• I own the first edition 1939 map by tigerman, and have played it a lot of times with my wife.  I liked your map that shows the proportions of both maps back on the first or second page

    I haven’t been able to find one like that of the 1939 changes between first and second edition and ultimately what you did with the land masses is so much what me and my wife noticed and critiqued on our very first play through on 1939…  too much emphasis on areas that just don’t need emphasis.  Although we play with our own special house rules and see fights through africa and the turkey / saudi arabia / Iran area’s quite more often because of it so having those areas works well for us.

    Looking at how you did the hexes I find it confusing on some of your island chains, you most likely will have to customize positions of islands a bit out of geographically correct positions in order for them to ‘flow’ with the hexes, but I really like  the idea of the hexes as it makes the sea zone battles a lot more tactical then strategical as with the bigger zones in 1939.  As much as I liked 1939 we drew extra sea zones on the map on our 3rd game because we found it too easy to get to specific spots to quickly (including Atlantic crossing, we made it where it takes 2 turns to get across from ANY point as well with a black sharpie)

    I personally really dislike the road art on the map,  I would have to seriously think twice about buying it if it is as prevalent as it is in these pictures.  Its ‘TOO’ distracting from the borders, even with them being enlarged/darkened…  I have no real preference on solid color over realistic over some background noise as the background of the map, but I just find the straight lines of the roads and such to prevalent and distracting.  Hopefully you make them less visible but still noticeable.  Your choice thou.

    The 1939 first edition was annoying with sea ports and airports displayed on the map, but with the lack of space in most places for units it worked well…

    Might I ask ‘has completely stalled’ is that still in effect?

  • It is still completely stalled. I was using a free program called Pixlr, which is a photoshop clone, but it has its limitations. One such limitations is size.  (http://pixlr.com/)

    I would have to completely start from scratch, and do Europe and Pacific as separate maps. Or at least, separate files then merge them.

    As to the hexes, lets use this fictional area as an example of the problem I am getting at:

    Lets take first SZ 12a and 12b. The hexes fall in a bay, and merging them seems appropriate, no major problem here that I can think of now.

    But lets look at SZ 4a and 4b, because here is my main problem.

    Imagine a soviet fleet in SZ 2. It can move through SZ 4 (merged 4a and 4b) and get to SZ 8. Even though moving through SZ 5 it could only get to SZ 9.

    It gets even more problematic when lets say a german fleet in SZ 20 has a port to use. And moves into SZ 13 (merged 13a and 13b) into SZ 8, then into SZ 4.

    Because some of the coast hexes have to merge, you can hug the coast and cut off a whole bunch of time.

    Conventional movement from SZ 20, to 21, to 17 to 14, to 9, to 5, is much longer.

    Hence a major roadblock. I would have to design the land to fit the hexes. So an entire redesign was needed.


  • Before I totally gave up, this is as far as I got.
    There was a lot of noise around the borders, because I am a photoshop amateur.
    And to put text on it, I had to blow it up to full size, unvectored, and it got really blurry.

    I couldn’t figure out how to put a font on, or IPC markings….I got frustrated.

    Though typing this out is getting me in the mood to try again…


  • Customizer

    I understand what you are saying about trying to put on text and such and I’m afraid I don’t have an answer for you on that.

    However, regarding the sea zone hexes, I really like your idea here. I think it’s a magnificent idea and you should go with it just like it is above. With this you would really have to plan ahead with what you can do with your navy. No more zipping halfway across the globe in 2 or 3 moves. Also, people might need to invest a little more heavily in navy to protect their coasts. Staging a fleet all in one single sea zone right next to your country won’t get it now. Your country may have 3 or 4 beaches to protect so you will have to get more ships and spread your navy out a bit. Might be a little harder for people to block with destroyers too.
    Take Indonesia for example. In the old board, it would be surrounded by one single sea zone. With yours, it touches 4 sea zones. While this makes it somewhat easier to invade, an air base on that island can also protect all 4 sea zones so this I think would make air bases a little more valuable.
    The only problem I see is some of the small islands that lay right on hex borders. Three come to mind: Okinawa, Midway and Malta. I’m sure there are others. The thing is you are not making a traveling map where everything has to be in it’s proper geographic place. You are making a gaming board map so once you get the hexes situated, it won’t hurt if you move some of these little islands a bit so they fit within one hex.
    As for the Baltic Sea example in your previous post with the little hexes. You were mentioning merging certain of the hexes which creates the problem of having ships hug the coast to skip hexes and move faster than they actually should. No offense oztea, but you are making this harder than it really is. DON’T MERGE THE HEXES! Any of them. Leave them as they are and that problem is instantly solved. Having several beach fronts for a territory is not a bad thing. You don’t have to rework the land territories.

    By the way, with the plethora of new units being put out by HBG, and the fact that some players have advocated giving cruisers a movement of 3 to increase their usefulness, your map could make that a possibility without overpowering any ships that you give increased movement to. I was always against giving any type of ship extra movement potential with the current setup of sea zones in our current maps, but yours has many more zones and I think that would fix it just right.

  • The problem with not merging hexes is that some hexes are so small that they are only a sliver of space. Too small to fit large amount of ships in, and if its a critical SZ, we cant rely on marshaling cards.

    What has to be done, is a from the ground up redrawing of the land/sea borders with hexes in mind from the start to avoid as many issues as possible of the hexes needing to be tweaked.
    However, thats going to be a very lengthy process. Im not sure I have the will power to go through it all again and deal with the inevitable computer errors and glitches.

    If I could do it all with a sharpie and scan it, I would, but thats impractical.
    Ill have to buckle down and just do it one day….

  • Here is a link to a similar attempt by me to redo a map (Xeno’s Europe at War/Russia at War) with mostly hex sea zones.


    In the Atlantic is works brilliantly, but I soon realized why the original designer choose the sea zone lines that he did in the Med.  It is always a compromise when doing this kind of work,

  • Customizer

    Craig Yope,
    That looked like a very good job on your sea zones. One thing I found interesting is there would be no attacking England from behind Denmark. Germany would have to stage his fleet west of Denmark to invade England, thus exposing it to possible British air attack.

    Okay, if you end up with some tiny sliver of a sea zone up next to a coast, don’t merge it with another sea zone further down the coast making a long sea zone. What you do instead is eliminate the slivers by slightly extending the hexes that border it farther out to sea. Say you have this skinny sea zone right up against a coastline. That zone will be bordered by two other sea zones that are further out at sea, right? So, simply erase the two side borders of the skinny zone and extend the center bordering line of the other two hexes on to the coast. What you end up with is two hexes that get a bit elongated and actually border the coast with NO TINY SEA ZONE there. It won’t hurt to have a few coastal hexes that are just a bit larger than the rest and you eliminate those odd coastal strips without making it possible for ships to “jump” past hexes that they shouldn’t be able to. Every single hex does not have to be perfect.
    For an example from your big map above: Look at the northern most coast of New Foundland. There is a tiny part of a hex right along the coast joined by two almost full hexes. Eliminate the sides of the small hex and extend the bordering side of the two outer hexes to the New Foundland coast. Problem solved.
    Another example: Look at North Korea. You have that one skinny part of a hex that travels along the coast of North Korea and ends at the land border of Vladivostock and is bordered by two “fuller” hexes in the Sea of Japan. The southern hex covers the eastern coast of South Korea and part of North Korea while the northern hex covers the coast of Vladivostock. This has an even simpler solution. Simply erase the ONE side of that tiny partial hex that borders the southern “fuller” hex. The result would be that the southern hex would now run up against the eastern coast of both North and South Korea and would still be separated from the coast of Vladivostock by the northern “fuller” hex.

    If you do this anywhere you find these little slivers of hex along a coast, you can still make this work. I know it sounds simplistic, but it will work and you will have created a superb battle map. Yes, there will be a few sea hexes that are a little bigger than the rest or have slightly odd shapes to them, but like I said they don’t all have to be perfect hexes. And it won’t hurt to have a few larger sea zones here and there. Just look at what we have currently – tiny sea zones in the Med but you get out into the Indian Ocean or some spots in the South Pacific, and they are HUGE. Ships cover hundreds of miles in a single move. Your way is much better and will be more regulated as to ship travels.
    From what I can see, you are almost there. Adjust a few hexes to eliminate those skinny coastal areas, move a few small islands to fit within certain hexes and text for the sea zones and territories and I think you have got it. I will certainly be interested in a copy of your map if/when you get it finished.
    Only one other suggestion I would make assuming the rest goes well. Could you make a version colored for 1940 start?

  • having downloaded your original blank map and the last one you just posted I notice that the IMAGE size of both maps is very different when loaded in Photoshop.

    For instance your original rough drawn map

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30675.msg1110731#msg1110731  <– 1st post

    has a image/canvas size of 41.639 inches by 19.5 and a resolution of 72 pixels / inch.

    your latest post with the “finished product”


    has a image/canvas size of 15.625 inches by 7.323 and a resolution of 96 pixels / inch.

    Might this difference be the reason you see the noise around the borders like you are commenting about in your post?

    I’m curious,  if someone took that original posting and did their own edits to it (coloration and sea zones / zone edits) would it print without noise?    I REALLY want to make a custom map for the extreme customization me and my wife play but don’t know the canvas size I should start with, and this original post pic would be awesome as a starting place to make it what we want.

  • I had to shrink the finished product one for it to let me upload it on AA.org

    The noise is because, what I did, was trace the outline of the 1940 landmass in blue, thinking I would use it as the ocean border. But realized it needed to be black and paintbucketed it black, but it left all kinds of noise on the border on both sides.

    I really never did anything like this before, and it was a really sloppy process.
    Next time, it will be much different….however, my job doesn’t afford me nearly as much free time as I used to have, and with the release of 1914, my passion for the project dwindled.

    I really do appreciate all the support the community has shed on this project, and personally I would be so much more happy with a map of my own design than what is currently avalable at the 8X4 ft size.

    As an aside, I have been thinking about some rules this board would require, or at least I would implement.
    It would be very similar to 1940. I don’t think zones of control or terrain features would make it in. Special rail rules might.
    But primarily, a blend between 1940 and 1914 (and I would HIGHLY recommend playing with the pieces from both games because)

    The factions would be
    USA (USA Green)
    UK (UK Tan)
    Commonwealth / Canada&ANZAC (Grey)
    France / Free France (Blue)
    China (WWI US Green)
    Holland (WWI UK)

    USSR (Soviet Red)
    Communist China (WWI Russia)

    Germany (Black)
    Japan (Orange)
    Italy (Brown)
    Finland (WWI German Grey)
    Hungary/Romania (WWI Austria Hungary)
    Vichy French (WWI French)

    Spain/Portugal (WWI Italy Orange)
    Turkey (WWI Ottomans)
    Strict Neutrals (1940 Chinese)

  • Some other rules:
    Powers can produce Infantry and Artillery in certain original territories without a capital, China and Communist China will be powers that start with their capital controlled by the enemy.
    The Dutch will lose their capital on turn 1 or 2

    Ports + AA Guns will allow AA coverage in adjacent sea zones (in some fashion)

    Powers not at war will collect 1/2 IPCs, limited movement and production

    Artillery will defend from amphibious invasions like in 1914

    And the big one! The WEEKS ROLL
    At the start of a full game turn (at the beginning of the German turn) roll a die. This is the number of rounds each combat will last for this game turn.
    This represents the number of weeks this game turn represents.

    For instance, on the first turn, the roll is a 3. Each combat, land or sea, will last 3 rounds. After which, the attacker my choose to retreat, or contest the territory (like 1914)
    The attacker my choose to retreat before the week number has been met if they wish as per normal 1940 rules.

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10


    Would it help if someone purchased you photoshop?  On the premise that this will be completed at some point?

    Also… as to rules, If you included some of my “darkside” rules, or versions of them, like POW’s, as optional rules.

    I would be ecstatic… and, liberal with software funding. 🙂

  • There is a way to get photoshop 3, or something, for free. Adobe just gives it away as like a free trial thing or something because its so old.
    I just havent gotten around to it.

    I got a new job where I am on call 24/7, so my free time has really taken a nose dive.

  • Catching the bug again. (the hexes in this pic havent been adjusted yet)

    I cant really get this style down. Does anyone have any suggestions for something a little more flashy than solid colors?
    Im going for the look of the original Europe game, but I think I may have to settle for solid colors. Nothing seems to look right.


  • Bump to see if Oz is still tinkering w/map. Oz, I just ran across this project and hope you will continue it.

    As far as coloring, I favor the pastel/faded colors you have chosen over the bold colors from The Global War 1939 (I have the smaller 2nd version of Tigers map). I also think a background is pretty cool, but a terrain type might be more appealing and help with the congestion that the roads are giving you (too many lines IMO). Plus many ppl would be interested in terrain causing movement issues like in Northern Italy etc….or you even developing some rules incorporating movement over mountains or rivers (major bridges etc).

    To address the sz hexes, I really like that idea. Like you I thought sea movement in GW1939 was too fast and US to France/Spain or England in one move seemed over powering. The other problem we had w/GW1939 was it is only 3 moves from Romania to Moscow. Your map has the standard 4 spaces that will work much better IMO.

    As far as the Sea Hexes, like I said I like what you have done hear. As you pointed out it will take 2 turns for US to get to England (assuming the DC naval base gives +1), but it will take 3 turns to get to Gibraltar or N Africa. It will also take 2 turns to get to Hawaii from southern Cal naval base (that seems too long as well). If you enlarged the scale of the hexes would that take care of some of the problems you have encountered near land w/o allowing for the leap frogging? By using a bit larger hex pattern it would still take the US 2 turns to get to England (doesn’t matter if they get closer as long as they can’t get next to the coast in 1 turn), but would most likely bring Gib or N Africa to 2 moves as well. I like expanding the ocean travel time, but it needs to be playable. A slightly larger hex pattern might also bring some of the island chains into one sz w/o moving them around too much in the Pacific as well. Just a suggestion to keep your thought process going.

  • I know that this is far far down the line (if you do decide to resurrect this project).

    1. The circles I’m assuming are for major cities. Some might have production centers or be linked to a victory point system. Don’t know if you had this in mind, but you could also make them all hubs of transportation. Most of them are 3-4 spaces apart, and it would be very cool if you could move a certain number of ground units up to 4 spaces over land (need to set a max of maybe 3-5 units hub to hub TBD in NCM only). You would need to have a direct path of territories controlled by your side (4 space max movement and must start and end at a hub). If you take a territory from your enemy you can’t produce units, but you can still use their rail or roads. It would make it worth while to capture these circle territories (not just bypass them), as well as defend them.

    2. I like limiting the rounds of combat somehow to create contested territories. Not sure about rolling a dice per full round of play, but I can see how that could make things interesting and could represent things like a winter or rainy season. Maybe just a simple max of 2 or 3 rounds of combat determined by how many units in the battle. Give the upper hand to the attacker where he decides after each round to press on, or retreat. After the 3rd round of battle if the defender still has units the attacker can either stay full force to contest the territory, retreat in full, or split his forces retreating some, and leave the rest to contest.

    Could also allow the defender some sort of retreat option after each round of battle? Each units rolls a dice.
    1-2 unit stays
    3-4 unit retreats
    5-6 unit removed from play (killed or POW)

    1. Tweak to airbases allowing them to scramble to land territories? Could do dog fights/recon to upgrade a limited number of art etc… could have dog fights last two rounds max (conserve air units), then allow for retreats?

    2. I know you will come up with a pretty cool convoy system making subs (maybe surface raiders) more valuable (but not overpowering unless ignored). Maybe assigning a raiding max to individual sz’s that had known convoy traffic linked back to individual powers (some sz’s could double dip multiple Powers). Maybe include some air defense in the “raiding phase” as the allies used airbases in Iceland, UK and other places to scout and protect convoys. If Iceland were to be where 2 or 3 sz’s intersect, that air base could scramble to multiple sz’s to protect convoys, or navy (some kind of sub detection roll?). Right now in G40 Iceland is pretty useless.

    Anyway OZ, don’t give up just yet

  • I gave up because putting the roundels all over the map and numbering everything got very tedious.

    Combat would be limited to 3 rounds, and after that you can retreat or your can dig in, but this exposes you to counter attack.

    Tanks (and mech when paired) would have some cool rules.
    First of all, they can roll to retreat as the defender after one round of combat. (you may only retreat half)
    Second, they could blitz into new combats.
    Because combats last 3 rounds, for mechs and tanks, if they participate in a combat that ends in the first or second round, they can blitz into another combat and fight for the remaining rounds. In this way Germany can really pour into Russia and France.

    Not sure 100% what the city circles would do, but in the very least they would allow defending infantry to defend at 3 during the first round of combat. (representing how difficult it would be to take a city)

    For movement, something like “city to city” might be possible.
    For instance, the IPC values of each city is how many units can use its rails to ride to any other city within 4 spaces (noncombat only)

  • Wow, really nice map. I’ve done a home made map myself, and like some of the ideas you’ve done. My map also has circles rep. key areas. I like how many zones there are. I included two POW camps in mine. Africa looks harder than ever! I like Europe too.
    Starlight Sniper

  • '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    Love the hex sea zones.  Here is something TMTM posted on doing textures and wavy lines around borders using paint.net that might get you the texture you are looking for.


    I recently made a new module for abattlemap for the A&A Global 1940 http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22555.0

    In it I used the same color scheme as Axis & Allies Global War, I had to figured out how to do it and I kinda did… so I thought I’d share the process with anyone wanting to do the same:

    How to make the textured colors in Axis & Allies Global War Variant

    Using Paint.net, which can be downloaded at www.GetPaint.net

    First I click New and size the new canvas as 60 x 60 pixels (we are creating an image which we�ll use later to fill the area�s of your map)

    Select the base color and use the paint bucket to fill the new 60 x 60 canvas

    Click on Effects � Noise � Add Noise and just adjust the intensity… I did around 25, but experiment for yourself.

    Click on Effects � Blurs � Average Blur and set the radius at 3

    Now our 60 x 60 image should look like the textured color we desired.

    Save it as mynewcolor.bmp

    Now the area on your map that you want to fill with your new textured color, you�ll need to get a plugin for Paint.net. found here http://www.sapphireonline.com/Downloads/PhotoFloodFillPlugIn.zip and just unzip it to the default C:\Program Files\Paint.NET/Effects folder and close and reopen Paint.net

    Now with your map open, use the Magic wand and select the area you want to fill with the new color. Then click on Effects � Photo Flood Fill and for Photo File name we are going to use the file we just make mynewcolor.bmp and click ok and now your map will be filled with that color.

    How to make waves like in Axis & Allies Global War Variant

    I just used Effect � Object � Drop shadow and settings 0�d the blur and only adjusted widening. You might see waves on the land area… no worry… you need to use layers for each wave and the land color layer should be on top of the wave layers and will cover the waves on the land. I also recommend that on the layer you�ll use to make wave that that layer only have the lines you�d like to add waves to… remove all border lines etc so it doesn�t add waves to those etc.

    Tip: Always use the duplicated layer, so your not adding effects to your outline layer, always save the original outline layer for other effects.

    I use these in my recent module for A&A Global 1940 module at http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22555.0 where I have the source files for download and you can see how I used them.


Suggested Topics

  • 50
  • 66
  • 33
  • 4
  • 5
  • 2
  • 16
  • 7
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys