AARHE: Map files

I was thinking they won’t fit.
They’ll come in at a later stage when I decide on size problems for the special edition.

If we go through with the make-pretty update to normal AARHE maps those’ll have territory and VC text.

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