Australian sea lane

[Lebatron]

I wish to make the Australian sea lanes more important for UV3.0. Particalarly the Pacific ocean and not the Indian ocean lane. It's the sea lane that triggers the video when you have air within range of New Zealand. Its not that New Zealand is important but rather that you have air based on New Caledonia or Fuji which interupts the shipping lane to Sydney's port that makes air based here important. Getting Air Proximity points is a nice bonus but still fails to model what cutting this sea lane can do. Cutting this sea lane for say 6 months(2 turns) should shut them down. In other words, allied forward bases here would collapse. How to model that? Well maybe I could get the new code to damage the factory(s) in Australia when either New Caledonia or Fuji is held by Japan, and keep damaging it every turn that either of these islands is held. You know that sound you hear every Axis turn when partisans attack, that sound would be neat to apply to Australia being damaged due to its sea lane being cut. I don't wish to have any territories surrender as that is not the goal in modelling the cut sea lane. But at first glance I don't think Brian's new code for surrender related stuff supports just damaging infrastructure without turning over the territories to another power. Is this right Brian?

[WanderingHead]

I would love to see the whole Pacific redesigned. IMO, the importance of the sea lanes to Australia should be through the move and combat mechanics, not through artificial things like VPs etc. One big reason the sea lanes are not important is because it is just too far from the USA to Australia. The fundamental reason for this is the square grid of the Pacific map (instead of hex-like).

There was some discussion of this here:
tm.asp?m=1879466

Unfortunately, Bo Rearguard removed his posted maps. But there were some ideas there. I have a mock up myself. Once I finished this release I was toying with the idea of fixing the map issues in the world's oceans.

I think the key thing from that thread is that the map should be really designed for some key distance properties, which this table tried to highlight:

Code: Select all

DISTANCE FROM CALIFORNIA
               km  ratio(km)  #SZ   SZ ratio   SZ target for realism
 Tokyo       9016  1.000        6      1.000    6.000 (leave this unchanged)
 Taipei     11113  1.233        8      1.333    7.398 -> 7
 Manila     11922  1.322        7      1.167    7.932 ->8
 Pt Moresby 11113  1.233        7      1.167    7.398 ->7 (I counted seazones to the north side)
 Brisbane   11600  1.227        9      1.500    7.362 ->7
 Sydney     12093  1.341        9      1.500    8.046 ->8

[WanderingHead]

ORIGINAL: Lebatron
How to model that? Well maybe I could get the new code to damage the factory(s) in Australia when either New Caledonia or Fuji is held by Japan, and keep damaging it every turn that either of these islands is held. You know that sound you hear every Axis turn when partisans attack, that sound would be neat to apply to Australia being damaged due to its sea lane being cut. I don't wish to have any territories surrender as that is not the goal in modelling the cut sea lane. But at first glance I don't think Brian's new code for surrender related stuff supports just damaging infrastructure without turning over the territories to another power. Is this right Brian?

I don't think you can do what you want today. What you could do is create any kind of unit anywhere in the world with a political event, or the surrender style events, but you cannot directly remove or damage units.