AARHE: Map files

[Imperious Leader]

I should have this done ( the one with the IPC icons by tomorrow)

I am working on a waterloo game and it takes up my time.

[tekkyy]

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

[Imperious Leader]

No the map with the icons fixed so it has the new layout. i guess thats would be 1939, but perhaps i need to fix the phase 1-2 maps as well? Can you do this? This is really getting on me as i have alot of work to finish.

Waterloo
Leipzig
Sturm Europa ( see BGG)
War for Independence

[tekkyy]

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)

[Imperious Leader]

Ok thanks. post when ready.

[tekkyy]

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/

[Black Fox]

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.

[Imperious Leader]

Thats interesting stuff, but i cant rip the images because these are scanned pages so i get the whole page rather than the one tank. They have military fonts for download already. they are free.

[Bierwagen]

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

[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

[Imperious Leader]

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

  - Hongkong
  - Astrakhan

Is this intentional?

these are in the rules. Ill check and update the player aid.

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.

[tekkyy]

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

[Bierwagen]

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

[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

[Imperious Leader]

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 ASW 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.

look up both of the  "Happy time" for the U-boats, and the effects on American subs to Japanese merchant shipping. W/o ASW technology, radar, sonar, naval sonar... the allies have major troubles to cope with. However, Japan also has some issues because of its island economy.

But remember subs cant hit air units and subs are not brought in as the same combat with naval surface units. Sub interactions are seperate.