New Axis & Allies Global War Variant (free map)


  • Victory Cities
    I feel that to get the VC conversation moving forward we should use the following approach.

    Review the current list, then post what cities on that list you disagree with and why, along with your suggested replacement.

    I think this approach will allow us to focus on specific cities and allow for pointed debates.  (Please don’t just post your list of cities.)

    Other VC goals:
    This is not set in stone but for parity and continuity I would like each nation to have the same number of VCs.

    Try to keep fairness/balance in mind when choosing cities.

    Try to keep one territory between the VCs. (I know we have some exceptions, if you have a better city please let me know.)

    It’s my understanding everyone likes the tiered system of (1) 20, (1) 15, (3) 10 if I am wrong let me know.

    Let’s try to suggest cities and not oil fields or areas of major battles I’m sure some of these have merit but like Larry Harris I like the idea of cities being discussed around the war tables.

    Remember that a city can be on the map that is not a VC.  So if you think a city was important during the war put does not merit VC status, let me know I will try to add it.

    Something not up for debate, Total Cities

    The max number is 30.  I know it is hard to choose, with so many great options out there. (It’s like being a kid in a candy store with a twenty dollar bill.)  But do try.

    CURRENT LIST

    National Capitals 20 point

    US
    San Francisco 15 point

    10 point
    Honolulu
    Manila
    Panama City

    UK
    Calcutta 15 point

    10 point
    Canberra
    Cairo
    Singapore

    RUSSIA
    Stalingrad 15 point

    10 point
    Leningrad
    Baku
    Vladivostok

    GERMANY
    Paris 15 point

    10 point
    Oslo
    Warsaw
    Budapest

    ITALY
    Athens 15 point

    10 point
    Tripoli
    Addis Ababa
    Palermo

    JAPAN
    Peiping 15 point

    10 point
    Okinawa
    Seoul
    Taipei


  • Territories
    I feel we have discussed this at length and should be close to final.  If you want to see any additional changes let me know this week.

    I did not get feed back on the Atlantic Islands. Like/Dislike? Needs more/less?

    Imp, do you still have heartburn over Vichy?

    Roads In or Out?

    I am in favor of the rule I suggested (obviously).  How does the group feel?

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Territories

    I feel we have discussed this at length and should be close to final.  If you want to see any additional changes let me know this week.

    I did not get feed back on the Atlantic Islands. Like/Dislike? Needs more/less?

    Imp, do you still have heartburn over Vichy?

    Roads In or Out?

    I am in favor of the rule I suggested (obviously).  How does the group feel?

    Well Yea i dont see why Vichy cant just be neutral rather than under german control and allowing germany to take the income. Making Vichy the same gray as germany is a total embarrasment to the reality.  In Aug 1942 Hitler attacked Vichy France and took (southern france, algeria, morroco, and Tunisia) all other Vichy territories were out of reach of Hitler.

    I would prefer these roads only:

    Burma road ( a route thru the mountains)
    Siberian railroad ( along the stretch of SU)
    Lend lease road in Persia ( connecting persian gulf to caucasus)
    Alaskan highway (connecting it to USA)
    A major rail to connect both sides of USA so units can do it in one movement.

    Please try out my turn order. I think it will help you well.

    When you post please have a nice PDF or Jpeg

    Also the set up sheets should be on PDF… the file i got does not have the tops of the setup sheets.

    Remember the Soviets and British invaded Persia in aug 1941 because of pro-axis government. They established a land route to get supplies to Russia.


  • Turn Order
    Like I mentioned before some great suggestions have been posted to the thread on this topic.  I look forward to trying them when I find the time.

    Due to the fact that these suggestions have not been play tested I am going to have to fall back onto the true and tested turn based method of A&A.  It’s just a rule set feel free to play the map anyway you like, but I will be putting one of the following onto the reference charts.  If we create a rule book for this variant other methods can be listed in it.

    So please vote and let me know which option you like best.

    A) Axis Aggressors

    1. Germany
      2. Russia
      3. Japan
      4. United Kingdom
      5. Italy
      6. USA

    B) A&A Classic plus 1

    1. Russia
    2. Germany
    3. United Kingdom
    4. Japan
    5. United States
    6. Italy

    C) Europe and Pacific Theaters Separated

    1. Germany
    2. Russia
    3. Italy
    4. United Kingdom
    5. Japan
    6. United States


  • @Imperious:

    I would prefer these roads only:

    Burma road ( a route thru the mountains)
    Siberian railroad ( along the stretch of SU)
    Lend lease road in Persia ( connecting persian gulf to caucasus)
    Alaskan highway (connecting it to USA)
    A major rail to connect both sides of USA so units can do it in one movement.

    I thought you were in favor of the strategic move rule?


  • I thought the Alaskan highway was put in in the 1960s?

    -jim lee

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    I would prefer these roads only:

    Burma road ( a route thru the mountains)
    Siberian railroad ( along the stretch of SU)
    Lend lease road in Persia ( connecting persian gulf to caucasus)
    Alaskan highway (connecting it to USA)
    A major rail to connect both sides of USA so units can do it in one movement.

    I thought you were in favor of the strategic move rule?

    Yea i am but i thought you guys werent gonna go for that since nobody responded to that suggestion. So i figured if your not going that way at least you would have something.

  • Moderator

    NIce roads
    Alaskan highway was made in the 50’s and 60’s. If you want to add another road put in the Autobahn
    Burma road is good, Siberian railway, good, Transcontinental RR, Good, If a African/ asia road is wanted, connect Egypt with Iran or India, but i think more then 1 new road will be to much.  My vote is for a road or railway in europe.


  • On the VC list;  Please change Budapest to Bucharest! Roumania was much more important then Hungary.

    China is on the map, and played separate by the US, so replace Panama City with Chungking as a VC. There must be something to gain for the Japanese in their War with China.

    On territories; Did you add the name of Corsica??  And maybe you can switch the IPC values of Abyssinia and Italian Somaliland, now that Abyssinia has a VC.

    On roads,  Well I’m favouring strategic redeployment! But the roads could be used for Lend Lease rules. So IL’S list is OK.  This could also work great with the convoy boxes. Something like convoy routes.

    Vichy France should be “pro-Axis” Neutral. Please not the color of Germany.


  • Oh yeah, forgot this;

    @deepblue:

    Turn Order
    A) Axis Aggressors

       1. Germany
       2. Russia
       3. Japan
       4. United Kingdom
       5. Italy
       6. USA

    From your list on Turn order this one is definitely the best! Germany before Russia, so Barbarossa will have a go. Japan before the UK  and US, and the UK before Italy, so Italian East Africa could be attacked…

    However I still like this one best;

    1. Germany/ Italy
    2. Soviet Union
    3. Japan
    4. United Kingdom/ United States

    Have it tested. It saves time and more realistic. Also add’s more team play.


  • @jim:

    I thought the Alaskan highway was put in in the 1960s?

    -jim lee

    No, no…;

    The road was originally built mostly by the US Army as a supply route during World War II. It was completed on the 28th of October 1942.


  • Micoom,

    @Micoom:

    On the VC list;  Please change Budapest to Bucharest! Roumania was much more important then Hungary.

    This is fine by me.  Anyone have an issue with this change?

    @Micoom:

    China is on the map, and played separate by the US, so replace Panama City with Chungking as a VC. There must be something to gain for the Japanese in their War with China.

    Good point, just one thought if China has its own army production, its own roundel.  Could it have its own VC?  Just a thought.

    Give China a 10 point VC to defend on “its own”.

    Thoughts?

    @Micoom:

    On territories; Did you add the name of Corsica??  And maybe you can switch the IPC values of Abyssinia and Italian Somaliland, now that Abyssinia has a VC.

    Not yet, waiting to see how the Vichy debate turns out. (It is Vichy, don’t want to do the work twice.)

    Hold onto the IPC thought till later.

    Death Head 420,

    If a road version is made, I will look into the Europe road/rail.

    Craig,

    Glad to see you back on the thread.  Thanks for the input.


  • The third draft has arrived!

    Sorry for the delay, the file sharing service was down.  Can’t complain too much it’s free!

    Gentlemen,

    I have made the following changes from the second draft:

    Added:
    Portugal

    Changed:
    Date of map to June 1941 (Abyssinia and Italian Somaliland exception)
    Baltic States, Western Russia, Eastern Ukraine, and Crimea are under Russian control.
    Former sea zones 92, 93 and 107 have been combined.
    Abyssinia and Italian Somaliland are now Italian.
    Added Addis Ababa as the fifth VC for Italy.

    Reminders:
    When reviewing the map please consider both historical accuracy and game play.
    The image has been reduced by 50% for faster downloads. (Makes it a little fuzzy)
    Unfinished elements have been removed.
    This is a work in progress.

    http://www.mediafire.com/?33tytmjmgkk


  • I think roads in Europe are unnecessary, jut like they are not needed in the US. Roads and Railroads all over the place. No need to add them.

    I will keep my thought on the IPC’s Also want change in Hungary and Rumania. And before had comments on the East Indies.


  • Why decided to not change Bellorussia and Western Ukraine to Russia? It is June 1941 at the start of Barbarossa… I think you should change this.

    See: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/Operation_Barbarossa_corrected_border.png


  • Would you like to use the weapons purchase deal from my map? Its a vector image so it’ll scale better. And maybe redo the A&A title to match your city text?

    If you are interested the .pdf is here : http://www.bionicdonkeys.com/iWeb/A%26A map/Axis %26 Allies game map.html

    -jim lee

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Changed:
    Date of map to June 1941 (Abyssinia and Italian Somaliland exception)
    Baltic States, Western Russia, Eastern Ukraine, and Crimea are under Russian control.
    Former sea zones 92, 93 and 107 have been combined.
    Abyssinia and Italian Somaliland are now Italian.
    Added Addis Ababa as the fifth VC for Italy.

    LMFAO!!

    This starts in June of 1941… so those 3 german territories that are in the soviet camp need to be changed to Soviet control.

    Additionally, since your only making the one map… perhaps you could color the French all blue so people can play a 1939 version?

    Varients have this thing about them… people pick up the challenge and modify some things to get what they need and want. If the French were blue it would be like meeting them half way. You could even color the german starting 1941 territories with a dotted red line, while allowing all those neutrals to go white. That way you created a map that can be played with any scenario possible… And you helped alot of people who normally cant do this themselves.

    As i stated in the beginning you are performing a service to many people who normally dont even make maps, but would like a benifit of a flexable map… It would also make the Italian african colonies much more legitimate because its a 1939 map…

    Now thats an improvement.

    PS: Tobruck should have a city on it like the other city named territories?

    Miccoon is very right Bucharest is a million times more important to germany than Budapest.

    Romania had substantial oil fields at Polesti which were vital to German industry.

    I would consider you adding some oil fields and using the AAE rules on oil attacks… It would add alot to the game.

    Oil centers:

    Baku
    Maikop
    Asfrakan
    South Cacasus
    Polesti
    Texas

    Heres a old link i often use amoung other things:

    http://history.sandiego.edu/cdr2/WW2Pics2/82027bg.jpg


  • Vichy:
    I’m on board with the neutral/pro-axis Vichy.  If i’m reading the posts right, neutral territories, but money to Germany.  Germany can invade them to move through them.  I think that that light grey or blue-grey color could accomplish this as well as the 1939 scenario mentioned.

    Road/Rails
    If the plan is for road/rails, then I like IL’s list.  For Europe, pretty much all the countries had a compatible rail system and I would be in favor of instead of putting multiple rails, putting in a standard europe rail plan, where you could move from one territory in europe an average number of territories away.  Average would come from what the other rails are like.  Spain had a different system and Russia was very primitive rail system in comparison.  http://www.feldgrau.com/dreichsbahn.html

    Turn Order:
    I like Micoom’s best
    1. Germany/ Italy
    2. Soviet Union
    3. Japan
    4. United Kingdom/ United States

    but from deepblue’s list I would vote for A: Axis Aggressors, but I really do think Italy should go before UK.
    1. Germany
      2. Russia
      3. Japan
      4. United Kingdom
      5. Italy
      6. USA


  • Random thoughts:
    If you are going back to June '41, East Poland, BeloRussia and West Ukraine should go back to Russia

    I like the Atlantic Islands, for realism.  I do see them as better in early stages for US to move to Europe, and for Germany after wiping Russia out

    I think it was mentioned way back now about spliting the solomon islands into a couple sections and at the time I thought no, but after more thought and looking more and more at New Guinea, I think the Solomons could be split.  Historically at least the US and Jap were both on opposite sides of some of the islands there for months fighting.  I think it could work.

    The Chunking VC is probably better than Panama City, I know that historically there were German plans to attack the canal there but there was German plans for just about everything (death rays, better mouse traps, etc) and that is a huge amount of China to cross for not a whole lot (though ipcs haven’t been ironed out yet)

    Naha is listed in Okinawa and looks like a VC but I don’t see it on the list?


  • @Micoom:

    Why decided to not change Bellorussia and Western Ukraine to Russia? It is June 1941 at the start of Barbarossa… I think you should change this.

    I was referencing this map and it to be more accurate the map is “Juneish” not specifically June. Since most of Byelorussia is axis control by July I left it with the Germans.  Looking at the map again you’re probably right about Western Ukraine.

    Thanks for the heads up.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Eastern_Front_1941-06_to_1941-12.png


  • OK. But also change Belorussia. Just give it a small setup later on. So that Germany can invade it easily.


  • Will do.


  • @deepblue:

    Turn Order
    C) Europe and Pacific Theaters Separated

    1. Germany
    2. Russia
    3. Italy
    4. United Kingdom
    5. Japan
    6. United States

    I vote for this turn order.  I think it will play out nicely.  My other reason for choosing it, is that the starting setup for this tun order would require the least amount of alteration to make it compatible with 1. Germany/Italy, 2. Russia, 3. Japan, 4. UK/United States.  If we go with the 6-turn list from above, then the only real changes that will be needed between a starting setup for 6-turn and 4-turn is that the UK in the pacific theater might need a small number of changes to compensate for going either before or after Japan.  Everything else on the board could be left the same.  Assuming we put out a new rules .pdf to go with the final realease of the map, I think we should go with a standard 6-turn system for the regular rules, and then we can add a rules addendum that would list the slight setup changes needed for the UK to allow for the alternate 4-turn system.  I have Adobe Acrobat Proffessional, so once we get around to making the rules, I can put together a .pdf file that’s as detailed and robust as we want it to be.  It also wouldn’t be hard to release an alternate UK setup card, too, so that players who are always going to play 4-turn wouldn’t even have to look at the rules addendum to see how the setup is altered.


  • @deepblue:

    Roads In or Out?

    I am in favor of the rule I suggested (obviously).  How does the group feel?

    I vote for putting roads in, but try to put them in in a subtle way on the map, so that players who don’t want to play with them can just ignore them and they won’t stand out real glaringly on the map.  The roads and/or strategic move system can then be put in as optional rules in the rules .pdf.  As for what roads to go with, I would go with the 4 I had on my original map, (though maybe you could try to redraw them in a prettier manner.)  Plus the Lend-Lease road from Persian Gulf to Caucasus that I.L. mentioned sounds like it would be nice, too.  As for the Alaskan Highway, I would leave it out.  All that road really does is make it even more impossible for Japan to attempt an invasion of the US.  For gameplay sake, I think Japan should still have some sort of outside chance of taking over the US.  I’m not saying it should be easy in any sense, but the possibly should still be there, however slight.  The Alaskan Highway just makes it even easier for the US to repel an Alaskan foothold than it already is.

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Well at the very least the USA should be connected by a rail line. The US had more miles of rail than any nation on earth and at a minimum a rail should at least connect all parts of USA so 1 MP units can get across.  Perhaps that alaska railroad could have a limited movement of no more than say 2-3 per turn… to make up for that “Japan should be able to have a chance to invade USA” idea which is really very remote. The benifit to USA would be to establish a naval base (puget Sound) and be somewhat established in other naval bases besides Hawaii.

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 32
  • 2
  • 9
  • 1
  • 14
  • 10
  • 3
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

39
Online

15.6k
Users

37.0k
Topics

1.6m
Posts