@SuperbattleshipYamato I have played a few games and though the Axis can initially worry the Allies , (I thought I would lose ), I have always been able to keep the income gap and , as the game progresses, it opens up much more .
I don’t believe , The Allies don’t need help in this game, if the players are equal ability.
How would you change the map?
-
What would you change concerning the map. If there are any maps you guys like post em here.
-
I always kinda liked the idea of having more territories in the original. Like, maybe making Belgium-Netherlands, Paris, and Vichy France all seperate territories. Also, splitting up Italy into Sicily, Northern, and southern Italy. Splitting up the three Japanese islands and seperating Finland from Norway. Just some ideas that I’ll probably never try but it would pretty fun to see them put into action :D.
-
Kinda a loaded question … “fewer territories so it’s more like checkers”. I guess you wouldn’t knock off any territories at all ;)
I’ve only tried the revised map once, but I think I like the original map a bit better. One thing I did like from the new map was the sea zone between Japan and Manchuria. Really makes getting to ships in there a pain!
Off-topic, on the old map Karelia is HUGE. There’s FIVE territories spoking off of it. Why is it so big? Does anyone think it should be split up? If anyone has split it up, how did you do it? -
I’ve never tried to split Karelia up. With Germany’s economy and situation in the original, I think it would hurt the Axis pretty bad if Karelia was split up.
-
i play with the World at War map usually now myself, I like the extra territories and I am currently working on my own quasi map. WIll post when I am done.
-
I like the revised map and I say keep it as-is. If you add more territories, it makes it hard to keep them occupied with the limited amount of pieces that come with the game.
But if you add more game pieces, then I can see adding in a bit of complexity with the map.
-
More territories,means more stragety=More FUN!! :D
-
I’ll try anything once.
Except…well…uh…Nevermind!
-
What about using the Europe Map and the Pacific Map instead of the standard map? They both have extra territories and you could just overlap them where they over lap. (not 100% sure on feasibility of this since I dont own Pacific.)
-
Actually, there are maps out that show how to link the two together. Granted I forget where they are now (I think either aamc.com or axisandallies.net, but I’m not sure), but it’s out there.
-
Cut up italy and australia.Give them 10 ipcs each.Add italy’s original score to germany(6ipc’s)and australia’s original score to UK(2ipc’s).Play them 6th and 7th. Or just bring in Italy to even the sides up(3 teams each). :D
-
i already have added more territories - it adds way more fun - but it will cang money amounts and then you start chaniging everything - and then you get an insane game like me and my nerds did
-
One change a friend of mine added to his board when we were in college was to add a sea zone off Denmark, splitting the north sea and the Baltic, and populating it with mines.
The mines functioned as “anti-aircraft” for ships and was “owned” by whoever held Berlin. (each enemy ship entering, roll dice, a 1 = a ship sunk)
Since most folks strongly agree that the game strongly favors the Allies, this little twist was actually a nice addition.
It prevented Russia from reaching the Baltic fleet in R1, made it so that UK needed twice as many transports to land in Karelia, Eastern, and Germany in order to land the same numbers of troops each round (with the risk of losing ships in and out of the Baltic).
It was JUST enough to balance out the game in the early stages (first 10 rounds), which is when most games are decided.
Personally, I think it is a far better answer to balancing the game than Russia Restricted, or “Axis Advantage” that is available in the Hasbro version of A&A.
-
For Starters:
1)Get rid of Black ocean which tends to hide the pieces and is hard on the eyes
-
never let “Artists” draw the world while on an acid trip. You need to hire a real Cartographer who traces an actual world map with tasteful and functional topographic sensibilities. I dont want to see spain or Arabia look like they are striken with elephant mans desease.
-
make the map much larger so i can see the numbers and dont have to keep knocking down the damm pieces just to move around. Damm it how difficult and expensive is a freeking piece of cardboard 50 x30? id easily pay extra for quality.
-
I dont want a superemposed “compass” on my board thanks very much! You can also leave out ghost images of the Yamato, an essex class carrier, or winston churchill thanks very much!
-
You can number the values with slightly larger numbers so i dont have to keep reading what sea zone im moving into or leaving from, or have to find how much something is worth by moving pieces around the small print.
-
You can use a different font for all the characters, and make the sea zones more equal in size and LESS like some haphazard piece of “broken glass”
-
You can probably get rid of United States because the axis dont ever get to invade that nation anyway, and if they did the game would have been over long before that happened. That way the rest of the globe can look more acurate, while you just include a small tract of western and eastern USA. Same goes for S america. Sorry boys from Brazil will have to wait another day.
-
make accurate national names of territories. e.g. Manchuria is actually Manchukuo so get used to it. Also their is no Persia, and what happened to Tankanika Territory? You got nations on the board that werent even formed untill after WW2 ended.
Ok thats enough charges for one day. now breath…. :mrgreen:
-
-
A minefield? That’s interesting … I may have to try that someday!
-
A minefield? That’s interesting … I may have to try that someday!
Yep, just a little addition… easy to mark on the board, easy to ignore if you don;t like it. Add “Denmark Straits” to the map, put an X in it for mines (actually we viewed it as a combination of mines and shore-based anti-ship guns), and most of the “traditional” strategies get blown away…
- UK based/returning bombers can’t reach Berlin without flying over Western Europe, and an extra AA in AND out.
- Balitc Fleet could not be sunk immediately by Russians, or easilly attacked by UK
- UK and US could not indiscriminately land forces in Stalingrad
- German Baltic ships could not immediately go from Germany to Labrador or Spanish coast… had to take their chances in UK seas for a time.
In fairness, there should be some other changes to go along with this (rules that are not in the Hasbro version of the game)
1. Panama Canal cannot be used by Axis if Allies hold Panama, and vice versa.
2. Suez Canal likewise, with NEITHER side being able to use it if Axis holds one side and Allies hold the other.Have fun with this folks. I know Bone and I loved to play for DAYS using these variants.
-
I like MB map a little more than the new one, better color tone and topography. The oceans always need to be blue. What I do like about the revised map are the naturally impassable terrains, Sahara and Himalayas and gonna implement that onto my current board somehow.
I did find a south pacific expansion that overlaps the blowup boxes at the bottom right of the map. http://www.kw.igs.net/~tacit/aanda/expansions/sep.htm
It adds IPC value to the tiny islands and increases the value of current japanese controlled territories. The new revised map also increased the value of Borneo and Australia and rasing the larger island territories to “2” and giving the non-valuable islands a “1” should make the pacific theatre more reason to battle there. It even suggests adding a few more units on the board this way. What I dont like about this method is that England has a starting economic value higher than Germany. However Japans is significantly increased and USA slightly increases.Is it realistic to assume that USSR had a strogner economic value than what the starting map shows? I heard somehwere that the two biggest allied powers were USA and USSR, or was that an foolish source of info?
-
Is it realistic to assume that USSR had a strogner economic value than what the starting map shows? I heard somehwere that the two biggest allied powers were USA and USSR, or was that an foolish source of info?
Assuming you mean historically, well, Russia basically threw a ton of unarmed men at Germany. So they spent and lost the most men. But not really for great return. It depends on how you want to interpiet that. But, also, Russia was economically a mess. Corupt communism and all.
Anyway, I like the minefield idea a whole lot.
-
Anyway, I like the minefield idea a whole lot.
Glad you like it. Should allow for a no-bid game with or without RR, and the allies will be hard pressed to win
-
One thing I don’t like about the Revised map is Greenland. I would say essentially there is no point to it. Greenland is so useless for anything; there’s no point to land there at all because you can land in the UK with aircraft instead. It’s only useful if Germany controlled Britain and you wanted to stage some US fighters there but in that case you’ve already lost the game. Even though Gibraltar is a 0 IPC territory, at least you do use it sometimes to land aircraft…
Suggested Topics
