• After reading a lot (and STILL! not being able to meet with anyone to play or owning Axis and Allies myself), I’ve come up with a few map changes largely based on realism. And I know I’m going to get blasted by people saying it’s not a realistic game etc., but these changes are very much based in actual geography and reality. Moreover, they add sea zones to the Atlantic which can slow down the popular and powerful “shuck-shuck” ferry of units from North America to Europe. I think this will add a little balance, and more importantly my proposed changes MAKE SENSE. Isn’t that one of the most important things in a strategy game? I think so, and if there are any other glaring absurdities in A&A then by all means let’s discuss SIMPLE ways of fixing them. (There is an excellent discussion of technology on the AAMC boards)

    Enough chit chat-you still have no idea what I’m proposing!

    1. Remove the line between Alaska and SFE, making the Bering Strait one sea zone. Come on, people used to WALK across it, but a transport can’t bridge there? Look at places like Japan and the Mediterranean, bridging occurs there and it’s roughly the same distance.

    2. Add a line going straight up between Scandinavia/Finland and Karelia. This line creates a seazone off the coast of Karelia-basically a Russian port zone. This makes it impossible for US to sail troops to Karelia without floating in the Atlantic for a turn. (realistic?) And, more realistic than that is this: Russian sea units protecting Karelia can’t defend against a naval invasion from Germany across the English Channel. Come on, how can ships up in the isolated, ice-filled Russian waters fight against transports launching from France??!! That’s crazy. It also prevents bridging from Karelia to UK(ABSURD!), but still enables this move to be made easily.

    3. This one is hard to describe, but I’ll try. I’d recommend opening up the map http://www.axisandallies.org/download/map.jpg

    –End result of line: A triangular, North Atlantic, pure ocean zone between UK and Canada. This triangle touches 3 sea zones - the newly formed Hudson Bay/all of Canadian coast zone, the UK sea zone aka North Sea, and the Spanish Atlantic sea zone.

    –Drawing the line: Here are the two endpoints of the line, and hopefully you can envision it. This creats a triangular, North-Atlantic ocean space between Canada and UK. The line starts from the blow-up boxes above Canada, specifically it starts between the Cuba(East Indies?) and the Gibraltor blow up boxes. Got it? Now this line will extend to that huge vertical line in the middle of the Atlantic, the one that divides the words “North” and “Atlantic.” But where on that line you ask? To a point in the middle of the Spain sea zone line. This new line, if extended through the Spain sea zone, would eventually hit Algeria. Still don’t see it? Maybe someone can describe it better.

    Anyway, those are my proposed map changes. They make US to Russia sailing take 2 turns, and fighters no longer have trans-atlantic abilites except to Western Europe. (But bombers can still get to UK, which I think is also accurate) The Russians now have their own port instead of sharing one with France, UK, and Scaninavia. And Alaskans can bridge to Soviet Far East, which might make the Pacific a little more important.

    -Mike

    P.S. Can someone give me the contact info for whomever maintains the rest of the site? I’d like to try and get my map up on the site. Thanks.


  • Dear Mike,

    Some interesting suggestions.

    1. Bridging between SFE and Alaska is definitely plausible, however, it may have other strategic consequences. For example, USA can threaten invasion of SFE (as well as any navy) from WCO SZ in 1 turn.

    The counter side is that a Japanese navy stationed in SFE SZ is threatening to (a) bridge to alaska, and (b) invade WCAN, © invade WUS.

    Could make for an interesting Pacific scuffle maybe?

    2. Buy the board game (there already is a line there). Quite why the map doesn’t show one is strange though - maybe it could be updated?

    3. If American fighters can’t cross the Atlantic without a UK carrier to land on, UK is effectively forced into buying a carrier in UKT1/UKT2. This will cut out a lot of dynamic play (IND/SA IC).

    I think the proposed Sea Zone would allow transatlantic flights from ECAN to UK/FIN, which as you say might be more realistic.

    The danger is that if US can’t “shuck shuck”, and need 2 turns to transport their men, does that delay the US too much in Europe? In some games I have played, even one turn’s difference is critical in deciding whether Moscow or Germany will fall.

    Anyway - some ideas for you to kick around. I suggest you try the new map changes, and compete in the relevent theatre for each change (US goes Pacific for number 1, Germany/Jap focus on Russia ASAP for change 3), and see what they play like.

    [ This Message was edited by: Desert_Viper on 2002-04-24 13:40 ]


  • Thanks, those are all valid points and I agree with all of them.

    Yes, fighters could go transatlantic from Canada to UK, but they still have a delay of one turn to get from US to UK and have to stop in Canada. That may relieve some early pressure on Germany and give them a chance to move instead of holing up in T1.

    I don’t think the effects in the Pacific theatre are bad at all. One of the main reasons it’s ignored, I hear, is that it takes too long and you can be seen a mile away. With surprise attacks a viable option for both sides, new strategies or at least distractions are available to get out of the Fortress Europe tedium. I bet it will still be a race to crack Berlin or Moscow, but imagine stalling tactics that use Pacific invasions! Pretty interesting, especially for the US who have to get tired of shucking infantry over and over. Imagine US, Japan, USSR, Germany, and maybe even Britain depending on strategy, all fighting on two fronts! Then it’s a World War, not a Europe War!

    Now the biggest change-the effects on the shuck shuck. I don’t know enough to say any more than the obvious-it slows it down. All you experts out there can tell me how great, awful, or meaningless that change is. Even better, someone play it! I’d love to hear how it goes in the Pacific and Europe.

    -Mike

    The game already has a line between Karelia and Finland! HA! I feel like a tool!


  • Yes…North Sea and the Barents SZ are indeed already 2 separate Sea Zones.

    I have always thought there should be an extra SZ between Canada and North Sea–ships SHOULD hafta take an extra turn to cross the Atlantic, giving German U-boats a realistic chance to confront them. As it is, this important aspect of WWII is totally ignored, as ships built in East USA can sail into England totally unopposed on a single turn–unless Germany can block the route entirely w/ U-boats which as we all know is impossible unless the Axis have already basically won…

    Ozone27

    P.S. The Bering Strait should remain 2 SZs however–do you have any idea how difficult that Sea is to cross? May be only 50 miles at it’s narrowest point, but shifting ice, sudden squalls and powerful currents (not to mention towering waves and biting cold) make the Bering one of the most treacherous of seas. When its frozen over its little better, in some ways even worse–recently an expedition set out with fully modern tractors and equipment to cross the ice from Asia to North America and were defeated by the shifting and dangerous pack ice near Alaska. That’s with 90’s technology, not '40s. The only reason people were ever able to “walk” across the Bering Strait was because it wasn’t there at the time–when the (future) native Americans came over it was dry land…

    [ This Message was edited by: Ozone27 on 2002-04-24 21:34 ]

    [ This Message was edited by: Ozone27 on 2002-04-24 21:42 ]


  • Really? The Bering Strait is that tough. Hmmm…that kinda screws up my argument. But doesn’t one sea zone there sound like a good idea to improve gameplay? Besides, it LOOKS really easy to cross on a map. So it would be realistic to ignorant people such as myself. If anyone out there has played a game with the extra North Atlantic sea zone, or with the Bering Strait as one sea zone, let us know how it went. Better yet, someone try a game or two with those modifications.


  • It seems that creating one sea zone out of the Bearing Straight wouldn’t be that great an advantage. With the two movement points for a transport one would be able to shift troops from Alaska to The Soviet Far East just as quickly as if there were only one sea zone between them.

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

77
Online

15.1k
Users

35.9k
Topics

1.5m
Posts