Ya but every thing is raised +1 across the whole game for AD
So far Allies 3-2
But should be 4-1. Axis had 1 tank in coast city. Allies Didn’t bring enough troops.
It was nice had allies attack St. lo on T4 or 5
Added a few pieces to setup. 3 extra paratroopers and a few tigers late on card and AD@5 I think M1 only. Moved 3 block houses off coast on upper left side of map and put in 2 more against big US beachhead and other one against other US beach head.
This is the map I use.
Better take d day discussion to correct thread from now on
DA6E0A3F-2E5B-4517-B1B4-BDFC48594DD2.jpeg
Redesign 1941 Setup on v5 1942.2 San Francisco Experiment
-
Baron, I just took a look at the second version of your “Tirpitz” file. It looks extremely historical! This is the most historical 1941 setup I have ever seen. I like it well enough, and I would play it, but my guess is that the Axis will need a bid. Just as the Axis were historically underdogs in 1941 (even if they seemed fearsome at the time), so your very accurate 1941 setup puts the Axis at a disadvantage to win. Given average dice and equal skill, the Axis empires will expand from this starting position, but it is unlikely that they will expand fast enough or far enough to conquer the world – the Allies have enough room to retreat without losing any capitals, the Allies are very well-positioned to secure naval superiority everywhere outside the Mediterranean, and the Allies are out-producing the Axis 120 IPCs to 48 IPCs. Even if the Axis capture 30 IPCs worth of territory in the first two turns, that still makes the economy 90 IPCs to 78 IPCs in the Allies’ favor, and with M3 transports and no long-range combat bombers, that 12 IPC edge is enough for the Allies to build a successful invasion fleet. At least, that’s my opinion.
To see how hard it is to gain more than 30 IPCs in the first two turns, take a look at this territory list:
Borneo: 4
West Indies: 4
Kwangtung: 2
Yunnan: 1
Anhwei: 1
Malaya: 1
Burma: 1
New Guinea: 1
Western Australia: 1
French Madagascar: 1
Buryatia: 1
Soviet Far East: 1
Japanese Subtotal = 19 IPCs
Karelia: 2
Belorussia: 2
West Russia: 2
Ukraine: 2
Egypt: 2
Trans-Jordan: 1
Sudan: 0German Subtotal = 11 IPCs
Total Axis Gains = 30 IPCsMaybe if you do really well as the Axis you gain 31 or 32 IPCs in the first two turns, without losing anything anywhere. But even 30 IPCs of conquest is already a lot to ask of the Axis, and in my opinion it’s not quite enough for the Axis to have a fair chance to win.
-
Russia gets its first full turn before Germany second turn?
UK and USA can purchase and place or just collect income?
OK, I saw they have no money on first round.Yes, that’s right. Russia gets a full turn, and UK/USA have no money on first turn, so they have nothing to purchase.
G1 (full turn)
UK1 (skipped)
J1 (full turn)
US1 (skipped)
R1 (full turn)G2 (full turn)
UK2 (full turn)
J2 (full turn)
US2 (full turn)
R2 (full turn)G3 (full turn)
UK3 (full turn)
J3 (full turn)
US3 (full turn)
R3 (full turn)Etc.
-
Black Elk, I’m sorry you’ve been laid up with the flu! I hope you feel better soon.
Baron, thanks for the thoughtful comments. :-)
-
Annnd I just looked at Tirpitz v1.01. Again, very interesting. Looks like you’re adding more German infantry to compensate for the extra Russian airplanes. Oddly, given the Barbarossa start, that may work in Germany’s favor!
One interesting option with v.1.01 for Germany is to skip the attack on Egypt altogether, and send both transports to attack the Caucasus. Focus on sinking Scottish fleet with submarines, and use all or nearly all of Luftwaffe to kill Russian tanks/planes on G1. If you take Baltic, Belorussia, Ukraine, and (amphibiously) Caucasus while clearing West Russia of the tactical bombers, then Russia winds up pretty crippled! Baltic transport can be used on non-combat to ferry Finnish troops to Baltic States, and then the 5 inf, 1 art in Karelia are out of position for good counterattacks on R1 – they can take (empty) Finland, but it’s only worth 1 IPC. That leaves only Moscow and Vologda as significant Russian offensive forces.
For an extreme gambit, you can pair this German opening with a Japanese attack all-in against Russia on J1, forgoing some of the money islands in favor of all-out attack on Siberia. E.g., take whatever’s undefended, but don’t stress about it, and unload at least 3 of your transports in Buryatia and Soviet Far East. Could be fun!
-
Black Elk, I’m sorry you’ve been laid up with the flu! I hope you feel better soon.
Baron, thanks for the thoughtful comments. :-)
I’m quite happy too you feel better.
There is a big issue with the two turns Axis blitz setup : Japan finished its J2 with: 5 Inf, 1 Art, 1 Tank in Western USA and I still owned money islands.
I had to find that it needs edit from Neutral to Japan TTy.
But it is a very good idea to simulate these TTs.If Allies have too much money in Tirpitz setup, it might be an idea to add money islands as Neutral so 9 IPCs and more if Persia and Madagascar are included. UK will be poor on starting IPCs.
-
Yeah, maybe I didn’t think that through. Maybe no need to skip US1, so something like:
G1 (full turn)
UK1 (skipped)
J1 (full turn)
US1 (full turn)
R1 (full turn)G2 (full turn)
UK2 (full turn)
J2 (full turn)
US2 (full turn)
R2 (full turn)Etc.
It is not like USA has that many attack options anyway in the opening setup, especially since Japan goes before America anyway.
-
Annnd I just looked at Tirpitz v1.01. Again, very interesting. Looks like you’re adding more German infantry to compensate for the extra Russian airplanes. Oddly, given the Barbarossa start, that may work in Germany’s favor!
One interesting option with v.1.01 for Germany is to skip the attack on Egypt altogether, and send both transports to attack the Caucasus. Focus on sinking Scottish fleet with submarines, and use all or nearly all of Luftwaffe to kill Russian tanks/planes on G1. If you take Baltic, Belorussia, Ukraine, and (amphibiously) Caucasus while clearing West Russia of the tactical bombers, then Russia winds up pretty crippled! Baltic transport can be used on non-combat to ferry Finnish troops to Baltic States, and then the 5 inf, 1 art in Karelia are out of position for good counterattacks on R1 – they can take (empty) Finland, but it’s only worth 1 IPC. That leaves only Moscow and Vologda as significant Russian offensive forces.
For an extreme gambit, you can pair this German opening with a Japanese attack all-in against Russia on J1, forgoing some of the money islands in favor of all-out attack on Siberia. E.g., take whatever’s undefended, but don’t stress about it, and unload at least 3 of your transports in Buryatia and Soviet Far East. Could be fun!
IDK if it is legal when naval combat taking place in same SZ than an unused TP if it can ferry troops in NCM.
Triple A forbid it…The Baltic: 2 Tanks 1 Fgs, Bielorussia: 2 Tanks 1 Fg and Ukraine: 2 Tanks and 2 Fgs, gives a much higher unpredictable results. And with 2 Fgs and 2 TcBs able to destroy 2 TcBs in WestRussia, it increases it too.
Finally, your idea to put 1 Fg and 1 TcB in Finland allows to choose between Archangel: 1 Inf and 1 Fg or attacking Scapa Flow: BB, DD and TP. It may allows Russia to end with 2 Fgs and 1 TcB if Germany choose to attack UK, or if Fg survived the TcB A4 and Fg A3. It is a tough call against 1D4 and 1D2.Maybe, I would just put a single Fg there but add the Infantry unit in West Russia with 2 TcBs. That way, 7 attack points against 4 defense point is more tempting. And, maybe 1 Tactical bomber might survived because Germany’s call off the attack…
It is more interesting for Russia to roll in such opening. There is a lot of potential surprised with D3 Tank and D4 Fgs instead of usual D2 Infantry…
If bid is needed, the first thing I will add is to give Germany start up 40 IPCs and Japan 30 IPCs to begin with.
Germany probably needs it to be able to add at least 1 Sub in the water.
After the initial assault of G1 Barbarossa, there is only a few Infantry left in Norway and Finland.
Maybe 1 or 2 survived in each of Baltic States, Bielo and Ukraine.
If any TT have no Infantry buffer, it might open an interesting Soviet counter-attack to destroy as much heavy hitter as possible.Maybe the amphibious assault on Caucasus is something which might off balance things… I cannot say.
-
Baron, I just took a look at the second version of your “Tirpitz” file. It looks extremely historical! This is the most historical 1941 setup I have ever seen. I like it well enough, and I would play it, but my guess is that the Axis will need a bid. Just as the Axis were historically underdogs in 1941 (even if they seemed fearsome at the time), so your very accurate 1941 setup puts the Axis at a disadvantage to win. Given average dice and equal skill, the Axis empires will expand from this starting position, but it is unlikely that they will expand fast enough or far enough to conquer the world – the Allies have enough room to retreat without losing any capitals, the Allies are very well-positioned to secure naval superiority everywhere outside the Mediterranean, and the Allies are out-producing the Axis 120 IPCs to 48 IPCs. Even if the Axis capture 30 IPCs worth of territory in the first two turns, that still makes the economy 90 IPCs to 78 IPCs in the Allies’ favor, and with M3 transports and no long-range combat bombers, that 12 IPC edge is enough for the Allies to build a successful invasion fleet. At least, that’s my opinion.
To see how hard it is to gain more than 30 IPCs in the first two turns, take a look at this territory list:
Borneo: 4
West Indies: 4
Philippines: 2
Kwangtung: 2
Yunnan: 1
Anhwei: 1
Malaya: 1
Burma: 1
New Guinea: 1
Western Australia: 1
French Madagascar: 1
Buryatia: 1
Soviet Far East: 1
Japanese Subtotal = 21 IPCs
Karelia: 2
Belorussia: 2
West Russia: 2
Ukraine: 2
Egypt: 2
Trans-Jordan: 1
Sudan: 0German Subtotal = 11 IPCs
Total Axis Gains = 32 IPCsMaybe if you do really well as the Axis you gain 31 or 32 IPCs in the first two turns, without losing anything anywhere. But even 30 IPCs of conquest is already a lot to ask of the Axis, and in my opinion it’s not quite enough for the Axis to have a fair chance to win.
Thanks Argo,
I like IC in French West Africa. It allows Germany to put 1 Vichy Infantry end of G1.
I would like to know why you put so much UK units in Africa?
Germany cannot afford that much investment over there.I hope it will work eventually. This is something to make a setup, another to depict a situation and a third to make it workable and funny, and a fourth to make it balanced.
One of my fear is about PTO draging too much IPCs for UK.
Making it like an all investment there, so Russia is overwhelmed or all-in in ETO but Japan is growing monster unhindered.
Even, money islands IPCs might be needed by UK to built something in both theatre. -
Thanks!
My goal in Africa is to reflect UK’s historical forces on the continent, and also to make it optional for Germany to attack Egypt on G1. In most setups, Africa gets 4-5 UK units, South Africa gets 1-2 British units, and the rest of the continent is empty. This means that if Germany can conquer Egypt, then the rest of the continent is almost a freebie. US/UK have to do crazy things like ship in troops from India (allowing India to fall to Japanese) or dedicate entire US budget to repeatedly ferrying troops to all of west Africa (instead of a limited, one-time ferry for Operation Torch in Morocco). Meanwhile, Egypt is usually strong enough to attack Libya on UK1 if Egypt is not attacked. So of course, in 70% of games, Germany attacks Egypt hard on G1, and in the other 30% of games, Germany quietly reinforces Libya to prepare for a G2 attack on Egypt. What if Egypt were not such a big deal? Yes, Egypt is nice, it is worth $2, but behind Egypt is the rest of Britain’s armies. This makes the north African theater just one relatively minor theater – less important than either Barbarossa or the Battle of the Atlantic. In previous versions, you would never see Germany building a submarine in the Atlantic at the expense of an extra tank to ship to North Africa, and you almost never see an Italian naval attack on Ukraine / Caucasus. So, maybe we can turn those into real options.
It’s possible that I need to decrease British Egyptian forces to compensate. I think right now Egypt is reduced to 3 inf, 1 tnk (instead of OOB 2 inf, 1 art, 1 tnk, 1 ftr). Maybe that needs to drop down even lower, to something like 2 inf, 1 tnk, 1 AAA.
Germany starts with 2 transports in the Med, and they will likely survive through at least the end of G2, maybe the end of G3 or even G4. So that is potentially 16 units (4 turns * 2 transports * 2 units per transport) that Germany can ship to Africa on top of the starting German Afrika Korps. I agree that Germany cannot afford to ship 16 units to Africa, but what about something like 7 inf, 2 art, 1 tnk ($35) spread out over 3 turns, part of which will come from starting forces in Italy and Southern Europe? That does not sound unreasonable to me if Germany wants to emphasize the African campaign. If Germany truly cannot afford that, maybe Germany needs more starting infantry in Europe.
I think we can make this work. As you say, it will take several tries, but we will not give up!
If UK needs the money islands, it is easy to give UK the money islands. That is not a problem; playtesting will tell us the answer. My opinion is that it is OK for Britain to be a little poor, because a strong Russia means that Britain does not have to rush fighters to Moscow or rush transports to France – if Britain wants to focus its budget on S. Africa / India / ANZAC in the first few turns, maybe building a couple of DDs or ftrs for the Batltle of the Atlantic, and then pivot to invading France/Norway once Japan is contained, that is fine with me.
-
Here is a more Axis bias setup v.1.02:
Dakar is German and Japan start with way more Transports: 7 TPs instead of 5.
But Philippines, Wake and Midway are now juicy target to get rid of. 1 Fg and 2 TcBs to destroy.
Archangel is more appealing, but West Russia might need Finland aircrafts (1 Fg and 1 TcB) to get a fast decisive victory: up to 6 planes can reach West Russia: 3 Fgs and 3 TcBs. But you cannot support attack on UK’s Battleship if you go that way.Archangel: 1 Fg
West Russia: 2 TcBs and 1 AAA
Ukraine is still: 2 Tanks, 2 Fighters
Belorussia still: 2 Tanks, 1 Fighter
Baltic States still: 2 Tanks, 1 FighterPhilippines: 1 TcB and 1 Infantry
Wake: 1 Fighter
Midway: 1 Tactical BomberIwo Jima: 2 Infantry
Okinawa: 3 Infantry
French West Africa: 1 Industrial ComplexI tried to provide a few pictures below, but it is too much KB, more than 1536 KB…
See post below for complete set-up.
-
I’m not very apt with pictures.
I will need help to be able to directly put on a post.
Sorry… -
I can help post your pictures tonight.
I’m struggling to figure out the Axis surprise round. It’s very important to me that both Germany and Japan move before the UK. But if we keep the standard Russia -> Germany -> UK -> Japan -> USA turn order, then the only way I can think of to give Japan a move before the UK is to let Germany go twice before the UK even goes once, which sounds like a recipe for losing London. At a minimum, that means that Germany is going to be able to unload way too many infantry in Egypt / Trans-Jordan, even with the additional British troops in sub-Saharan Africa.
Maybe the solution is to reduce Germany back down to one Mediterranean transport? This would help nerf the G1 attacks on Egypt and the Caucasus, but at the cost of making the G1 opener more boring / more similar to previous editions. If Germany builds a second (or even a third) Med transport on G1, then they could still potentially come up with a massive attack on Egypt on G2, before Britain has a chance to react, but at least that’s more expensive for Germany.
The only other thing I can think of is to just edit the turn order in the .xml file to be Germany -> Russia -> Japan -> UK -> US, and tell people to install my .xml file if they want to play the game, but I know that does tend to drive people away. We have enough files already.
Thoughts?
-
I can help post your pictures tonight.
I’m struggling to figure out the Axis surprise round. It’s very important to me that both Germany and Japan move before the UK. But if we keep the standard Russia -> Germany -> UK -> Japan -> USA turn order, then the only way I can think of to give Japan a move before the UK is to let Germany go twice before the UK even goes once, which sounds like a recipe for losing London. At a minimum, that means that Germany is going to be able to unload way too many infantry in Egypt / Trans-Jordan, even with the additional British troops in sub-Saharan Africa.
Maybe the solution is to reduce Germany back down to one Mediterranean transport? This would help nerf the G1 attacks on Egypt and the Caucasus, but at the cost of making the G1 opener more boring / more similar to previous editions. If Germany builds a second (or even a third) Med transport on G1, then they could still potentially come up with a massive attack on Egypt on G2, before Britain has a chance to react, but at least that’s more expensive for Germany.
The only other thing I can think of is to just edit the turn order in the .xml file to be Germany -> Russia -> Japan -> UK -> US, and tell people to install my .xml file if they want to play the game, but I know that does tend to drive people away. We have enough files already.
Thoughts?
IMO, it might be simpler to edit the turn order.
If you know or Black Elk knows how to edit the turn order, it will provide two distinctive setups: yours and mine.
Anyway AA50 already use a similar turn order.
This is already a Redesigned stuff.
We may finish with two different workable setups or maybe there is some dead-end we didn’t see actually for one or the other…The M3 Cruiser and TP brings a lot of unknowns in the foreseeing department.
IDK if the actual map with such short distance from:
WUS to Japan to India to South Africa or to Italy to France and UK to Karelia/Archangel SZ or to Eastern USA, all at 3 SZs from the next other is working or not. (The only exception is between WUS SZ and EUS SZ: 4 SZs.)
Maybe a kind of Risk massive building, then invade with 75%, built another 25% then make back and forth 3 SZs moves can break this setup.
We are just too amazed by the freedom M3 wonders gives us for the first time. But, when waking up from the dream, it might not be as hoped.One reason I tried a different setup than 1942.2 OOB is also about this bad feeling that OOB setup doesn’t work.
I was going in the direction of only considering M3 for Global scale game.
And for good reason, since it was built around all M2 units while Global allowed M3 with NB anyway. 3 to 4 moves is only 125% increase compared to 2 to 3 SZs moves which is 150% increase.I was diverting from the initial 1941 M2 adaptation project also because you seemed very enthusiastic about M3 and all the new stuffs.
Why not give it a chance after all?Eventually, if nothing goes wrong there will be a single file with all the optional stuff, including optional setups and turn order.
-
Editing the turn order is easy. When you’re ready, just post the latest version and I can make the turn order whatever you want.
Or if you want to do it yourself, there are three sections of the xml that need to be edited for it to work properly. They are all near the top of the file so it’s pretty simple. -
Thanks! I’ll do it myself tonight. :-)
-
1941 Redesign setup for A&A 1942.2 assuming M3 Cruiser and Transport
Tirpitz version 1.02This Redesign set-up includes more warships ATO (8 Germans Subs), to be more historically accurate, or gives little more challenge in China, and add a lot of Tanks and aircrafts, a few Submarines, Cruiser and 1 Transport for Russia. Also, US PTO Islands received planes instead of Infantry while Japan received more Transports and Infantry on Iwo Jima and Okinawa to take care of these menaces.
At least, it provides a reason to invade these islands on J1.Set up includes from San Francisco Experiment V5 1942.2:
Fighter A3 D4 M4 C10, A1 D1 in SBR escort and intercept, preemptive Anti-Sub Attack 1, Anti-Sub Defense 1
TcBs A3-4 D3 M4 C10 SBR A1 D6 damage, preemptive Anti-Sub Attack 1, Anti-Sub Defense 1
StBs A0 D0 M6 C5 D6 damage
Destroyer A1 D1 M2 C5, preemptive Anti-Sub Attack 1, Anti-Sub Defense 1Transport and Cruiser can move up to 3 SZs.
Turn order is:
1-Germany
2-United Kingdom
3-Japan
4-USA
5-Soviet UnionOther Player-Enforced Rules
-
You must own Gibraltar to move anything except submarines between SZ 13 <-> SZ 14
-
You must own NW Europe to move anything except submarines between SZ 5 <-> SZ 6.
-
Dardanelles Strait (near Turkey) is open to all players.
-
The factories in Szechwan and Sinkiang produces only infantry or Artillery, and it is destroyed if captured by the Axis.
Also, considered Western Chinese border is impassable for land units from both sides.
On tabletop, you may decide to simply built 1 Infantry for each 2 IPCs from Chinese TTy (rounding up) instead of placing factories in China.
To be tested:
If you choose to move any type of surface ships through a sea zone containing one or more enemy submarines without stopping to fight those submarines, you must roll one die per enemy submarine (it does not matter how many ships you move, only how many enemy subs there are).
Your fleet takes one hit for each “1” rolled on the dice.
If you move through more than one sub-infested sea zone, repeat this process.Argothair suggestion slightly modified.
Soviet Union
Starting income: 32 (24+ 8 ) IPCsRussia: 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter, 1 Tactical Bomber, Industrial Complex
Karelia S.S.R.: 5 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA, Industrial Complex
Archangel: 1 Fighter
Vologda: 1 Infantry, 1 Tank, Industrial Complex
Evenki National Okrug: 1 Infantry
Novosibirsk: 1 Infantry
Kazakh S.S.R.: 1 Infantry
Caucasus: 4 Infantry, 1 AAA, Industrial Complex
Yakut S.S.R.: 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA
Buryatia S.S.R.: 2 Infantry
Soviet Far East: 2 Infantry
Baltic States (Russian): 2 Tanks, 1 Fighter
Belorussia (Russian): 2 Tanks, 1 Fighter
Ukraine S.S.R. (Russian): 2 Tanks, 2 Fighters
West Russia (Russian): 1 AAA, 2 Tactical BombersNaval Setup:
Sea Zone 4: 1 Submarine, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 5 (Contested to Germany): 1 Cruiser, 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 16: 1 Cruiser, 1 Submarine, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 63: 2 SubmarinesUnited Kingdom
Starting income: 42 (31+ 12-1) IPCs
United Kingdom: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 2 AAAs, 1 Tank, 2 Fighters, 1 TacBomber, 1 Strategic Bomber, Industrial Complex
Eastern Canada: 1 Infantry, 1 Tank
Egypt: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter
Union of South Africa: 2 Infantry
Trans Jordan: 2 Infantry
India: 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA, 1 Industrial Complex
Burma: 1 Infantry
Eastern Australia: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA, 1 Industrial Complex
Western Australia: 1 Infantry, 1 Industrial Complex
Western Canada: 1 Infantry, 1 TacBomber
New Zealand: 1 Infantry, 1 Industrial Complex
French Equatorial Africa: 1 Infantry
Italian East Africa: 1 Infantry
Kwangtung (United Kingdom): 1 Infantry
Malaya (United Kingdom): 1 Infantry
Persia : (United Kingdom)
East Indies: (United Kingdom)
Borneo: (United Kingdom)
New Guinea: (United Kingdom)
Solomon Islands: (United Kingdom)Naval Setup:
Sea Zone 6: 2 Destroyers
Sea Zone 7: 1 Battleship, 1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 10: 1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 13: 1 Aircraft Carrier with 1 TacBomber, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 14 (Contested to Germany): 2 Submarines
Sea Zone 17: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 27: 1 Aircraft Carrier with 1 Fighter & 1 TacBomber, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 33: 1 Transport
Sea Zone 34: 1 Battleship, 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 38: 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 39: 2 Destroyers
Sea Zone 40: 1 TransportUnited States
Starting income: 45 (42+ 3) IPCsEastern United States: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter, 1 TacBomber, 2 Strategic Bombers, Industrial Complex
Central United States: 1 Infantry
Alaska: 1 Infantry
Western United States: 2 Infantry, 1 AAA, 1 Fighter, 1 TacBomber, IC
Midway: 1 Tactical Bomber
Hawaiian Islands: 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter, 1 Industrial Complex
Yunnan: 2 Infantry
Szechwan: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA, 1 Fighter
(IC for chinese purpose only, destroyed once captured: built Infantry or Artillery only)
Anhwei: 2 Infantry
Sinkiang: (IC for chinese purpose only, destroyed once captured: built Infantry or Artillery only)
Wake Island (United States): 1 Fighter
Philippine Islands (United States): 1 Infantry, 1 Tactical BomberNaval Setup:
Sea Zone 11: 1 Cruiser, 2 Destroyers, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 42: 1 Aircraft Carrier with 1 TacBomber, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 48: 2 Submarines, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 53: 1 Battleship, 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 56: 1 Cruiser, 1 Submarine, 2 Destroyers, 1 TransportGermany
Starting income: 34 (41- 8+1 ) IPCsGermany: 4 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 2 AAAs, 2 Tanks, 1 Fighter, 2 Strategic Bombers, 1 Industrial Complex
France: 2 Infantry, 1 AAA, 2 Tanks
Northwestern Europe: 1 Infantry, 1 AAA, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter, 1 Industrial Complex
Norway: 3 Infantry, 1 AAA
Finland: 3 Infantry, 1 Fighter, 1 TacBomber
Poland: 5 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 2 Tanks, 1 Fighter, 1 TacBomber
Bulgaria Romania: 5 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 2 Tanks, 1 Fighter, 1 TacBomber
Italy: 1 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter, 1 Industrial Complex
Southern Europe: 3 Infantry, 1 Tank
Morocco: 1 Infantry
Libya: 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank
Algeria: 1 Infantry
French Western Africa (Vichy): Industrial ComplexNaval Setup:
Sea Zone 5: 1 Battleship, 2 Submarines, 1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 8: 2 Submarines
Sea Zone 3: 2 Submarines
Sea Zone 14: 1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 15: 1 Battleship, 2 Cruisers, 1 Submarine, 1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 23: 1 SubmarineJapan
Starting income: 15 (30 - 15) IPCsJapan: 4 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AAA, 1 Tank, 1 Tactical Bomber, 1 Industrial Complex
Manchuria: 3 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Kiangsu: 4 Infantry
Iwo Jima: 2 Infantry
Okinawa: 3 Infantry
Caroline Islands: 3 Infantry
Formosa: 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter
French Indo-China Thailand: 3 Infantry, 1 ArtilleryNaval Setup:
Sea Zone 57: 2 Aircraft Carriers, 1 Submarine, 2 Fighters, 2 TacBombers
Sea Zone 50: 1 Destroyer, 2 Transports
Sea Zone 60: 1 Battleship, 1 Submarine, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 61: 1 Aircraft Carrier with 1 Fighter & 1 TacBomber, 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 2 Destroyers, 1 Transport with 1 Infantry & 1 Artillery, 1 Transport with 2 Infantry
Sea Zone 62: 3 Transports -
-
Here’s the new .xml file! If you copy and paste it into the map/games subfolder in your Philadelphia Experiment v2 1945 folder, then you should be able to play. I was able to fix the turn order, and also several other issues that had been bothering me. I’m copying the Game Notes and a screenshot below for anyone reading along who doesn’t use TripleA.
This version of the San Francisco Experiment also includes the Argo Map Mods, which treat South America, Persia, Saudi Arabia, the West Indies, and Borneo as “soft neutrals” that can be occupied by any player. In addition, there are two new canals: the Kiel Canal, which requires players to own both Norway and NW Europe in order to move between Sea Zones 5 and 6, and the Straits of Gibraltar, which requires players to own Gibraltar in order to move between Sea Zones 13 and 14. The Dardanelle Straits (near Turkey) are open to all players, because Turkey cannot be owned. Finally, the connection between Russia and Western China has been severely restricted: units may only pass between Sinkiang and Evenki. Kazakh and Novosibirsk are no longer considered adjacent to any Chinese territories. The game will automatically enforce all of these restrictions.
This version of the San Francisco Experiment forces subs that try to move through a sea zone containing enemy destroyer(s) to survive one round of anti-sub rolls, similar to the old “Always on AA” effect from Revised Edition.
The scenario for this map is Argo 1941, which features a new turn order: Germany, then Russia, then Japan, then the UK, then the USA. Both Germany and Russia start with a large air force, but, as in the historical Barbarossa, Germany is able to destroy much of the Russian air force on the ground at the very beginning of the war. Germany will have to decide whether to focus on destroying the British Atlantic Fleet or destroying the Russian air force – they usually cannot accomplish both on the first turn. Although it is relatively easy for Germany to take Egypt, Britian now has the ability to defend Africa in depth, with significant forces in Ethiopia, Kenya, the Gold Coast, and South Africa. French West Africa is controlled by the Germans, who can use the starting factory there to mobilize “Vichy” forces if they wish. This is merely thematic; Vichy forces behave just like regular German forces.
In the east, Japan is cash-poor but is poised to expand very rapidly, with five transports and a large air force, similar to the famous “AA50 1941” setup. Like Germany, Japan will need to decide whether to focus its air force against Allied ships or against infantry on the mainland. First-turn attacks against Western Australia, Hawaii, or even San Francisco are possible, but not necessarily recommended. In China, the USA starts with a factory in Szechuan. This thematically represents the Chinese ability to raise new militias, but the factory can be used for any purpose, and it will remain on the board even if captured. The factory is less useful than usual for a Japanese tank drive to Moscow now that China’s only connection to central Russia is on the round-about route via Evenki National Okrug. Russia, in turn, is better able to defend this region thanks to a starting factory in Vologda and a starting artillery piece and AA gun in Yakut SSR.
America begins the game with a respectable air force, but it will need a turn or two to build up enough transports, carriers, and artillery to be effective. America will also usually want to take a moment to “rally” neutral Mexico and Brazil to the Allied cause. First-turn attacks on Morocco, France, the central Pacific, or Buryatia are possible, but probably not wise unless the Axis leave a gaping hole in their defenses. As in most 1941 setups, the Axis are inevitably going to expand, and the Axis are inevitably going to win some major battles where they destroy lots of Allied hardware at little cost to the Axis. The question is whether they can expand and destroy rapidly enough to gain either a sustainable edge in income, or the means to deliver a knock-out blow to Moscow.
There are a total of 24 Victory Cities in this setup (the Axis start with only 6).
Projection of Power: Axis = 10 VCs, Allies = 20 VCs
Honorable Victory: Axis = 14 VCs, Allies = 22 VCs
Unconditional Surrender: Axis = 18 VCs, Allies = 24 VCsExcept as noted above, this game uses the rules from World War II v5, San Francisco Experiment version.
Credits: Hobbes for basetiles and initial xml. Veqryn for relief tiles, decorations, and corrections.
Also thanks to Jason/TripleElk for creating ww2v2 Revised and ww2v3 50th Anniversary artwork and tiles, which were also ported over to this version. Many thanks to everyone who has been working in the Redesign threads on the axisandallies.org forums, and especially to Black Elk and Baron Munchhausen! Many of the best ideas in this map come from them, but all errors are still ultimately my responsibility. All feedback – short or long, positive or negative – is welcome at jasongreenlowe@gmail.com. -
And, as a courtesy, here’s the latest screenshot from Baron Munchhausen’s Tirpitz edition. To create a screenshot from TripleA, just use the “Export” menu at the top of the screen. To make the map small enough to fit in an axisandallies.org attachment, just turn off “View Map Details” from the “View” menu at the top of the screen before you make the export. I also find it helps to increase the font size to 14 from the “Edit Map Font and Color” screen on the “View” menu, but it’s not strictly necessary.
It looks like Baron and I are converging! We keep adopting each other’s best ideas. :-)
-
Wow Argo,
you worked hard and your way better than me into changing map features.I’m pretty happy you found the Always active AAgun.
I hope it works only in water.I saw your VCs, there is a few which differ from the basic 20/30/40 lists.
Would accept to change a few VCs to streamlined as much as possible your map?
Are you able to add a few more to reach 30 VCs?
Or, do you prefer to stay at 24 VCs for some reason?Here is what I’d like:
Poland VCs move to Ploesti (Romania / Bulgaria Romania),
Ottawa (Eastern Canada) move to Reykjavik (Island), (an easier target and nonetheless very important way point in lend-lease convoy)Also, 4-Truk (Caroline Islands), should be a VC/VT (more accurately a Victory Territory) to give some reason to attack.
Rio (Brazil) move to Truk (Caroline Islands),I suggested: 10-Wellington (New Zealand), but I clearly see how important is Panama’s Canal and if there is no NOs on this map a VC is a must.
In addition, a Factory in New Zealand create by itself an incentive to invade.
We have nothing else better to give to Panama than VC.You put 16-Irkutsk (Yakut SSR), it is on the 40 list and not in the 30 lists.
Do you need it more than Archangel? (which was put on the 30 lists)
At least, I would change:
Egypt for Archangel, then?
It is too easy to get by Germany.
Egypt is a stranglehold point which doesn’t give a good idea of Axis progression.However, it may also be possible to switch priority rank from G40 list to 30VTs list between Victoria (30 lister) and Irkutsk (40 lister):
14-Victoria (Western Canada),
15-Chonqing (Szechwan), (G40: China)
16-Irkutsk (Yakut SSR),to…
14-Irkutsk (Yakut SSR)
15-Chonqing (Szechwan), (G40: China)
16-Victoria (Western Canada)So, it makes senses to keep both Cairo and Irkutsk (Yakut).
Here is the list:
@Baron:Here is a revised list based on IL advice on last page.
It is still keeping Archangel,Baku, Rostov-on-Don, Ploiesti and Mosul as VCs.
Rostov is no more VC meaning Baku needs to be NOs.
Kiev (Ukraine SSR) is in G40 40 list instead of Rostov-on-Don
Tunis (Tunisia) and Dakar are now VCs instead of Algiers and Free Town.
Amsterdam (Holland) is out.
Helsinki (Finland) Pro-Axis Neutral is out.
Gibraltar will be considered with NOs.
Azores might be considered if we ever do map changes.G40 40 VCs list, 1942.2 30 VCs & 20 VCs list
G40 only 10 VCs are bolded.
1942.2 30 VCs list is normal font.
1942.2 20 VCs list is italicized.Total VCs: 40/30/20
ETO VCs: 22/16/10
PTO VCs: 18/14/10Axis ETO: 7/6/4
Allies ETO: 15/10/6Axis PTO: 4/6/4
Allies PTO: 14/8/630 VCs / 20 VCs list on 1942.2 make for :
Germany: 6 VCs / 4 VCs
Japan: 6 VCs / 4 VCs
China (US): 1 VC / 0 VC
USA: 4 VCs / 4 VCs
Russia: 4 VCs / 3 VCs
UK: 9 VCs / 5 VCs40 VCs list makes for:
ETO: 22 VCs
Germany: 4 VCs
Italy: 2 VCs
Pro-Axis Neutral: 1 VCPro-Allies Neutral: 1 VC
France: 3 VCs
Russia: 5 VCs
UK: 5 VCs
USA: 1 VCsPTO: 18 VCs
Japan: 4 VCs
UK: 4 VCs
ANZAC: 3 VCs
China: 1 VC
USA: 4 VCs
Russia: 2 VCsG40 and 1942.2 40/30/20 Victory Cities list:
Axis 8 European VCs (5+1 VCs 1942.2) 4 VCs on 20 VCs:
1-Berlin (Germany),
2-Rome (Italy),
3-Paris (France), (G40 France: Allies)
4-Ploiesti/Bucharest (Romania / Bulgaria Romania 1942.2),
5-Oslo (Norway),
6-Warsaw (Poland/Eastern Europe),
7-Tripoli (Libya).
8-Mosul/Baghdad (Iraq) Pro-Axis Neutral,9-Athens (Greece) (Pro-Allies Neutral / 1942.2: Axis),
Allies 13+1 ETO VCs (10 VCs 1942.2) 6 VCs on 20 VCs:
10-Washington (Eastern USA),
11-London (UK),
12-Cape Town (South Africa),
13-Moscow (Russia),
14-Leningrad (Karelia SSR),
15-Stalingrad (Volgograd) (Caucasus 1942.2),
16-Archangel (Archangelsk),
17-Reykjavik (Island),
18-Cairo (Egypt),
19-Dakar (French West Africa),
20-Tunis (Tunisia),
21-Kiev (Ukraine SSR),
22-Ottawa (Ontario).Axis 6 PTO VCs (G40 & 1942.2) 4 VCs on 20 VCs:
1-Tokyo (Japan),
2-Shanghai (Kiangsu),
3-Manila (Philippines), (G40 USA: Allies)
4-Truk (Caroline Islands),
5-Singapore (Malaya), (G40 UK: Allies)
6-Manchuria (Harbin),7-Rabaul (New Britain) (G40 New Britain ANZAC: Allies / 1942.2 New Guinea: Axis).
Allies 11+1 PTO VCs (8 VCs 1942.2) 6 VCs on 20 VCs:
8-Calcutta (India),
9-Sydney (Eastern Australia), (G40 ANZAC)
10-Wellington (New Zealand), (G40 ANZAC)
11-Anchorage (Alaska),
12-Honolulu (Hawaii),
13-San Francisco (Western USA),
14-Victoria (Western Canada),
15-Chonqing (Szechwan), (G40: China)
16-Irkutsk (Yakut SSR),
17-Hong Kong (Kwangtung),
18-Vladivostok (Amur).Victory Conditions to be determined…
You win if your team has at least x+ VCs in either theater, or at least y+ VCs globally for two consecutive. (Making R1 win impossible.)
Check VCs number on Warchest phase at the end of a game round if VCs condition is obtained.
-
Do you believe you can change Infantry for Aircraft in the first Soviet defensive line?
I would change 1 TcB in Poland into a Fighter. That way, both can work in combined arms against the lonely Fighter in Western Russia.
Also, don’t forget that Tactical bombers can also bomb IC in SFExperiment v5.
One less bomber might help UK’s IC not being maxed out too early.
And Germany needs Fighters to get the opportunity to freeze them in Germany or Western Europe to defend against bombers.Is there some historical reason you put 1 Fighter in New Zealand?
I liked you add 1 Infantry in Eastern Canada, this single Tank and half empty TP always bugged med.
Things starts slowly for Allies, let them have a little fun somewhere.On my map, Northwestern Europe and France are quite depleted, once all Tanks rushed in the East toward Baltic States. It opens a gap in Western German’s defense. UK might try to take NWE. It can be around 50% success if there is only 1 or 2 Infs and 1 AAA. In my mind it makes for Dieppe raid, even if it is a bit early (but you can wait next UK’s turn to try):
The Dieppe Raid, also known as the Battle of Dieppe, Operation Rutter during planning stages, and by its final official code-name Operation Jubilee, was an Allied attack on the German-occupied port of Dieppe during the Second World War. The raid took place on the northern coast of France on 19 August 1942. The assault began at 5:00 a.m., and by 10:50 a.m. the Allied commanders were forced to call a retreat. Over 6,000 infantrymen, predominantly Canadian, were supported by The Calgary Regiment of the 1st Canadian Tank Brigade and a strong force of Royal Navy and smaller Royal Air Force landing contingents. It involved 5,000 Canadians, 1,000 British troops, and 50 United States Army Rangers.
Objectives included seizing and holding a major port for a short period, both to prove that it was possible and to gather intelligence. Upon retreat, the Allies also wanted to destroy coastal defences, port structures and all strategic buildings. The raid had the added objectives of boosting morale and demonstrating the firm commitment of the United Kingdom to open a western front in Europe.
Virtually none of these objectives were met. Allied fire support was grossly inadequate and the raiding force was largely trapped on the beach by obstacles and German fire. Less than 10 hours after the first landings, the last Allied troops had all been either killed, evacuated, or left behind to be captured by the Germans. Instead of a demonstration of resolve, the bloody fiasco showed the world that the Allies could not hope to invade France for a long time. Some intelligence successes were achieved, including electronic intelligence.
Of the 6,086 men who made it ashore, 3,367 (almost 60%) were either killed, wounded or captured.[4] The Royal Air Force failed to lure the Luftwaffe into open battle, and lost 106 aircraft (at least 32 to flak or accidents), compared to 48 lost by the Luftwaffe.[5] The Royal Navy lost 33 landing craft and one destroyer. The events at Dieppe influenced preparations for the North African (Operation Torch) and Normandy landings (Operation Overlord).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieppe_Raid
So, it is voluntarily that France and NWE are pretty barren.
Suggested Topics
