Just want to add that there is a tournament going on for this map. Free entry, double elimination. $200 in prize money: $125 to 1st place, $50 to 2nd place, and $25 to 3rd place. Click here to see the website:
http://www.biscon.com.au/tourny/dice/index.html
To download the Full size Screenshot of this map (6mb), click here:
without units:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/tripleamaps/files/images/fullsizescreenshots/TripleA_new_world_order_no_units.png/download
without any color, flags, or anything:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/tripleamaps/files/developer%20resources/base%20tile%20full%20images/NWOblank.png/download
Also should mention that downloading TripleA Axis & Allies game engine, you get this map/game automatically because it comes with TripleA.
And there are always at least a few people online willing to start a live or play-by-email game of New World Order, in triplea’s lobby.
Runs on Revised rules (Also called 4th Edition Rule. 4th Edition = Revised)
so, if you have the Revised rulebook, or you get the scanned rulebook off the internet, then you know the rules.
the only changes are:
1. It is not allowed to make Fighter movements based on the assumption that a Carrier could pass through a potentially cleared seazone in NonCombatMove. (as it actually is legal under Revised/LHTR)
2. Territories can only be strategically bombed up to their territory value per turn.
3. Phase order is changed. Purchase phase happens AFTER the combat move phase, but happens before the resolving combat phase. (no actual difference in gameplay, it just makes larger maps easier to play and make purchases for)
Things that are not covered by the revised rulebook:
1. Units and prices are completely different. (and there are specific rules for certain units, like bunkers and the units that can be built only on turn 4 and later).
2. You may enter and attack ‘neutral’ territories for free.
3. You may not fly over a neutral territory without attacking that neutral territory first. (ie: you can attack it then retreat after 1 round as a means of flying over if you wish, but this can be expensive to do).
4. Empty neutral territories may be blitzed.
5. There is no technology.
6. Default is to use Low Luck. Anything legal in dice is legal in low luck. Anything illegal in dice is illegal in low luck.
Yea Denmark was defeated in 24 hours. It had no army. perhaps 1 infantry but not more.
Denmark has been annexed without real any combat.
But I agree no more than 1 infantry.
Denmark seems to have quite a large military compared to that of the Dutch and Belgians whose military forces were far larger.
The Danish have 3 infantry, a tank, artillery, and another ground unit. While the Belgians and Dutch have 3 infantry each. The Danish contained no armoured divisions of that size, or any armor at all if I recall.
I agree with De Gaule. No more than 2 dutch INF and 3 in belgium.
Too much units for germany on the western front.
While historical accuracy is important and always nice to see, Balance is far more important.
I don’t agree at all but hey that’s your game…There’s no challenge! Map is well done but you make a little mistake.
Eastern prussia was seperated of germany by danzig corridor.
Replay value and balance had precedence over historical accuracy in NWO. A truly historical setup on this level of abstraction is doomed to lead to one-dimensional gameplay. The map is an hommage to the charms of the Larry Harris A&A game mechanics, not a history simulator.
options
means
variation
means
high replay value
means
increasing depth of strategical challenge within the community
means
unlimited challenge and fun
Too many games today leave the player with the disappointing discovery, that while seemingly full of choices, the game boils down to one simple optimal approach.
In NWO, there is a multitude of interconnected hotspots, each with a fine balance of its own. There is no optimal trajectory solving the game for you. If you let your concentration slip in one theater of war for a turn only, if your opponent anticipates your subconscious wishes better then you do his, he will exploit that and win. Still, the map allows for a relatively intuitive gameplay for beginners.
A hidden plus of NWO is that it inherently attracts a pleasant and mature selection of skilled players.
Thx to Veq for the post and call me me shameless ; )
ErnieBommel (retired)
while i always see this in the online (live) lobby for triplea, and it possibly the 2nd most popular triplea live game (and most popular play-by-email game), I have yet to see this played in the forum.
has anyone given this a play-by-forum go?
Has anyone played this NWO scenario using a physical map and pieces, F2F or by email? Which map(s) would work best with this set-up?
Is the scenario set-up (and/or are the starting assumptions) markedly different from that of the official games?
This map is clearly based on post 1945 boundaries, which grates with a 1939 scenario. Particularly noticable with Poland & Yugoslavia, but also Bessarabia/Moldova should have a Black Sea coastline.
If you want to do a game based on WWII start with map of Europe from 1939, not 1945.
In 1939 USSR was more in the Axis than the Allies.
Off topic but these stats in the screen shots would do quite well for D6 stats when using HBG custom units. Many have posted various rules for D6 stats with limited success. However these stats may be more accepted with precedence and provenance from tripleA.
Thanks, Veqyrn. :evil:
This map is clearly based on post 1945 boundaries, which grates with a 1939 scenario. Particularly noticable with Poland & Yugoslavia, but also Bessarabia/Moldova should have a Black Sea coastline.
If you want to do a game based on WWII start with map of Europe from 1939, not 1945.
In 1939 USSR was more in the Axis than the Allies.
I don’t know my WWII or European history that well, but thanks for the advise. Are there any good WWII A&A Europe maps out there with a 1939 point of view that would be good fits for this set up? Would any of IL’s wonderful maps fill that bill?
Thanks!
yes look up my global 1939 game which came out before global 40
Thanks IL! I was sort of wondering about using that one, or one similar to that one, for this variant.
Replay value and balance had precedence over historical accuracy in NWO. A truly historical setup on this level of abstraction is doomed to lead to one-dimensional gameplay. The map is an hommage to the charms of the Larry Harris A&A game mechanics, not a history simulator.
options
means
variation
means
high replay value
means
increasing depth of strategical challenge within the community
means
unlimited challenge and funToo many games today leave the player with the disappointing discovery, that while seemingly full of choices, the game boils down to one simple optimal approach.
In NWO, there is a multitude of interconnected hotspots, each with a fine balance of its own. There is no optimal trajectory solving the game for you. If you let your concentration slip in one theater of war for a turn only, if your opponent anticipates your subconscious wishes better then you do his, he will exploit that and win. Still, the map allows for a relatively intuitive gameplay for beginners.
A hidden plus of NWO is that it inherently attracts a pleasant and mature selection of skilled players.
Thx to Veq for the post and call me me shameless ; )
ErnieBommel (retired)
As someone who’s played a number of NWO games, I want to voice my agreement with every positive thing that’s been written about this map.
Maybe there are those here who have played Risk. Then at some point, you went from Risk to Classic or Revised. And realized you could never go back. Once you go from Classic or Revised to this map, you will experience exactly that same reaction.
I’ve played this map at least 40 times, and I cannot recall any two games being the same. Very high replay value. Also, this map’s element of pure strategy (as opposed to tactics) is very strong. Every major nation except the United States will generally find itself fighting on at least two fronts; sometimes more. “What are my objectives for this front?” you need to ask. “Am I trying to create a static situation; or do I want to advance? What’s the best way of spending as little as possible on my static fronts, so that I can get away with spending as much as possible on the fronts where I’m supposed to be advancing? How can I force my opponents to spend as much as possible on their defensive fronts; so as to distract them from their offensive fronts?”
One example of this kind of thinking is the naval situation in the Eastern Mediterranean. Britain has several options.
Following up on an old topic, are the initial setups for this A&AR variant written down or posted anywhere accessible? I don’t have the TrippleA app, so I can’t just look it up on the NWO map.
The best solution to the problem is to download TripleA. The above link will let you do exactly that. Not only will this engine allow you to play Larry Harris maps, it also allows you to play a good selection of player-created maps. Some of them are significantly better than any of Larry’s maps, at least to me. (Including New World Order, Rising Sun, and Domination 1914 No Man’s Land.)
