AARHE: Map files

updated with latest AARHE terrains

2008-02-06 pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/?exmzoomwfnl

which map? if are you talking about the 1939 map my should talk about it in the 1939 thread
my intention was to separate them since AARHE sort of more house rule and AARHE 1939 is sort of more variant

yeah I’ll do the standard map
the 1942 Italy map I plan to remake later

yes you deal with the 1939 map
(remember to use the new layered file)

ok I’ve added the new VC icons to the standard map

http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/maps/20080303_AARHE_standard_with_setup.pdf
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/maps/20080303_AARHE_standard_with_setup_100dpi.png
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/maps/20080303_AARHE_standard_with_setup_300dpi.png

latest maps in this folder

http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/maps/

Gents

I came across this web site http://www.history-on-cdrom.com/  It has a lot of useful information.  There are a lot of silhouettes and drawing that can be used for maps and charts.  Unfortunately, they’re not free.  However, it’s still worth a look.

VICTORY CITY CHART doesn’t have marker spots on it for:

- Hongkong
  - Astrakhan

Is this intentional?

http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/player_aids/20070425_AARHE_victory_city.png

• Bierwagen

I printed out and was constructing a new map and I notice the VC’s with 0 value in them (e.g., Dakar, Tobruk, Honolulu).

Is their purpose just to represent 1 free ID?

You can’t build infantry there, and you can’t use them for victory conditions so I thought I’d ask.

• Bierwagen

Astrakhan replaces the older VC at Kazakh, it was Almaty I think

Hongkong replaces Shanghai (this came about from the 1939 map…Shanghai fell already in 1939)

but Hong Kong is not as resourceful as Shanghai and the battle of Hong Kong was relatively minor compared to battle of Shanghai

so on my todo list I actually want to put it back to Shanghai for the standard 1942 map

another thing is that the national player aids do not show the newer simpler combat sequence

yeah thats right you can’t deploy infantry at 0-value VCs
but besides the implicit ID unit, you also get to repair your damaged battleship/cruiser there

Ah yes, the repairing of BB, CA, and CVs at the 0 point VC – good call thanks.  I keep forgetting about that requirement.  Lots of new if/then clauses to remember.

Thanks on the SS clarification.  We’re a little slow down here where the information superhighway meets the gravel road.  So, the interpretation that was being promoted was 1 more SS than any AWS capability (e.g., 1 sub vs. a fleet with no Cruiser or Destroyer gets the +1 bonus).  This seemed a bit over powered.  So, I was looking to tighten it up so there wasn’t any wiggle room for argument.

I hate submarines now!  But, that is how it should be.

-Bierwagen

Thanks for the insight on the name changes – Since I already printed it out as a magnet chart, I’ll just stencil it in.  Thought I was missing something critical when I couldn’t make the VCP chart mesh up with the board.

• Bierwagen

Afternoon!

Back with another fist full of questions for both LITE & AARHE 4.0.  For starters a few map clarifications:

• There appears to be an intentional amphibious assault landing into Western Europe out of SZ 13.  Is this correct?

• Can the allies enter the Northeastern portion of SZ 5 (e.g., the part in front of the canal) in order to invade Germany?

• We were curious what the intent behind the canal in Denmark is

• Can a fleet in SZ 34 repair in Cairo, or is it cut off by the canal?

• Do the VCs turn the whole country into a dock or just a specific SZ? (e.g., does Rio de Janeiro support SZs 22 & 18 or just SZ 22)

Thanks,
Bierwagen

more info

SZ13 vs. Western Europe
SZ13 is not intended to be adjacent to Western Europe
similarly Karelia is not intended to be adjacent to SZ3
in this aspect AARHE is just as bad as the Revised map (borders not sharp enough)

SZ5
SZ5 and SZ12 are considered one sea zone
the canal/waterway icon are between the corresponding
so if you go from SZ6 to SZ5 you must engage enemy in SZ5
if you go from SZ12 to SZ13 you must engage enemy in SZ13

the situation at SZ5 is a little complicated and wasn’t draw clearly
we don’t want the revised-style SUPER SZ5 that was adjacent to 5 territories and 1 neutral
the Denmark situation
maybe there is better way to draw it that I overlooked

Canal in Denmark
the idea is that Denmark should be put in territory Germany rather than territory Western Europe,
the Denmark waterway is like Gibraltar, except with its promixty to Germany homeland it was a different kettle of fish

**repair at VC
interesting question, I didn’t think of that
I guess we don’t want inland VCs like Tehran or Toronto to repair ships
then again did Russia not have naval facilities at Black Sea?

it must be clarified (repair at sea zone adjacent to VC/IC…what is adjacent?) or people could consider ICs are built at VCs hence the same treatment as the example given at Cairo

dock at VC
does that mean we can’t dock at Turkey or Spain?**