too.
Of course, without your map, he would not get such hybrid map where it is now.

[baron Münchhausen]

DK, looking deeper at your Pacific SZs map, maybe it is just a question of slightly moving Marshall Islands SZ65 to the West, and leaving space to move IJN from Japan directly through Wake Island SZ51 to Solomon Islands SZ45.
That way, US Navy would have to move from Hawaii SZ52 through Wake SZ51 or Solomon SZ45 to reach your home-made SZ65 Marshall Islands.
This would also emphasized the historical importance of fighting for Solomon Islands.
So, Wake and Solomon would be part of an outer defense perimeter.

Also, IJN from Philippines SZ49 would be able to reach Solomon SZ45 in 2 moves instead of 3 moves by connecting SZ49 to New Guinea SZ47.
**By tweaking slightly these two, SZ49 & SZ65, it will recreate 1942.2 SZs dynamics without making an overall redraw of your hybrid map based upon 1942.1 PTO SZs.

Since you were able to change wholly a Chinese TT and much more in France, you have an opportunity to make many play-tests for much lower cost.**

Of course, I’m making a guess about what is not working to your taste.
But, this SZ65 (and SZ49, too) is probably related with New Zealand not being very active, as you put in your last game report 21 October 2017 at about 21 min 30 sec. (It was 3 SZs from Japan, in the original map SZ; actually it is 4 SZs from Japan.)

Let me know.

[baron Münchhausen]

You said you would like to enlarge Pacific.

Is it something like this you have in mind?
Another SZ66 (Johnston Island)?
More distance (3 SZs) between Japan and Hawaii?
Keeping all actual SZs border.
I added Gilbert Islands in SZ 44.
However, I would change Philippines SZ49 to reach New Guinea (as in 1942.2 map).

[baron Münchhausen]

Here is another map which add Guam or Mariana Islands and still keep a somewhat accurate geographic position.
Wake Island has been put northward into SZ57.

If you wanted more island TTs in PTO.
Due to strategic importance of Mariana Islands and Guam, I would even rise the value of this TT to 2 IPCs (Japan). So, the Islands hopping and Marianas Battle (or Great Marianas Turkey Shoot) make sense in this game too. And also for balance purpose, adding 1 IPC Johnston Island (US) and 1 IPC Gilbert Islands (UK).

I also modified the Gilbert Island SZ44 borders, so it makes more sense that IJN captured them at the beginning of the war against USA. It better illustrates the Outer Defense Perimeter of Japan.

I even played on the geographic positioning of islands.
It gives a better view of where are each TT.

[baron Münchhausen]

This last ones is adding a 1942.2 North Pacific SZ67 and making much straighter SZ, but same as above.
I also modified the Korean SZ61.
That way, it will get directly to Soviet Far East SZ62, same as 1942.2.

---

I even push a bit forward, for my pleasure by adding 1 IPC Vancouver Island in between 2 SZs : SZ64 and SZ55, and if captured, allows Japan to launch Fighters from this island into West USA or Western Canada.

[baron Münchhausen]

This map is by far the better to see US advance toward Japan in PTO.
All important Island locations are noted.

[General 6 Stars]

So who and what map has the correct Burma Road on it ? This map shows the road only in Burma and going to Chungking which is above Yunnan and not going to Sezhwan.
So then all game board maps are wrong ?

I’m assuming they are changed for game play purposes ?

[baron Münchhausen]

You seems on the look out SS.
A real watchdog.
It needs further investigation, which source is accurate?

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

So who and what map has the correct Burma Road on it ? This map shows the road only in Burma and going to Chungking which is above Yunnan and not going to Sezhwan.
So then all game board maps are wrong ?

I’m assuming they are changed for game play purposes ?

The previous map seems correct. It reveals that delivery from Calcuta to Chungking was by air transports.
And road shipping was by rail first, then road toward Yunnan regional capital.
There is many particularities according to the time war.

Probably the simplest way is to consider 4 TTs for gameplay purpose.

[General 6 Stars]

@Baron:

@SS:

So who and what map has the correct Burma Road on it ? This map shows the road only in Burma and going to Chungking which is above Yunnan and not going to Sezhwan.
So then all game board maps are wrong ?

I�m assuming they are changed for game play purposes ?

The previous map seems correct. It reveals that delivery from Calcuta to Chungking was by air transports.
And road shipping was by rail first, then road toward Yunnan regional capital.
There is many particularities according to the time war.

Probably the simplest way is to consider 4 TTs for gameplay purpose.

I did some checking to. Its the Ledo Road that connects the Burma road to India. the Ledo Road wasn’t built until 1945. As you stated there is many particularities.  So if it goes through 4 territories then it should be called The Ledo/Burma Road. IMO