The Complete Redux

[Clausewitz]

This is the latest version of my complete AAR Redux map.
Some notes:
Yes, Berlin and Moscow are one step closer. But Moscow is further away from Japan...
Also, my deletion of capture the capital rules lessens the impact of a Moscow capture.
In case you're wondering, the IPC values are Axis: 42+42=84, Allies 36+36+36 = 108.
For a discussion on the rationale behind this review my thread "Poor Little Russia."

[Lobo]

Couple of quick observations:

USSR
- Evenki should touch Mongolia (and separate Baikal and Kuzbas) to add 1
territory between Japan and Moscow.
- Now move Moscow back 1 territory from Germany.
- Amur terr. is going to Japan, no point in Russia even wasting a guy. Consider combining with another territory.

Japan
- I would move the IC from Shanghai to Manchuria, Hopeii (?) or Korea.
It will slow them down a bit.

China
- I like the new Chinese territories

Europe
- I like the Pripet marshes, more realistic, more interesting.
- Denmark is going to be a pain to defend, but I guess it replaces WE in that role now that it has an IC.
- Split Arabia into two territories. Too easy for Germany to plow through there on the way to the Caucasus.

Overall, very well done.

[series]

OMG, ITS SO PRETTY!

Haha! Good job clausewitz! Awesome board!

For gameplay purposes, I think you may need to give Russia less initial units......

However, awesome job. China... your china has the territories arranged exactly like mine! Awesome! (However, you have the soviet thing, and you were willing to extend control to sea).

Once again, amazing map!

:D

[Atlantikwall]

USSR
- Evenki should touch Mongolia (and separate Baikal and Kuzbas) to add 1
territory between Japan and Moscow.
- Now move Moscow back 1 territory from Germany.
- Amur terr. is going to Japan, no point in Russia even wasting a guy. Consider combining with another territory.I would propose the following:
1.) Stretch Baikal (or Irkutsk) to the north to put a barrier for Japan in Siberia.
2.) Place Yakut where it is, namely north-west of the Baikal lake.
3.) Combine Amur with Soviet Far East

[Atlantikwall]

In case you're wondering, the IPC values are Axis: 42+42=84, Allies 36+36+36 = 108.I don`t like that at all. I think you have to give the axis more units to balance the game and the allies should receive more IPC. That`s more realistic than giving the Soviet Union the same amount of IPC as the US. Imho the staring IPC in Revised with 70-96 is already to close.

Btw, the map is great, especially China!

[series]

I don`t like that at all. I think you have to give the axis more units to balance the game and the allies should receive more IPC. That`s more realistic than giving the Soviet Union the same amount of IPC as the US. Imho the staring IPC in Revised with 70-96 is already to close.

Btw, the map is great, especially China!
Germany actually was one of the richest nations of the war, spending the most money, besides USA of course. However, Japan was very very very poor in this aspect, a more realistic IPC count for axis (keeping a 70-96 ratio) would be germany 60 and japan 20, and thats ridiculous.

[Nuclear]

I like the map, keep up the good work.

[Atlantikwall]

Germany actually was one of the richest nations of the war, spending the most money, besides USA of course. However, Japan was very very very poor in this aspect, a more realistic IPC count for axis (keeping a 70-96 ratio) would be germany 60 and japan 20, and thats ridiculous.That`s why it`s Germany 40, Japan 30 and SU24, UK 30 & USA 42 in Revised. It reflects more or less the economic strenghts, but the "differences" are flattenened and due to gamebalance, Japan has become much wealthier than in reality. But I wouldn`t mind if you made it Ger 45 & *** 30 versus SU 28, UK 32 & USA 45 which would be 5/12 for the axis and 7/12 for the allies. Of course, you have to adjust the game with extra units. And if I look at Clausewitz`s map, the additional sea zones would make it certainly though for Japan to expand via transports. And Africa would be way out of reach for Japan. That may be realistic, but I expect that the axis would have a tought stand in such a game with the map above! Imho, you should give the chinese territories much more IPC value to help Japan to quickly catch up (e.g. KWA 4 & Szechwan 3). And neutrals should stay impassible as the eventual US-invasion of Spain in 2nd-edition is quite too big of a threat for Germany!

[Lt M Cotten]

That is one SWEET map. :)

Whatever program you use to make those I am going to HAVE to break down and buy! Please let me know!!!

I would adjust the IPCs some and I really liked the extra territory between Germany and Russia.

The real question is what size map are you going to transfer it on to?

[Nuclear]

Could you please tell us how you were able to make that map? I have to agree with Lt M Cotten with having to buy the same program that you used to create it.

[elbowmaster]

sexy map clausewitz...!!

[Kaufschtick]

That is one SWEET map. :)

What he said! :cool:

[Clausewitz]

Couple of quick observations:

USSR
- Evenki should touch Mongolia (and separate Baikal and Kuzbas) to add 1
territory between Japan and Moscow.
- Now move Moscow back 1 territory from Germany.
- Amur terr. is going to Japan, no point in Russia even wasting a guy. Consider combining with another territory.

Japan
- I would move the IC from Shanghai to Manchuria, Hopeii (?) or Korea.
It will slow them down a bit.

China
- I like the new Chinese territories

Europe
- I like the Pripet marshes, more realistic, more interesting.
- Denmark is going to be a pain to defend, but I guess it replaces WE in that role now that it has an IC.
- Split Arabia into two territories. Too easy for Germany to plow through there on the way to the Caucasus.

Overall, very well done.Moscow is staying exactly where it is.
Just to clarify, the "V" symbols on the map represent the original Victory Cities rather than ICs.
Amur province did stick out like that - if Japan had attacked Russia Vladivostock probably would have fallen very quickly. So leave it as is and use non-aggression treaty rules.
China has both Communist and Nationalist areas, controlled by USSR and USA respectively. Each should be allowed to build infantry in these areas up to IPC values. The different Chinese factions CANNOT share the same territory and are free to attack each other and annex any Chinese territory as well as Japanese held areas.
CC held areas allow passage for USSR units, CN forces will share territory with US and UK forces.
By the way, I would give neutral countries their own armed forces making it more difficult to take them over. Whenever a neutral is attacked it's forces and IPCs automatically become controlled by the other alliance.
The pale green territories on the map are considered impassable.

[Clausewitz]

That is one SWEET map. :)

Whatever program you use to make those I am going to HAVE to break down and buy! Please let me know!!!

I would adjust the IPCs some and I really liked the extra territory between Germany and Russia.

The real question is what size map are you going to transfer it on to?
OK, I'll say this one more time. It's a very simple process. Just get a picture of a map you like as the basis of your conversion, save it to disc, load the file into PAINT, save the image as a GIF and away you go.
If you like you can use my maps - just right click on the map and save the image.

The Redux map is specifically designed for people who want to tinker with the existing map by painting over it. That's why it uses the existing (sometimes skewed) topography of the AAR map. Note that to get the effect of my version you have to extend the playing area over three of the four frame borders. In particular, you should extend the right hand side to regain the correct shape for North America.
Some of you may wonder why I included so many island territories - this is because I'm considering reducing aircraft movement ranges to 2 and 4. This increases the importance of island "stepping stones". I'm also considering CAPs in AAR.
Anyone else like the idea of 8 IPC 2-movement fighters?

[Nuclear]

An 8 IPC fighter that could only move 2 spaces, seems ok, I have never tryed it and would only guess, that it would like you stated make more of the terriorities on the board more important. That is all I can think up of right now.

[series]

Im confused, whats the point of a new map? Are you using it to print and play on :confused: ?

[Lt M Cotten]

I must say that I am no fan of Texas being in the same territory as North Dakota.

Why can't we have our own space? :D

[Defiance]

hi Clausewitz,

now this is the very first map which comes close to the one I want to have made. I have it on paper right now, but not digitally yet.

Although I agree on most of the map; your ICP dristibution is not exactly what I have in mind. 36/36/36 doesn't represent the capacity each of the allies really got. Same for axis.

Moscow and European theatre is fine now. Moscow 1 step closer w/ Pripet could really be interesting... Hopefully no stackfest otherwise add in extra step in nothern route...

My changes on the map would be as follows:

- nice setup with the Congo: but shouldn't it border the atlantic ocean and by doing so that Br.We.Afr. and Fr.Eq.Afr. doesn't border eachother? but maybe this current setup is better for gameplay...

- the sea zones around Sumatra, Java, Borneo, New Guinea, Phillipines and Malaysia now encircle the zones completely; i'd cahnge the sea zones in order to get the same as what is done with Australia, Japan or Great Britain

- I'd also change the sea zones so that Hawaii can't be directly attacked from the Japan sea zones, but Midway instead.

- You should look at Alaska and Kamchatka as Alaska should be even in size; I don't like the fact that Japan can still directly drop troops in North West territory :mad: it is unrealistic: Alaska should top the map imho

- Baikal should, or even better, YOU must split that country or else the siberian route is still 4 spaces away from Moscow: You can divide it into Buryatia and Irkutsk. Other solution is to extend Evenki till Mongolia, but I like that less.

- Yakut should border Kamchatka, and let Amur join up with Soviet Far Eat

- Where have you gotten the "Kuzbas" name from? I can't seem to find it...

- I wouldn't let French Indo China border the Szechuan area: Let Kwangtung border with Burma.

- maybe do something about Arabia like Lobo suggested, or maybe rename that area.

Overall very well done!! But you should really reconsider some ICP choices imho

[series]

Clausewitz or someone, can you tell me if it is possible to print out your map on 4(+) sheets of paper so it goes like this:

[][]
[][]

I can print it blown up 200%, but it cuts off the red pages as shown in the diagram. I wanted to play a game on it (of course, I would need to make up unit placement- I assume Russia would get less starting units, USA more, Japan less).

Edit: Ok, I figured it out. But is my unit placement theories about right?

[series]

OK, I'll say this one more time. It's a very simple process. Just get a picture of a map you like as the basis of your conversion, save it to disc, load the file into PAINT, save the image as a GIF and away you go.
Do you have any favorite sources for this?

[DXfoxman]

Clause, i've been looking for your "poor little russia" post... but i can't find it! where is it?

I got alot of questions...

[series]

Clause, i've been looking for your "poor little russia" post... but i can't find it! where is it?

I got alot of questions...
http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=2736&highlight=poor+russia (http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=2736&highlight=poor+russia)

There ya go...

[Clausewitz]

Just time for a few comments here...

The geography of the Redux map is based soley on the official AAR map. This wouldn't be my personal choice - I'd have wider oceans, for example.

Perhaps North West Territory should be an impassable (ice?) area.

The IPC values I've posted are based on an experiment to balance the game away from the usual KRF and KGF strategies, and are of course not historic. However, I stand by the comments in Poor Little Russia.

[elbowmaster]

Perhaps North West Territory should be an impassable (ice?) area.


thats how our version is...we dislike the fantasy element of the polar express...we also have an impassible siberia...

[Clausewitz]

Just wanted to post a new version of this map with a different colour scheme.

[elbowmaster]

looks sexy clausewitz...!!

[sking500]

we also have an impassible siberia...

No accounting for the Trans-Siberian railroad?

[Nuclear]

It is a great map, yet, I would have made the one zone in China, Hong Kong and it would have been a circle. That would be the zone that is right now called Kwa.

[Clausewitz]

No accounting for the Trans-Siberian railroad?
If you use my map as a basis, the TS Railway would run from Moscow-Bashkir-Kuzbas-Baikal-Amur, so the northern siberian areas could still be impassable.

But is it fair for territories with IPC values to be impassable and therefore invulnerable to enemy conquest?

[Clausewitz]

It is a great map, yet, I would have made the one zone in China, Hong Kong and it would have been a circle. That would be the zone that is right now called Kwa.
Kwangtung was a vital area for the allies, particularly the US airforce which used it as a base for bombing Japan before pacific islands such as the Marianas were captured.

This prompted a major operation later in the war as the Japanese invaded the region with the specific goal of closing down the air bases.

The region as a whole, then, was far more important than Hong Kong alone.

[elbowmaster]

No accounting for the Trans-Siberian railroad?

yes we have that account...

[TomJag3]

I really like the map. What do you think about making the St. Laurence (North Alaska) impassible?