DK's Progressive Arms Research system…

I do sometimes have to look more than once when I see the CV.  Should be AC.

The lady and I will be playing as the Allies, and we’re going to attempt a neutral crush.  The idea is Russia hits turkey hard R2, followed by the US landing in Spain US2.

The idea is roughly this:

R1: purchase 2 tanks & 1 mech for Stalingrad, 7 inf for Moscow.  Back off the front lines, including sending the Leningrad troops to Archangel, then position 6 infantry in Caucasus and as many mechs and tanks as possible in Stalingrad.  All air force goes to Moscow, giving Russia 23 units to hit Turkey with on R2.  Should only lose 3 infantry in the counter attack, leaving 15 ground units in Turkey.

US1: purchase 7 transports, all in the EUS.  Get the Pacific fleet to Hawaii, get some planes down to NZ and Queensland, consolidate the Atlantic fleet in EUS, move the EUS fighter to Gibraltar for extra defense.  US2: all Pacific buy of 2 CV, 1 transport, 2 DD’s, 3 subs.  Attack Spain in full force, should only lose 2 inf, leaving 14.

UK1: factory in Egypt, transport in Canada, fighter in South Africa.  Standard Med and Africa moves: clear out the Malta SZ with a couple of planes, try to kill the Italian BB with the sub in SZ98, add planes to Gibraltar to defend.  I’m going to use the Canada transport to drop a tank and inf in Suriname.  Over on the India side I’ll move the fleet over to Africa and use the transport to take Persia.  UK2: Buy ships out of Egypt, factory in Persia.  From there, get as many men to Egypt as a I can, move the Royal Navy to SZ91 to help protect the American transports.

There is obviously a lot more to it, but this is the basic version.  Thoughts and suggestions?  The overall idea is to squeeze the Med and Italy.  US can build a complex in Spain, or more likely just shuttle 8 units from EUS each turn.  Russia can gradually advance into Southern Europe, especially if the UK has men and planes to back them up.  The idea with UK is just that: build a lot of ships and planes to help secure the Med and the territories Russia and the US advance into.

Just finished a game with the Europe only setup. Had to make a few modifications (changed the artillery piece in Paris to a tank and the artillery in Western Germany to a mech; pulled a few subs/tanks from my 1941 game) due to the Germany setup requiring more pieces than the game comes with. Other than that, had an absolute blast, definitely seemed balanced. Thanks.

@Black_Elk:

That’s a clean map Ryuzaki_Lawlie!

The color selection is ideal. Though the black impassibles still jump out at me

From a design standpoint the only things that catch my eye are the two round sea zones surrounding Japan and Hawaii.

It feel like you need one in the Atlantic to balance things out aesthetically. Have you considered the possibility of one surrounding the British Isles?

Or maybe Iceland? Or maybe both?

I still think Mercator is a bit tight in Europe, a little stretching there might be ideal, even if it was just along the vertical axis. I think the map would still read fine, but you’d get a few more pixel for units into those key European spots. Also if you were willing to shrink South America slightly you could almost curve off a 10th of the map height at the bottom of the screen (which is notorious for players forgetting units in the south sea hehe) without really needing to change Africa/Australia of the pacific. Basically a slight bend would go a long way, even if using Mercator for the baseline.

Oh and I think the possession colors for Dutch Borneo and British Sarawak and North Borneo should be reversed.

My only suggestions :)

Nice work man. That would be a fun map to form the basis of a 1939 game, or any year from 39 on.

I like that you have not yet imposed on the map any extraneous information such as IPC values or VC. This means the map is adaptive for many purposes. I like the general division of territories. Only that the projection is a bit large at the poles for my tastes. If we could shrink them up slightly I think the map would be ideal. Its really more about screen dimension for me when it comes to the Big World Map that Wandering Head made. These days most screens are very long relative to their height, so standard Mercator always seems blown out a bit in tripleA to me, especially at the south end, and of course Europe is always tight. I wish the center picker for tripleA was better at housing units to smaller scales. Its a little better than it used to be, especially with the guiding lines, but still Europe loves to clutter up haha.
:-D

Again though, great design direction!

I’ll probably shift the continents (turning their general direction), and stretch out northern Africa and Europe, will probably require North America to get a bit skinny, but I think the big benefit from this, is that potentially more European spaces can be added. This will allow me to add more to the Mediterranean however (and it really needs the space), perhaps round out where Rome is. Africa, I think needs a bit more work. South America possibly as well, but I sort of need an idea of which cities can be considered major not only there, but elsewhere. Vladivostok will defiantly get added in with it’s own space.

I picked black for impassables, since it tells me that there is nothing there, no play space, it’s simply temporary, and they are there for the designer’s benefit.

I’m not sure where else to put a rounded Sea Zone, I’m considering more though.

I’ve seriously considered using the map and customizing it for my never-ending variant project.

One thing I like in both Risk! And Attack! That I didn’t like previously is the “sea lane” movement as opposed to A&A’s transport only movement. This idea is one I’m tinkering with on the A&A maps not only to speed up the game but to also break away from standardized strategy. Which not only lengthens the game but contributes negatively IMO to replayability as well as other aspects.

And instead of giving the US an extra $10 for having the Philipines and Hawaii, they should start off with $10 extra and lose $10 due to a massive loss of morale when they lose them. A penalty as suppose to a reward. The loss of morale can truly result in a loss of production. That would make it more realistic.

I am probably going to post this topic in another section. I would like to build more support for this for any future revisions to the rules.

@oztea

Hi! Sorry to disturb you, but just to clarify (sorry for the stupid question), Japan is supposed to be at war with the UK, ANZAC, and the Dutch in this setup, right? I’m asking because the TripleA map doesn’t have the UK and Japan at war and I’m not sure whether that’s an error or not. Thank you!

yea i added in planes as attackers but if non transports are in the sea zone, they must attack as normal as per OOB.