Posts made by deepblue

The week is almost over.

Recap…

There has been some debate over the CB near Wake.

Was I able to persuade you to keep it our do you still feel it should be removed?

The British CB in the Med.

I like it but still have some reservations.  It seems that this CB will be really hard to defend.  One thought I had was to trade places with the Italian CB, but not sure if that would help or not.  Any other thoughts?

America CB in the Atlantic.

I think it should stay.  But I could move it up and over a bit (on the sea line under Newfoundland) so it is more in line with supplies going to Britain.  Let me know if you think this is better then the current location.

Thanks for all the great input, I will try to get all your suggestion on the map for this Friday.

I am not the creator of the “waves” nor am I going to put in the tremendous amount of time it would take to remove individual lines (waves) from the map.  I defer you to Positronica (wave maker) on this request.

Unless I get an overwhelming response from this group to the contrary, the Vichy topic is final.

Craig,

First off I didn’t move the Alaskan CB or for that madder any of the US CBs in the pacific.  If you have a problem with their location, that’s fine.  Where did you want them to go? What is your solution/suggestion?

I think the Alaskan CB is in a good spot myself.

The one out in the middle (near Marshall) I guess is for the supplies to the Philippines.  Again I did not put it there.

I never like the one near the Line Islands but I got such a response when I suggested removing some CBs that I left it.  After I gave it more thought, can it really hurt?

The only argument I can see for having the US CBs where they are in the Pacific is that it pulls the US quicker into the pacific.  The Japanese can strike them without hitting the mainland, I kind of like that idea.  It keeps the “turtle” US players from just sitting back.  This will force him to protect his assets.

The other argument for CBs near these islands (Line, Gilbert, Marshall) is that it adds value to the islands.  Without the CBs this area is void of value.  I like this idea too, adding value to the region.

On the same note some people have suggested that the CB near Wake Island be removed.  I will use the same argument here, without the CB these islands (Wake, Iwo, etc.) have no value.  This gives the area some value.  (By the way this is another CB I did not add.)

The current set up in my option will force more navel battles to take place in the pacific.

Second,

I don’t think the map needs to represent convoys that moved up and down the coast of the same nation that is pointless.

So… the US convoy in the Atlantic, can’t it represent goods going to Britain and later troop/supply movements when they land in Europe?

CBs should be a bit of an abstract concept.

Do CBs need some work? Sure, I’m open to suggestions.

This Week’s Goals (April 9th)

1. Finalize Sea Zones
2. Finalize Convoy Box locations
3. Hopefully finalize the map itself (I am not referring to things that go “on” the map such as IPCs, Ports, etc.)

The Vichy Topic has been discussed at length.  The compromise that is reflected on the fifth draft is the final resolution to this topic.

Last Week’s Goals Review. April 2nd

1. Finalize Vichy
Finalized Discussion closed.

2. Start Sea Zones discussion
Still Open for discussion.

3. Convoy Boxes
Still Open for discussion.

Gentlemen,

I did not add the Wake Island CB; it is from the original map.

I also did not move the CB near Alaska.

The only CB changes I made are:

1. Moved the one British CB from the Atlantic Ocean to the Med. per Micoom’s request.
2. Moved the US East Coast CB forward.
3. Removed Madagascar CB.
4. Some of the CBs were adjusted due to the SZ changes.
5. Added CB near Palau Island

Micoom,

Splitting the Philippines would be hard to represent on the map.

Craig,

Having CBs adjacent to a nation’s home SZ does not add value to the map.

@Craig:

What are you trying to represent with the US convoy in the middle of the Atlantic?

It is just the original CB from the US Eastern Coast moved forward a bit.

@tekkyy:

Why don’t you make your first post a release point for drafts.
It’ll be easier for new people to get up to speed.

Thanks for the suggestion.  Will do.

It’s Friday!

The Fifth draft has arrived!

I have made the following changes from the fourth draft:

Added:
Revised Sea Zones
Corsica

Changed:
West Africa, French West Africa and Madagascar are now British.
Revised the Convoy Boxes.

Reminders:
When reviewing the map please consider both historical accuracy and game play.
The image has been reduced by 50% for faster downloads. (Makes it a little fuzzy)
Unfinished elements have been removed.
This is a work in progress.

http://www.mediafire.com/?enuvyjmek2o

Wow!  Great discussion.

Glad to see new (and old) contributors to the thread.

Didn’t think Convoy Boxes were such a hot topic.

Everyone made great points.

Micoom,

Your points are valid.  Britain and Japan were reliant on their convoys heavily.  I just don’t think the map needs 5 British convoy boxes in the Atlantic.  But you’re right I may have gotten too carried away with removing convoy boxes (CBs).

I still don’t see how the map needs three British CBs around Africa.  I have left off the CB next to Madagascar.

I will move a CB to the west Med. but I am not sure if I like it, it may make it a bit too crowed, we will see.

I will move the Soviet CB north, good suggestion.
I don’t see how adding another Russian CB will add value to the map.

I will try to add/move a Japanese CB near the Dutch East Indies.  The problem is this area is British so the closest I can get it is near the Palau Island, any further and it will look really out of place.

I liked the idea about the German CB but it will not fit.  I have tried to angle it several different ways and no go.  Even if I make it smaller it will take up almost the entire area and the title still would not fit in the box.  So not sure if that is going to work.  I thought about a punch out box or maybe put the box somewhere close with an arrow, but I don’t really like any of those ideas.

I still do not like the CBs adjacent to the home sea zones of nations. This just doesn’t add value for me.  If these CBs ever become threatened then it is probably too late for the nation and they will have bigger issues to deal with.  So I will try to move them out a bit.

Craig,

Thanks for sharing your maps they are a great resource.  I haven’t had a chance to read the thread but I look forward to it.

Everyone else,

Thanks again for the input.  Good rules discussion I will try to narrow it down and let the thread vote on the system they like once I have the time to absorb them.

I do however think we are a bit off target.  What I want to decide first, is location of the CBs then dive into the rules once the map is set.

All of this is not set in stone.  To be honest I have not given CBs the attention they deserve.  I have focused all my time at creating the sea zones.  They took an unbelievable about of time.

Murraymoto,

Thanks for the support,

Borneo will probably be a bit further away from Japan then it currently is when I am finished.

Convoy Boxes

I have not played a version with the convoy boxes yet but I like the idea.  It pulls conflict into the oceans, cool, but…

I think this map has too many of them especially for the British.

I am assuming that the boxes are use in some part to augment the “off map” resources of the nations for these smaller theater games.  So adding all of them from both games into one map is a bit over kill.

My suggestions:

Britain (Remove 3 boxes)

Remove the top British box off the coast of Spain.  Move the American box of the coast of the Eastern US forward to the newly vacated spot.

Remove the British box off the coast of West Africa.

Remove the British Box off the coast of Madagascar.

Japan (Possibility remove 1 box)

Move the Northern 2 boxes out away from the VCs, especially the box that touches the sea zone adjacent to Japan.

Maybe even remove the center box altogether.

America

Move the American box of the coast of the Eastern US forward to the newly vacated (British) spot.

Move the box near Alaska further away from the US’s western cost.

(I also think the IPCs for some of these boxes are way too high, but that is for another discussion.)

Gentlemen,

How about a compromise.

I will change the color of the Vichy territories south of the Sahara to one of the following:

A) Neutral

OR

B) British (Free French) controlled.

Please vote and tell me which option you like best.

pdel21,

I agree with you 100%.

But other members of the thread have express concern over the Vichy issue on more than one occasion.  So I thought I would give this subject some time and allow for a focused debate on the matter.

Vichy France

The arguments that Vichy should not be financing the Germans are valid but…

I have major concerns about the following:

If we just make Vichy France and its territories neutral we are forcing the German/Axis player to attack Vichy on the first turn to A) get the income, B) to reinforce the territory to keep the Allies from invading.

This is not acceptable, I do not want to force any player’s move, the map should allow for various styles of play and tactics.

So… if we can come up with a solution to this problem I will gladly change the color.

The problem: How to discourage both the Axis and the Allies from attacking Vichy early.

The best ideas that I have at the moment are these:

The Axis & Allies can’t enter/attack Vichy territory until the Allies have declared war on Vichy or When turn X has passed.  Allies can only declare war during the “Check for Victory” stage of the turn.

OR

Can we treat Vichy in a similar manner as China?  Let another player (Axis) control its forces and maybe give them very limited production similar to China or none at all.  This way they are not financially supporting Germany but the Axis have some control over what happens to them.

Just some thoughts.

Any other ideas?

Vichy Territories:
Vichy France, Algeria, Northern Algeria, Tunisia, French West Africa, West Africa, Morocco, and Madagascar.

Vichy Color Samples
http://www.mediafire.com/?dnrz1jxmahh

Please let me know which color you like.

Sea Zone Outlines

I was looking at the A&A map and noticed that the sea zones are outlined with dashed lines not solid lines.

I made a quick and dirty test, just so you can get a feel for what it would look like with doted lines.

Let me know if you like the idea.

I can try different colors if you think one would work better (Black or White maybe).

http://www.mediafire.com/?dmnjnnznhr3

Goals for This Week. (Week of April 2nd)

1. Finalize Vichy
2. Start Sea Zones discussion
3. Convoy Boxes

pdel21,

All good points, this debate could go on forever.  All are good candidates for VC status.

I prefer Oslo over Helsinki because it is easily accessible by an Allied invasion fleet.  But not easily supported by Germany itself.  This is currently the only German VC that is really at risk, the remaining VCs are within a stone’s throw from Germany.

I don’t really prefer Warsaw over Budapest.

Like I said earlier I think Germany already has an easy go at defending its VCs with their proximity to Germany; Budapest would just make it that much easer for Germany due to the fact it is land locked.  But this is a small issue.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

I would really like to close this topic soon so if anyone has a comment on pdel21’s suggestion lets hear it.

Last Week’s Goals Review

1. Victory Cities
The VCs are set on the map.  (VC rules may need further discussion)

2. Starting Territories, their borders, names and any final additions/removals. 
The territories are set with one exception “Vichy”.

3. Turn Order
The majority of the group likes A) Axis aggressors so A) it is.

4. Roads in or out?
Out.  (There seems to be enough people that want a version with roads so I will make a second version with the current roads on it.)