Communism Maps, POLL: Which maps do you want to see first?

[Teflon Kris]

Nice idea and setting for a map - I'm keen to see this one progress.

[Industrial Helix]

Yep, you are correct. Hopefully my diagram will help...




As it stands now, there are 4 territories without cities which make for a 2 territory +3 Bonus: Guangxi, Gansu, Charhar and Heilongjang. I imagine the mods are going to want me to add starting neutrals to those or a city. I'd prefer adding a city though, especially because there is room except in Heilongjiang. Another possibility is to make two territories worth 2 armies and two cities worth 3 armies.
Which might not be fair as GMD attack cities and CCP attack territories. CCP has access to 8 cities and 8 territories. GMD has 5 cities and 8 territories.

As for having the CCP attacking blue regions to get party loyalty and vice versa, I'm not sure about that. Gameplaywise, it seems like it might be an interesting twist but whether it makes historical sense, I'm not sure. And I want to stick close to history as possible... lest we end up with Romans in the Pelopennesian War.

Gameplay wise, the thing that concerns me is that it's going to put too much of a barrier for a player to get to that party loyalty... plus red is at a disadvantage it has three extra territories. (At this point one option is to add three non-city blue territories, which will help out of the bonus system changes).

Historically wise... it would make sense more to have blue party loyalty connected to blue territory. As a faction is getting invaded it's party loyalty is going to waver and the faction come under stress. The invading red player acts as a new unstable element in the party. It also makes sense in that if you're a GMD commander and you want Mao out of the game, you've got to go to Shaanxi and kill him rather than go to Nanjing to do so.

The thing I'm most interested in is the dynamic this game might have with 8 player standard, because essentially, there's an unofficial treaty between GMD and CCP players as to allow another player into the blue/red area puts all at risk.

So yeah, to be honest, I'd prefer blue area attacks GMD party loyalty and Red area attacks red party loyalty. I think I'm goign to have to add three non-city territories to the GMD though.

[MarshalNey]

So yeah, The Russian Revolution, The Chinese Civil War, Cuban Revolution and Vietnam (USA era). I'd still love to hear feedback on China and Russia. I should get some updated images going as well.

Vietnam would certainly fit the theme... although the guerilla warfare element might make the look and gameplay very different. Then again, that might give it just enough variety to make it unique.

Of course, if you're looking for a more conventional war, there's always Korea. Maybe a bit politically charged however, since that conflict really isn't resolved even today.

Cuba sounds fine, although I know nothing of the actual takeover.

You might also consider South America/Central America, as governments there were continually under pressure from communist elements...

the Mensheviks through me through a loop as they all believed they were fighting for the former russian empire.

Do all of the symbols need to be attached to ideology, or could you use something else, like their battle insignias (whatever those might look like)?

Even if you stuck with ideology, I can think of one possible solution- Admiral Kolchak, I believe, was part of a coalition of very different groups that included influential moderates and socialists from the Provisional Government. I'm not sure about the other two White generals, but if one can say that Kolchak best represented the vestiges of the short-lived Provisional Government, then you might be able to use their flag/symbol for him (whatever that might be).

[Industrial Helix]

Well, I did some extra reading on Vietnam and I'm starting to think that Vietnam might make for the mos tinteresting or difficult map of all. Because, essentially, the US ground troops weren't allowed to leave South Vietnam. No sense in allowing them to do so in the game, then, right? Then there's the massive air operations, North Vietnam was the most heavily bombed country in all of warfare. 10x more than Japan in WWII and 6x more than all of Europe in WWII. Not including the air operations would be a mistake.

So what I've got drawn out for Vietnam right now are 8 commanders, 4 USA and 4 N.Vietnam/Vietcong. The Ho Chi Minh Trail spreads across Laos and Cambodia and one way attacks S Vietnam, it provides no bonus. North Vietnam, South Vietnam, laos and Cambodia yield a territory bonus. The DMZ has a massive neutral if you're attacking south to North, but not north to south. USA commanders have access to 4 bombing options, each with massive auto deploy. Rolling Thunder hits all Northern Cities, Menu hits Laos and Cambodia (but not the Ho Chi Minh Trail), Linebacker hits areas touching the DMZ, Linebacker II hits all of N. Vietnam (cities and territories).

Cuba... I'm going to go for small map on this one and try to do something different than reuse the old formula. Perhaps 4 commanders (Che Guevarra, Fidel, Raul and Batista) and start them at neutral 4. In an 8 player game, you have to fight for the privileged of a commander. Also a smaller map, as opposed to China or Russia. I'm trying to hit the major areas of conflict that arose with Communism and obviously, Latin America is a big one. Cuba seemed like the most significant latin american country to go Communist, whereas many of the other countries ended up in the abyss of civil war for many, many years. Plus, it opens up the sequel for a Cuban Missile Crisis map later on down the line.

I'll take a look into the battle insignias for Russia. Problem is they all flew the Russian flag, perhaps colored dots, red white blue, would work? I'll play with it.

@ Tacktix - I can't believe I misspelled assault. The title, yeah, is crap. I just put it there to say "here's where the title goes" once all the maps of this map pack are in general good order, I'll whip up something nice and thematic for them.

As for Russia, yeah, the cheesy paint arrows are just there because I'm still trying to figure out how I want those areas to work. no sense in making it perfect just yet. I'll be sure to clean up the sloppy bits once this map pack goes to the gameplay workshop.

And it looks like the white lines need labeling... oops... The white lines are rail and they link cities. Plus I need to find some sort of rail crossed line. Maybe I'll ask Cairns....

@ Natty yeah, I think you're on to something there. Multicolored faction symbols are probably the best way to go. Though I wonder how well a small hammer and sickle will look. I'll play with it. Thanks!

[Industrial Helix]

This might be the most intense map of the Map Pack. Strategies will differ wildly depending on whether you land a USA or South Vietnamese commander. Once powerful enough, the USA can bomb nearly everything on the map and with autodeploys every turn, they're not going to run out of bombs. But the Ho Chi Minh trail is unassailable by bombing, giving a direct link from N. Vietnamese commanders to the south. But time favors the USA as troops grow faster for them than N. Vietnam (IF they're bombing at full force) but time favors N. Vietnam if the USA does not bomb full go.

The final option, invasion of North Vietnam, which USA players will have to pay a hefty price (reflecting the diplomatic situation). Eliminating your opponent isn't the quick option here. You've got to face the situation each respective side faces during the Second IndoChina War and devise a solution from there.

Have a look:

Click image to enlarge.

There's a ton of graphics problems... but right now I want to talk gameplay. I'll hit the graphics nitpicks when I get the chance.

[MarshalNey]

I really don't quite know what to say. "Intense" certainly seems to apply.

I can't, unfortunately, spend a great deal of time looking at this yet, but my initial impression is largely good. Many factors coming into play, and all the right factors are represented. The way that they are represented seems a bit off, though.

I find some things odd, particularly that LBJ and Nixon can be fighting each other (and in the same time period)... or that any of the commanders on the same side are fighting each other. Were any of these guys part of an opposing faction?

The fact that invading N. Vietnam is an option for the US forces is obviously a bit of a political fantasy. I do say that it is a realistic option on your map b/c the DMZ at 50 is in the vicinity of some of the Bombing campaigns (although the benefit is relatively questionable).

With these high troop barriers... have you considered Nuclear spoils or do they not factor into your calculations?

Finally, considering that Vietnam for the US was its first public taste of protracted guerilla warfare in a foreign land, I think maybe you might want to simulate it a bit more strongly... maybe a troop decay outside of the cities?

[ender516]

Just catching up with this topic again, so no comment yet on Indochina.
Quickies on Russia: spelling of Menshevik needs unifying; maybe symbol for them could be double headed Imperial Russian eagle?

[Industrial Helix]

I really don't quite know what to say. "Intense" certainly seems to apply.

I can't, unfortunately, spend a great deal of time looking at this yet, but my initial impression is largely good. Many factors coming into play, and all the right factors are represented. The way that they are represented seems a bit off, though.

I find some things odd, particularly that LBJ and Nixon can be fighting each other (and in the same time period)... or that any of the commanders on the same side are fighting each other. Were any of these guys part of an opposing faction?

The fact that invading N. Vietnam is an option for the US forces is obviously a bit of a political fantasy. I do say that it is a realistic option on your map b/c the DMZ at 50 is in the vicinity of some of the Bombing campaigns (although the benefit is relatively questionable).

With these high troop barriers... have you considered Nuclear spoils or do they not factor into your calculations?

Finally, considering that Vietnam for the US was its first public taste of protracted guerilla warfare in a foreign land, I think maybe you might want to simulate it a bit more strongly... maybe a troop decay outside of the cities?

Well, the LBJ/Nixon thing is rooted on the following grounds in my mind: 1) Nixon barely lost the 1960 election. It may have gone very differently if he'd picked it up in the early years and given his role int he last half of the war, he's a definitely yes. 2) Both Nixon and LBJ, LBJ more than Nixon though, micromanaged the war. They knew and approved of almost all operations in the war despite being thousands of miles away. LBJ would go over and approve every bombing operation on his Tuesday lunch with cabinet members. They were both as much a part of the war direction as Abrams and Westmoreland. 3) They were of opposite political parties and rivals.

The Vietnamese had more cohesion of command than the USA did. Ho Chi Minh died in 1970 I believe and Vo Nguyen took over to lead Vietnam in the final years of USA involvement and on into the war with China, Laos and Cambodia. So they have a similar situation as LBJ/Westmoreland and Nixon/Abrams.

The Vietcong was an entirely separate organization, though they took orders from N. Vietnam and were later absorbed by the North Vietnamese communist party.

The DMZ was an option that I struggled with for a while. For one, the map has to accommodate Assassin games though something is to be said for players with their target in their own forces having an advantage over a target in opposing forces. Though really, with such knowledge you play the game differently and in my opinion its a question of whether players will be wise enough to adjust their strategy rather than unfairness in the map. Secondly I asked myself what the USA would have needed to do in order to win the 2nd Indochina War...

The conclusions I came to were that they would have to recognize this was the INDOCHINA war and not a Vietnam War and addressed it in a similar manner as the French. This would mean ground forces action in the North, Cambodia and Laos. Secondly, they would have had to adopt universal bombing, something like Nixon's campaigns in LBJ's early years, as this would have prevented the Ho Chi Minh trail from even forming. Furthermore, as in Linebacker II, bombing which deterred China and the Soviet bloc from shipping arms into Vietnam. The DMZ at 50 represents that diplomatic block that LBJ faced and it also serves the purpose of entertaining the notion that the boundaries of the successors to Indochina could have been ignored. Theoretically, from what I've read of Kissingers after the fact comments, if the Sino-Soviet rift could have been exploited earlier, as in 1960s, then a possibility of a repetition of Korea would have been negligible as the USA and PRC would have been talking and in discussions. A new DMZ between Vietnam and China could have been established giving China the security she wanted and giving the USA a block in Soviet sphere of influence (or so they perceived it as such).

Hence, the possibility of invading the North though at a price. I designed this map to reflect 1968 as LBJ was going out and Nixon was going in, the Ho Chi Minh trail at full force and many of the major bombing campaigns yet to be undertaken. Invasion of N. Vietnam is an increasingly fleeting option at this point, as you've observed, but for gameplay sake and the strange counter-factual possibility of Nixon in 1960 making peace with China and pursuing Indochina in full force, the DMZ will act as a possibility.

As for a troop decay, I'm open to the idea but hesitant. Given the likely constant fighting as a result of the Ho Chi Minh trail and four players fueling it into S. Vietnam I think troop decay for the USA players is likely to be occurring at the hands of their enemies. Unless the USA starts bombing as soon as possible they're going to lose this game.

Another aspect of this map that I hope to bring into play is that players will have to cooperate with each other or lose as a whole, team games or not. Which ever side develops the quickest out of game cohesion and unity will win (only to have to fight for the spoils and the game themselves).

Team games will be very unusual as it will be akin to having many spies in high levels on both sides. Those will indeed be intriguing games.

[Astoria]

China, Russia and vietnam are in asia, while cuba is in america.

Sure enough, most of Russia is in Asia but most of Europe is Russia.

Helix, why do you use Men'sheviks vs Bol'sheviks? I think it should be White vs Red.
Bol'sheviks = Reds = Communists
Men'sheviks were just 1 out many opposition parties. When revolution begun pretty much everyone had to decide whether they gonna fight for Reds (communists) or Whites (those who supported Tsar).

[Industrial Helix]

Helix, why do you use Men'sheviks vs Bol'sheviks? I think it should be White vs Red.
Bol'sheviks = Reds = Communists
Men'sheviks were just 1 out many opposition parties. When revolution begun pretty much everyone had to decide whether they gonna fight for Reds (communists) or Whites (those who supported Tsar).

Well... I've always used Mensheviks as a synonym for whites but now that I think about it I think your right. I will make the change when the map goes through.

[skepticCS]

I agree with others' sentiments that the China and Russia maps have the most promise at this point, followed by Vietnam and then Cuba.

I did want to make a few comments on Cuba, since I have been thinking about making a Cuba map from an entirely different period and it's my major area of study (though I know relatively little about the specifics of the 1959 revolution). When you do get around to getting the Cuban revolution done, I hope you will find these useful.

Small things:

1) The provinces of Granma and Isla de la Juventud should be changed to Manzanillo (or Bayamo) and Isla de Pinos as the former names did not come into existence until 1976 and 1978 respectively.

2) Where do you get the concept of distritos from? Was this an historical military division created during the revolution by one side or the other? Or is it something you have created to fit into the commander structure. I would completely understand your logic in creating such divisions solely for the purpose of gameplay, but, personally, I would prefer to see you use the 6 historical provinces of Cuba that existed during the revolution (and until 1976). Here's a map:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 10sMap.jpg

You could still keep the existing provincial structure and rename them to municipalities. In fact, I think you should expand them greatly, but I will get to that below.

3) Cuba has many rivers but few large or deep enough to form a significant barrier to a determined army. The island does, however, have some daunting mountainous areas in the extreme east and west and between Cienfuegos and Sancti Spiritus. I would use those instead.

Larger Issues:

4) I know this is a "small" map, but I think there are way to few territories. Within the current provincial division you use there are many many municipalities that can be used instead to provide more options for advancing across the island from end to end. This would eliminate the bottleneck problem and afford more opportunity for the creative use of impassibles. I think the idea for cities is still a good one and adds a lot to the map so I would keep those in addition to the provincial expansion. You could also add the Jardines de la Reina, a series of thousands of small islands and reefs that run all along the southern coast of cuba between the Isla de la Juventud and Granma. They've served as the base for groups resisting colonial or governmental authority for centuries and, even though I am not clear what role they played in the 1959 revolution, they would be an attractive way for you to connect provinces along the southern coast.

I have more comments with regards to bonuses and starting positions, but those can wait until you start focusing on this map later. I applaud you for finally getting something on the site related to Cuba and I can't wait to see you push it through!

[Industrial Helix]

ScepticCS, I reall appreciate your input on the Cuba map. Your knowledge of the area and its history are going to be helpful and I totally appreciate it. Based on what you've given me to work with, I think the gameplay of this map is going to get overhauled significantly. I put the Distritos in specifically because of gameplay it because it would allow commanders to face off against their historical adversary. When the map hits its own specific thread and moves on, I'll be using a lot of the information you've given me and probably asking a number of questions.

It is intended to be a small map, but I can already see bottlenecks and such that will make the gameplay a lot less fun. It was the hardest map for me to make as all i did was some quick reading and wiki searches. I had little prior knowledge of the revolution until now. I'll play with it, and hopefully deliver a much better map.

Out of curiosity what is it that you study and where?

[skepticCS]

Great! I'm really excited to see where this goes and will be happy to give you as much feedback and support as I can once you get it off the ground. I'm an archaeologist and I study the Contact Period in Cuba (~1492-1550).

[Baron Von PWN]

Just a comment on your Russian revolution map, you should change the names for the non-bolshevik forces to whites. Some menshiviks did fight the bolsheviks but others joined them (Trotsky for one) and they definetly weren't the leading force behind the anti-Bolshevik forces.

[TaCktiX]

Voted for Chinese Revolution, as it seems the one in the middle of the complexity scale. Getting it quenched would prove the concept and ease the other maps' development.

[MarshalNey]

Voted for Chinese Revolution, as it seems the one in the middle of the complexity scale. Getting it quenched would prove the concept and ease the other maps' development.

Exactly what I thought. Voting with your head rather than your heart (I was sooo drawn to the Russian Revolution, but had to pick China for the sake of the map pack as a whole). I applaud your decision.