Difference between TripleA Map and OOTB Map

I got the map printed for buddy ( not Barons version) and here is a few pics of map and his painted pieces

E5EEF16E-7DCC-4289-97BA-96464E0F307D.jpeg 3762A82A-9E89-47B5-A417-A11EBEC0B7FE.jpeg

Danke Herr Rommel.

I was mainly wondering because I watched a Young Grasshopper video and he said that sometimes there are misprints.
This will definitely help with my 1939 Europe game I made up using the European side of the 1942.2 map.
Thanks for the quick response!

Here’s another fun set up for the Russians: The Vologda expansion!

Russian AI gets 1 extra factory, 2 tanks and 1 infantry behind the Urals. (A set bid of 30 ipcs)
+5 flat rate recurring income bonus to each of the Allies.

The extra tanks give Zhukov more to work with, whether to guard the rear in Asia, or to launch forward against G. The +5 to base income helps the Soviets to maintain, and perhaps to make use of their new production center eventually, which is here mainly as a draw for Axis and an achille’s heel. It’s like an interior Karelia, but one that Axis can’t immediately steal ;)

The income bonus to the Western Allies, allows them to overcome some of their naval goofs, to present a stronger threat over time.

Production expansion games like these might be fun in other areas of the gameboard (like for AI USA), but just thought I’d offer one for the Russians to kick it off. Vologda always struck me as a wasted space on this board, totally empty of units. I always thought it might have been more entertaining and significant if it housed a starting factory, which also gives Russia just a bit more each into the East. Using the AI Bid concept, you could try some fun AI redesigns, using the same essential 1942.2 framework but with just a twist here and there.

Russian Vologda expansion Bid +5 flat rate income bonuse to Allies.tsvg

is there a printable map pdf of this board game??
thanks

Thank you for the quick response!!

@Sean.C:

@adaptation:

I don’t know why people say Pearl Harbor cannot be done anymore - don’t forget that the Japanese sub is now absolutely untouchable with the new rules and can always go for Pearl Harbor. You can get 3 fighters(9), 1 bomber(4), 1 cruiser(3), 1 sub(2) and 1 AC(1) (grand total of 19) VS sub(1),destroyer(2),AC(2),fighter(4) (Grand total of 9).

Over 95% chance of victory with average IPC losses around 16-18 depending on if you chose to lose a bomber or fighter after your sub.

Then you end up defending with 2 fighters ( 8 ), 1 cruiser (3), and 1 AC (2) (grand total of 13) VS 2 fighters (6), 1 bomber (4), 1 destroyer (2), and 1 battleship (4) (grand total of 16).

Over 95% chance of losing your Japanese fleet with an average IPC loss around 18-20 for America depending on if they chose to kill a fighter or bomber after their destroyer.

Plus US player submerges the sub right at the beginning of the J1 attack, allowing it to participate on the counter on US2…

Then you have to consider that UK1 has almost a 70% chance of wiping out the other half of your japanese fleet

You’re goal here is India, not America.  The only reason people did it before was it was a slam dunk with no losses most of the time with units you didn’t need for India anyhow.  It’s a completely different story now.  Now your looking at the annihilation of a majority of your fleet that you actually need to help take India.

Yup, if the UK attacked SZ37 then Japan has to wipe out any remaining UK fleet from that attack and get the UK transports as quickly as possible. Attacking the US fleet almost removes Japan from the Pacific after US1.

Actually, I have come to reverse my previous position on the aesthetics of the map. It’s not that bad. Just a few things stood out to me initially, like mongolia, or saudia arabia’s nipple.

But I got a refresher of an old pic from an ex (MB and even Revised). And I’m quite happy with this new picece of tail.

Glad I produced a chuckle or two.