Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 9:03:05 PM   
Borger Borgersen


Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
Here is some information about Luleå:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lule%C3%A5

Here is information about Boden:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boden_Municipality

As you can see Boden is an inland town with just 20.000 inhabitants.

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)
Post #: 31
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 9:16:27 PM   
Borger Borgersen


Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I need to see a picture to vote intelligently on the next 3:
Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1a (33,45) (Borger) ?
Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1b (35,45) (Borger) ?
Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 2 (36,45) (Borger) ?


Maybe Froonp can draw an alternative coast line according to my suggestions? What I meant to be the best solution would be to do the following:

* The hex with the letter M (2x NW + W of Hanko) should become an all sea hex.
* The hex NW+W of Hanko should be less land and more water. Meaning the coast line should be moved to the middle of the NE hex side.
* The hex with the letter N (2x NW of Hanko) should be a land hex with a coast line
drawn from the middle of the SW hex side (to align with the coast line in the hex
mentioned above) to the current NE hex side.

Then the coast line can be maintained northwards towards Vaasa. It will create a
straight vertical line and the "bay" effect south of Vaasa will be removed.

I hope Froonp can create this in a nice way.

About the Finnish cities. The spelling is Finnish (Swedish).

* Helsinki (Helsingfors)
* Viipuri (Viborg) Today the name is Vyborg (Russian Выборг)
* Hanko (Hangö)
* Turku (Åbo)
* Tampere (Tammersfors)
* Vaasa (Vasa)
* Oulu (Uleåborg)
* Petsamo (Petsamo) Today the name is Pechenga (Russian Печенга)


(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 32
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 9:40:53 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
For the Finnish borderlands, I wanted to stress the fact that Nils and I had it this way so that a 4 factor moving leg Finnish unit could not cut the Murmansk Rail between the Ladoga and Onega Lakes in 1 Impulse if the Finnish Borderlands were Russian controlled, when Finland declares war to Russia.
It seems to us that the reason for the Russians to demand this territory was something like that, to help prevent the Fins to cut their Murmansk Railway to easily.


Isn't it possible for Russia to prevent this by placing some units and use the ZOC's. Russia had some units here to protect their borders. And if a lone Finnish unit plunges deep into Russia then it can be put out of supply if there are Russian units south and north of it. Of the 3 changes I proposed for the Karelia territory I think the 1 hex being part of Russia and not Karelia won't have a negative effect.

I was in favor of this too (preventing a 4 mover to cut the rail in surprise impulse) because the Scandinavia map of Wif FE does not allow this neither.
I did not want to give Germany an extra edge in this area.

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)
Post #: 33
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 9:41:59 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

I understand this about the 2 Finnish hexes inside Karelia I was talking about. But the
northeasternmost hex inside today's Karelia could easily be placed inside Russia (thus meaning it always remains part of Russia). It makes the Karelia part look a little bit better. Is there a reason why this are needs to be part of Finland BEFORE they cede Karelia to Russia. I don't think Finland ever had territory that far east.

I would agree with that.
I change my vote for this hex.

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)
Post #: 34
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 10:03:15 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

Maybe Froonp can draw an alternative coast line according to my suggestions? What I meant to be the best solution would be to do the following:

* The hex with the letter M (2x NW + W of Hanko) should become an all sea hex.
* The hex NW+W of Hanko should be less land and more water. Meaning the coast line should be moved to the middle of the NE hex side.
* The hex with the letter N (2x NW of Hanko) should be a land hex with a coast line
drawn from the middle of the SW hex side (to align with the coast line in the hex
mentioned above) to the current NE hex side.

Then the coast line can be maintained northwards towards Vaasa. It will create a
straight vertical line and the "bay" effect south of Vaasa will be removed.

I hope Froonp can create this in a nice way.

Here is what I came up with.
This illustrate the solution escribed above, which is the second solution Borger proposed.
The first solution globaly had the coastline westward 1 hexcolumn.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)
Post #: 35
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 10:07:53 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 19317
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

quote:

I would like to change the names of the Finnish cities to the Finnish names. There aren’t that many of them and it is similar to what we did in China. I do not want to do this in the rest of the world though! Can you imagine? All the cities of the world with Finnish spellings!

I would object to this, the more internationally accepted names during WWII was the Swedish versions of the names, Finland, Åbo, Helsingfors, Hangö, Tammerfors, Viborg as the dominant force in the administration had been Swedish since the 10th century, people like Mannerheim was swedish for example a decendant from the Swedish king Johan the III.

During the latter part of the 20th century the government became more dominated by the finnish people and the finnishification(?) increased in strength this is why the Finnish version of the names are more common in modern maps.


I defer to your judgment on this.

From your explanation it seems the use of the Finnish names is more like using the Chinese name Beijing. Clearly I have no emotional stake in any of this. I just want the choice of names for cities to be the best we can do - with the guideline being for all names to be appropriate circa World War II. From the earlier discussion about Åbo and Turku I had gotten a mistaken impression.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to c92nichj)
Post #: 36
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 10:10:28 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 19317
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

I understand this about the 2 Finnish hexes inside Karelia I was talking about. But the
northeasternmost hex inside today's Karelia could easily be placed inside Russia (thus meaning it always remains part of Russia). It makes the Karelia part look a little bit better. Is there a reason why this are needs to be part of Finland BEFORE they cede Karelia to Russia. I don't think Finland ever had territory that far east.

I would agree with that.
I change my vote for this hex.

I follow in your footsteps, Patrice.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 37
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 10:11:10 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 19317
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

Maybe Froonp can draw an alternative coast line according to my suggestions? What I meant to be the best solution would be to do the following:

* The hex with the letter M (2x NW + W of Hanko) should become an all sea hex.
* The hex NW+W of Hanko should be less land and more water. Meaning the coast line should be moved to the middle of the NE hex side.
* The hex with the letter N (2x NW of Hanko) should be a land hex with a coast line
drawn from the middle of the SW hex side (to align with the coast line in the hex
mentioned above) to the current NE hex side.

Then the coast line can be maintained northwards towards Vaasa. It will create a
straight vertical line and the "bay" effect south of Vaasa will be removed.

I hope Froonp can create this in a nice way.

Here is what I came up with.
This illustrate the solution escribed above, which is the second solution Borger proposed.
The first solution globaly had the coastline westward 1 hexcolumn.





I like all the changes shown here.


_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 38
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 10:13:23 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
Here's how it looks on the maps.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 39
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 10:17:36 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
About maps, look here, you can have whichever you want, its simply great !!!!
http://maps.google.com/

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 40
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 10:31:54 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
Here's an update about the votes :

Name of modification : Tampere (35,47) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 %
City / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Third largest city.

Name of modification : Gothenburg (41,38) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
City, Minor Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : it is one of the largest ports in Sweden and the main Swedish West Coast port - definitely a major port.

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1a (33,52) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 33 % / NO : 67 %
Country / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands; Become Finnish.

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1b (34,52) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 33 % / NO : 67 %
Country / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands; Become Finnish.

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1c (33,54) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Country / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands, Become Russian.

Name of modification : Lake Femunden (34,38 E) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 25 % / NO : 75 %
Lake / Norway
Modification to make / Reason : Removed.

Name of modification : Lake Mjøsa (Mjosa) (36,38 E, NE) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 %
Lake / Norway
Modification to make / Reason : Add.

Name of modification : Vänern () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Lake / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Outline needs enhancing

Name of modification : Vättern (40,40 SE) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Lake / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Extended 1 hexside SW.

Name of modification : Karlskrona (44,42) (lomyrin) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Major Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : it is primarily a Navy base and definitely only a minor port.

Name of modification : Boden (27,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 %
Minor Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Renammed Luleå (Lulea).

Name of modification : Bodø (Bodo) (26,41) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Minor Port / Norway
Modification to make / Reason : For supply reasons.

Name of modification : Tromsø (Tromso) (21,46) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Minor Port / Norway
Modification to make / Reason : For supply reasons.

Name of modification : Turku (Åbo) (37,46) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 75 % / NO : 25 %
Minor Port / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Second largest Finnish city.

Name of modification : Railroad Gothenburg-Stockholm () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Rail / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Passes between Vänern and Vättern. From Gothenburg the rail would go E;NE;NE;E and join with the other rail.

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 1 (26,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Resource / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex NW.

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 2 (24,45) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 50 % / NO : 50 %
Resource / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex SE.

Name of modification : Strait from Copenhagen to Malmo (45,38 E) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Strait / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Keep

Name of modification : Strait from Helsingor (NW Copenhagen) to Helsingborg (NW Malmo) (44,38 E) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Strait / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Straits are between Dannish Helsingor and Swedish Helsingborg.

Name of modification : Clear hex (34,39) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Terrain / Norway
Modification to make / Reason : Changed to Mountain.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1a (33,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 0 % / NO : 100 %
Terrain / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : Become land hex with most of the hex being sea.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1b (35,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 0 % / NO : 100 %
Terrain / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : Become land hex with most of the hex being sea.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 2 (36,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Terrain / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : Become all Sea.

Name of modification : Glacier Svartisen (26,41) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Terrain / Norway
Modification to make / Reason : This glacier is placed close to Swedish border. Move the ice 1 hex SE.

Name of modification : Mountain hex (35,37) (Incy) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Terrain / Norway
Modification to make / Reason : Changed to Forest.

Name of modification : Sognefjord () (Incy) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Terrain / Norway
Modification to make / Reason : Drawn too wide.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 41
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 11:20:14 PM   
Borger Borgersen


Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is what I came up with.
This illustrate the solution escribed above, which is the second solution Borger proposed.
The first solution globaly had the coastline westward 1 hexcolumn.





This is exactly how I wanted it. I agree with changing it like this. There is not need to change the map further maybe with the sole exception that the island in the NW of Hango seems to be slightly cut from the hexgrid. Maybe making the island smaller and be completely within the hex would be the way to go. Keep up the great work.

Maybe you can try to make a new coast line for Sognefjorden too? I think a visual map would tell much more than a lot of text.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 42
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 11:37:45 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

Maybe you can try to make a new coast line for Sognefjorden too? I think a visual map would tell much more than a lot of text.

Well this one is already done by the Graphic Artist, at least the southern part. The northern part is my addition.
I suppose he will re-do it entirely, and I guess drawing it myself is quite usefull to no one.

Well, what I mean is that the coasts I'm drawing are only to better see how the map look, because undrawn hexes are not easy to see if the map is good. My drawing is not very precise, especially the latest (comparison) where I forgot to drawn some islands. I suppose the Graphic Artist will do his own drawing.

< Message edited by Froonp -- 8/4/2006 11:40:03 PM >

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)
Post #: 43
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/4/2006 11:59:44 PM   
Borger Borgersen


Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
I read further in Wikipedia and noticed now that the ranks of the Finnish cities are:
1. Helsinki(560.000)
2. Espoo (230.000). City is located very close to Helsinki
3. Tampere (200.000)
4. Vantaa (185.000). City is located very close to Helsinki
5. Turku (175.000).

I think that the cities of Espoo and Vantaa have had a bigger increase in population since WW2 than Tampere and Turku, being so close to the capital Helsinki. Therefore I don't think they should belong on any WW2 map. They would be in the same hex as Helsinki anyway.

Turku was the former capital in Finland (before 1812) and seems to not grow as quickly as the other cities. Tampere is growing quickly maybe partly because of the big company Nokia being located there.

In 1940 there was only 65.000 inhabitants in Turku according to Wikipedia.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85bo

So maybe it's enough to add Turku only as a port.

About using the Swedish or Finnish names for the Finnish cities I prefer to use the Finnish names. Most people outside Scandinavia use Helsinki (not Helsingfors) and it's printed Helsinki on the WIFFE maps. Vyborg is the Russian spelling of the city. Maybe it's printed the Russian way because the city is Russian most time of the game.

It's a pity we don't have a Finnish player on this forum who could tell us exactly how things are. I read in Wikipedia that in Turku about 90% of the population speaks Finnish. Only 5% speaks Swedish. The Finnish cities have Swedish names probably from the time Finland was under Swedish control. But that was a long time ago and Finland became a Grand Duchy in 1809 under control by Russia. Only in 1917 Finland got its liberty.

I think most WW2 maps use the Finnish names for the Finnish cities. Maybe to avoid the "troublesome" Swedish lletters ä, å and ö.

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)
Post #: 44
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 12:47:55 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
First, thanks for the informations Borger !

Any idea of the population of Tampere in the 40s ? I read in Wikipedia that it had a rapid increase of population post WWII, but I couldn't find any figure.

For Turku, I stay with my NO vote.
65000 inhabitants sure warrants a minor port IMO, that's true, but the fact that it is on the European map, and so close to Hango make me stay on the NO side.

I agree for the addition of the western Norwegians ports because they put in supply from the sea areas that were in supply from Narvik & Trondheim in WiF FE and are no more in MWiF without those ports, but Turku adds quite nothing except geographical accuracy. But if we go this way too much, we risk going on adding "realistic features" to the European map which risk making it too different from WiF FE.

I prefer stay extremely minimalistic for changes in this area.

This said, I think that changes on the European map near the border of that paper map can be accepted, especially in areas who see nearly no action in the game, so I could live with the addition of Turku for which I'm outvoted already .

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)
Post #: 45
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 12:51:25 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

Name of modification : Turku (Åbo) (37,46) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 75 % / NO : 25 %
Minor Port / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Second largest Finnish city.


quote:

Any idea of the population of Tampere in the 40s ?

That said, if Turku is the second largest city in Finland, and if Tampere is the third, and if the population of Turku was 65,000 inhabitants in the 40s, chances are high that Tampere is below the 100,000 inhabitant mark that would make it appear on the map, so I stay with my NO vote for it too (here too I'm outvoted ).

< Message edited by Froonp -- 8/5/2006 1:56:10 AM >

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 46
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 1:53:39 AM   
ullern


Posts: 1837
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
Good discussion guys. And nicely done map Steve and Patrice.

It seems I made the draft for this map with Patrice, yes...

Before I make any other comments I think I have to address one principal idea presented here which was surprising (well not really):   Are we really gonna make any changes to the WIF FE European map? My vote is No.   I have to add that in my first draft, I already had fixed the Finish coastline south of Vasa something like Patrice now has drawn. This is not the only thing that is wrong with Scandinavia on the WIF FE European map. Borger Borgersen have already pointet out a few other issues, that I really do agree with, but then I still vote no because I want to not change WIF FE European map.   Others issues south of the yellow line are: Mjøsa, the straits around Copenhagen, (I think Borger had some more) .... and some that none have mentioned here: Bergen is wrongly placed, the south-western part of Norway are in gerenall wrongly mapped, the hex east of Oslo is really 60% Swedish, there are also some issues around Stockholm, some issues with the Swedish islands, and 1939-Finland’s widest river is missing – in Finish borderlands from Lake Lagoda two hexes along the yellow line. - These are issues we might fix, but then we are leaving the European map of WIF.

Nils Ulrik

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 47
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 2:39:25 AM   
Toed

 

Posts: 55
Joined: 8/5/2006
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Hi all. This beeing my first post in this forum I'd just like to cover the basics before getting on topic. I've been reading this forum for about a year now and I'm impressed by the work beeing done here. I'm 34 and enjoy playing strategy games. Having only played WiF 5 a couple of times back in the early 90's I'm no expert on the game or tactics but I would most certainly kept playing it if it demaned just a bit less space to play. So I'm eagerly awaiting MWiF. (Was following CWiF quietly as well.) So thanks Steve - I'm a customer as soon as it's released.

Now back to topic. I live in Sweden, Boden, and which might make me a bit partial but I still feel I need to bring this question to you all. Why is the 'Boden-hex' not a fortified hex? In the first half of the 20th century, Bodens fästning "The northern lock" was a effective Fortress. With a system of forts encircling 25 km with the city of Boden inside it. It contains roughly of 5 heavy artillery forts supported by flanking batteries and several infantry housing/storage forts some 1200 structures all in all. This supported by a garrison several mobile artillery divisions and infantry totalling about 15 000 men during the war. Built to protect the port of Luleå and the railway lines intersecting in Boden. So I'd would suggest that this fortress that might have been the strongest in northen europe (without a doubt the strongest in scandinavia) at the time warrants an all around fortress hex. I relise that this suggested change has little impact on the big picture in MWiF but to me it is a relevant historical fact that should be represented on the map.

Ok that was a bit long - sorry.

Now to the items here I can have some reasonably informed opinions about.

quote:

Name of modification : Gothenburg (41,38) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
City, Minor Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : it is one of the largest ports in Sweden and the main Swedish West Coast port - definitely a major port.
Yes

quote:

Name of modification : Vänern () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Lake / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Outline needs enhancing
Yes

quote:

Name of modification : Vättern (40,40 SE) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Lake / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Extended 1 hexside SW.
Yes

quote:

Name of modification : Karlskrona (44,42) (lomyrin) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Major Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : it is primarily a Navy base and definitely only a minor port.
Yes

quote:

Name of modification : Boden (27,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 %
Minor Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Renammed Luleå (Lulea).
Yes. While living in Boden makes me want to vote no. But Yes it is because Luleå is the name of the port and it has a larger population. Boden Fortress should be added to this hex.

quote:

Name of modification : Railroad Gothenburg-Stockholm () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Rail / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Passes between Vänern and Vättern. From Gothenburg the rail would go E;NE;NE;E and join with the other rail.
Yes

quote:

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 1 (26,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Resource / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex NW.
Yes

quote:

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 2 (24,45) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 50 % / NO : 50 %
Resource / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex SE.
No

quote:

Name of modification : Strait from Copenhagen to Malmo (45,38 E) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Strait / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Keep
Yes

quote:

Name of modification : Strait from Helsingor (NW Copenhagen) to Helsingborg (NW Malmo) (44,38 E) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Strait / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Straits are between Dannish Helsingor and Swedish Helsingborg.
Yes

ok I'm done now ...

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 48
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 3:24:38 AM   
ullern


Posts: 1837
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
Great having you here Toed. I am in on having that Boden hex fortified _ it's the fun factor, and I agree there are good reasons for it.


(in reply to Toed)
Post #: 49
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 3:25:14 AM   
ullern


Posts: 1837
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp Here's an update about the votes :

Name of modification : Tampere (35,47) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 % City / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Add. Third largest city. NO.

Name of modification : Gothenburg (41,38) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % City, Minor Port / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : it is one of the largest ports in Sweden and the main Swedish West Coast port - definitely a major port. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1a (33,52) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 33 % / NO : 67 % Country / Finland Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands; Become Finnish. No.

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1b (34,52) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 33 % / NO : 67 % Country / Finland Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands; Become Finnish. No.

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1c (33,54) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Country / Finland Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands, Become Russian. Acording to my sources the hex is only 20% Finnish. But I still think it's ok to keep it borderland simply to make it more likely that the Russians do make a go for the borderlands. vote : No

Name of modification : Lake Femunden (34,38 E) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 25 % / NO : 75 % Lake / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Removed. No. Keep it.

Name of modification : Lake Mjøsa (Mjosa) (36,38 E, NE) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 % Lake / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Add. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Vänern () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Lake / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Outline needs enhancing No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Vättern (40,40 SE) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Lake / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Extended 1 hexside SW. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Karlskrona (44,42) (lomyrin) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Major Port / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : it is primarily a Navy base and definitely only a minor port. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Boden (27,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 % Minor Port / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Renammed Luleå (Lulea). Yes.

Name of modification : Bodø (Bodo) (26,41) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Minor Port / Norway Modification to make / Reason : For supply reasons. I completely dismiss this suggestion. Supply reason? Supply to what? The USA campaign in Sweden? Changing the number of ports in Norway may change the game. Also this suggestion have Bodø wrongly placed. Vote: No.

Name of modification : Tromsø (Tromso) (21,46) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Minor Port / Norway Modification to make / Reason : For supply reasons. It is not possible to supply all of Norway without a HQ in WIF FE, adding Tromsø will make it possible in MWIF. Therefore I end up voting No. I can add that adding Tromsø is very likely to change how an invasion of Norway will develop and I don’t think that is right. (see also separate comment in my next post.)

Name of modification : Turku (Åbo) (37,46) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 75 % / NO : 25 % Minor Port / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Add. Second largest Finnish city. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I am likely to change my vote)

Name of modification : Railroad Gothenburg-Stockholm () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Rail / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Add. Passes between Vänern and Vättern. From Gothenburg the rail would go E;NE;NE;E and join with the other rail. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 1 (26,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Resource / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex NW. Yes.

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 2 (24,45) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 50 % / NO : 50 % Resource / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex SE. Indifferent.

Name of modification : Strait from Copenhagen to Malmo (45,38 E) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Strait / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Keep Yes.

Name of modification : Strait from Helsingor (NW Copenhagen) to Helsingborg (NW Malmo) (44,38 E) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Strait / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Add. Straits are between Dannish Helsingor and Swedish Helsingborg. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Clear hex (34,39) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Changed to Mountain. Defenitely No. There isn’t a good definition of mountains in WIF but if you look around you’ll get a good impression that a hex with some forest and the rest is flat mountains _ that is not a mountain hex in WIF. For example the area aound Chung King in China are no less mountains than 34,39 - Røros (Chung King area is lower than the surrounding mountains yes, but it still just as rugged and higher I belive, than Røros.) Another really gross example is the resource hex of Norway. If that resource hex is clear then Røros is just super clear in comparison. So I strongly oppose changing the Røros hex if we don’t change the defenition for the whole map.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1a (33,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 0 % / NO : 100 % Terrain / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Become land hex with most of the hex being sea. Indifferent, but I would add that Vaasa is really placed a bit to far west so the strait line should really go further east and thise hexes should be sea.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1b (35,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 0 % / NO : 100 % Terrain / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Become land hex with most of the hex being sea. Indifferent, but I would add that Vaasa is really placed a bit to far west so the strait line should really go further east and thise hexes should be sea.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 2 (36,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Become all Sea. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Glacier Svartisen (26,41) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : This glacier is placed close to Swedish border. Move the ice 1 hex SE. Vote no. Someone haven’t counted the distances right. I redid it now just to check. The Svartisen is correctly placed. (Also the given reason “to close to Swedish border” doesn’t make sense, as it is just as close if it’s moved.)

Name of modification : Mountain hex (35,37) (Incy) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Changed to Forest. Yes.

Name of modification : Sognefjord () (Incy) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Drawn too wide. Yes.


< Message edited by ullern -- 8/5/2006 3:42:33 AM >

(in reply to ullern)
Post #: 50
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 3:26:54 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 19317
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Johan,

Welcome, and thank you for your input.

I do not know the criteria that ADG used for adding preexisting fortifications to the map. However, it was done very rarely: the Maginot line, Singapore, and Sevastopol are the only ones in all of the world. I thought Gibraltar had them too, but that might have been an earlier version of WIF; it doesn't have any in WIF FE.

On the WIF FE mimimap of Scandinavia, Boden is shown as a port protected by rivers on four sides and the Baltic on a fifth. That provides a fairly substantial combat advantage for defenders. The current version of the Scandinavian map we are working on gives Boden/Luleå river protection only to the west and SW. Still, the Germans only get a few newly constructed fortifications to place along the Rhine at the start of the Global war scenario. At most I would not want to add more than two hexsides of newly constructed fortifications to Boden to the east and NE. That would bring it into line with the Scandinavian minimap as far as defensive combat advantages go.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Toed)
Post #: 51
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 3:31:52 AM   
ullern


Posts: 1837
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
On ports in Norway:

If I were to add a port in Norway it would be either Tromsø or Kirkenes. Both of which I believe played a big role for the German operations in northern Finland, Murmansk and the Barents Sea / Artic Ocean. I believe Narvik was important for the ferrying of the resources but not for the campaigns. But changing the number of ports in Norway do change the game.


If Tromsø is added. Then I will suggest making the border between the Artic Ocean and the Norwegian Sea to go at Tromsø instead of Narvik, because I believe Tromsø was and is the Artic Ocean port and not Narvik (and that this was simplified in the original WIF FE Scandinavian map).

On Bodø I will just restate that someone wrongly said that Bodø was in the ice hex. Bodø is in the Forest hex (25,41). If you count the number of hexes from the ice hex, you will count that Trondheim is 6 hexes away and Narvik is 5 hexes away. If you have a map that doesn’t distort the distances in the north it should be pretty obvious that Svartisen is placed closer to Narvik than to Trondheim, so this is correct placement. And then Bodø is placed north of that again four hexes from Narvik. The actually distances I find is 240 km between Svartisen and Narvik and 370 km between Svartisen and Trondheim (by air).

_ conclusion is that I would rather claim the opposite that Svartisen is placed too far south. But I think it’s fine as it is. It’s also an isue if Svartisen should be an ice hex at all. It’s not that big. But it’s the fun factor! There ain’t many ice hexes in the world and let it be an odd thing...

(The map have a lot of things that might be one hex wrong, where the error is due to getting the whole size of Norway and Scandinavia right. Supposedly Narvik is one hex too far north, but moving it would have caused a lot of issues all the way through Sweden and Finland, and even the distance to Murmansk may be important, and therefore Narvik is where fine where it is...)

Then I am done ....  he he
Nils Ulrik

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 52
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 4:30:15 AM   
Toed

 

Posts: 55
Joined: 8/5/2006
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Johan,

Welcome, and thank you for your input.

I do not know the criteria that ADG used for adding preexisting fortifications to the map. However, it was done very rarely: the Maginot line, Singapore, and Sevastopol are the only ones in all of the world. I thought Gibraltar had them too, but that might have been an earlier version of WIF; it doesn't have any in WIF FE.

On the WIF FE mimimap of Scandinavia, Boden is shown as a port protected by rivers on four sides and the Baltic on a fifth. That provides a fairly substantial combat advantage for defenders. The current version of the Scandinavian map we are working on gives Boden/Luleå river protection only to the west and SW. Still, the Germans only get a few newly constructed fortifications to place along the Rhine at the start of the Global war scenario. At most I would not want to add more than two hexsides of newly constructed fortifications to Boden to the east and NE. That would bring it into line with the Scandinavian minimap as far as defensive combat advantages go.

Thanks for the fast reply. All those examples are on hexes on the original two maps and all very famous fortifications from the war for diffrent reasons. Boden Fortress was thankfully never put to the test or it might have been in that group. That said I leave the game blance issues in your capable hands. If you think two hexsides are the way to go I'll bow to your greater WiF knowledge.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 53
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 6:18:40 AM   
Borger Borgersen


Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern
On Bodø I will just restate that someone wrongly said that Bodø was in the ice hex. Bodø is in the Forest hex (25,41). If you count the number of hexes from the ice hex, you will count that Trondheim is 6 hexes away and Narvik is 5 hexes away. If you have a map that doesn’t distort the distances in the north it should be pretty obvious that Svartisen is placed closer to Narvik than to Trondheim, so this is correct placement. And then Bodø is placed north of that again four hexes from Narvik. The actually distances I find is 240 km between Svartisen and Narvik and 370 km between Svartisen and Trondheim (by air).

_ conclusion is that I would rather claim the opposite that Svartisen is placed too far south. But I think it’s fine as it is. It’s also an isue if Svartisen should be an ice hex at all. It’s not that big. But it’s the fun factor! There ain’t many ice hexes in the world and let it be an odd thing...


I agree with what you write. But then I propose the coast line in the hex where Svartisen is located is changed a bit. Look here for a map of Nordland where both Narvik, Bodø and Svartisen are located:

http://www.campingguiden.no/nordland/kart.htm

(in reply to ullern)
Post #: 54
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 6:20:24 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 19317
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Toed
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Johan,

Welcome, and thank you for your input.

I do not know the criteria that ADG used for adding preexisting fortifications to the map. However, it was done very rarely: the Maginot line, Singapore, and Sevastopol are the only ones in all of the world. I thought Gibraltar had them too, but that might have been an earlier version of WIF; it doesn't have any in WIF FE.

On the WIF FE mimimap of Scandinavia, Boden is shown as a port protected by rivers on four sides and the Baltic on a fifth. That provides a fairly substantial combat advantage for defenders. The current version of the Scandinavian map we are working on gives Boden/Luleå river protection only to the west and SW. Still, the Germans only get a few newly constructed fortifications to place along the Rhine at the start of the Global war scenario. At most I would not want to add more than two hexsides of newly constructed fortifications to Boden to the east and NE. That would bring it into line with the Scandinavian minimap as far as defensive combat advantages go.

Thanks for the fast reply. All those examples are on hexes on the original two maps and all very famous fortifications from the war for diffrent reasons. Boden Fortress was thankfully never put to the test or it might have been in that group. That said I leave the game blance issues in your capable hands. If you think two hexsides are the way to go I'll bow to your greater WiF knowledge.


There are many holes in my personal WIF knowledge base. But the knowledge of the forum group is substantial.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Toed)
Post #: 55
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 7:02:35 AM   
Borger Borgersen


Posts: 403
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern
Name of modification : Clear hex (34,39) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Changed to Mountain. Defenitely No. There isn’t a good definition of mountains in WIF but if you look around you’ll get a good impression that a hex with some forest and the rest is flat mountains _ that is not a mountain hex in WIF. For example the area aound Chung King in China are no less mountains than 34,39 - Røros (Chung King area is lower than the surrounding mountains yes, but it still just as rugged and higher I belive, than Røros.) Another really gross example is the resource hex of Norway. If that resource hex is clear then Røros is just super clear in comparison. So I strongly oppose changing the Røros hex if we don’t change the defenition for the whole map.


Røros is not a clear hex. I proposed to change it into a forest or mountain hex. Look at the following photos taken at the Rørosvidda.

http://www.foto.se/cgi-bin/bilder/vis_bilde.cgi?id=205320&brukerid=23230

http://www.norphoto.com/r/m.php?p=8032&w=nor75

http://www.norphoto.com/r/m.php?p=8043&w=nor75

I would definitely not call the terrain around Røros for clear. Remember that when you make a hex clear it means that a unit only needs to spend 1MP to enter. Think about letting an army travel in the terrain of Røros. I would definitely not think it can be similar to travelling on the Ukrainian grassland. I have never ever seen a wargame with a map of Norway placing clear hexes in the highlands near Røros.

In my mind a clear hex is a good hex for armor to blitz gamewise in WIFFE. I think it's not easy for armor units to blitz on the Rørosvidda.

I agree that the resource hex in Norway (SW of Stavanger) is partly mountain too. But the terrain near the coast line is clear (the Jæren farmlands). And in WIFFE you don't separate parts of the hex with different terrain for different hexsides. So I agree the hex could have been a mountain hex because it contains both terrains. But we shouldn't change the European scaled map unless we have to and I think we can live with this being clear since parts of the hex is clear. But for the map area in Norway further north we are free to draw the map how we want because the WIFFE map was using the Asia scale. So for the Røros hex there is no need to make it clear just because another hex in Norway is both clear and mountain. The big difference between the hex near Stavanger and Røros is that the hex near Stavanger has some REAL clear terrain (being part of the Jæren farmland). But in Røros it's ONLY highland terrain. Not farmland. And it's not easy for armies to travel across Rørosvidda. So I think it doesn't warrant to be a 1MP hex.

Here is a map of the area near lake Femunden and lake Mjøsa:

http://www.fylkesguiden.no/hedmark/kart.htm

The yellow dot NW of lake Femunden is Røros. It's close to the text Sør-Trøndelag. So you see that lake Femunden is a bit south of the Røros hex.

I wrote that we don't really need lake Femunden if we don't place lakes like Mjøsa (being the largest one and closer to roads, railroads and cities). Lake Femunden won't have much impact of travel between Oslo and Trondheim because it's NOT located in one of the 2 possible valleys to travel between Oslo and Trondheim. Those valleys are Gudbrandsdalen (the western one) and Østerdalen (the eastern one).

I've been all across Norway at work (including Røros) and I know that the terrain here is not very army friendly. It's a 2MP hex (not a 1MP hex).

We have to remember that the map will NEVER be perfect. Sometimes we need to accept lesser accuracy to make the map work game wise. That's why I can accept Froonp's arguments about why the Karelia area is so wide. The reason is that Finland has some 4MP units and we won't let them be able to cut the Russian rail line to Murmansk in just one impulse.

You had a good point of saying that Bergen is not correctly placed. The railroad to Bergen is also not correctly placed. It goes further north. The Norwegian eastern railroad between Oslo and Trondheim (Rørosbanen) is not placed on the map. It was opened earlier than the western railroad (Dovrebanen). But these errors are minor ones and we can live with them. The main thing is that there is a rail line between Oslo and Trondheim to bring supply, strategic transport etc.

We also have to make compromises about exactly what kind of terrain to put into a hex. usually a hex will contain of different terrain. Usually clear, forest and often rough or mountain too. But we have to choose ONE of them. I think by looking at the Norwegian map that they map designers managed to make it pretty good. At least as good as for me as a Norwegian to say that it doesn't look weird. Well, with the one exception of putting a clear terrain in Røros.

I think the Scandinavian map will work well game wise after we make those minor changes we are discussing.

Regarding the ports of Bodø, Tromsø and maybe Kirkenes I think that we need as many ports we need to keep the necessary units in supply and not let units travel too far by foot in different terrain to get to the front line where they historically fought. I guess that is why you think about adding the port of Kirkenes. I think that Kirkenes is not needed because the Finnish port of Petsamo is on the map. It's nearby. Tromsø is the largest city in northern Norway and if there is a need for a port in addition to Narvik it should be Tromsø. I wrote that Bodø COULD be added if it's needed for supply reasons. As you see on the map it's a very long way to go by foot between Trondheim and Narvik.

I have no strong feelings to putting either Tromsø or Bodø on the map, but I think we need to have some kind of consistency when adding ports. If you add ports like Vaasa, Oulu and Luleå then I think it's not wrong to add ports like Tromsø and/or Bodø. I guess there was more action along the Norwegian coast than in the Gulf of Bothnia. If I remember correctly the German battleship of Tirpitz was sunk close to Tromsø hiding in the fjord there.


(in reply to ullern)
Post #: 56
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 11:48:44 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
Nils, on many proposals, you wrote this.

quote:

No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

I for one think that this is OK in these areas because :

1. Sweden, Norway see little to no action during the typical WiF FE game, so modifying slightly the map there does not really modify the game play. I for one never saw any unit in Sweden or Norway in any of my WiF FE played campaigns (15), so having a different map there won't change my perception of campagning there, because I have none.

2. These are countries half represented on the border of the map. So chances are high that the representation is somehow not as perfect as the one of France, Russia or Germany and Poland. We also saw that for Iraq and eastern Turkey and northwestern Persia, where we redrew the whole border area (see Caucasus map Thread).

(in reply to ullern)
Post #: 57
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 11:51:48 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 19317
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Nils, on many proposals, you wrote this.

quote:

No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

I for one think that this is OK in these areas because :

1. Sweden, Norway see little to no action during the typical WiF FE game, so modifying slightly the map there does not really modify the game play. I for one never saw any unit in Sweden or Norway in any of my WiF FE played campaigns (15), so having a different map there won't change my perception of campagning there, because I have none.

2. These are countries half represented on the border of the map. So chances are high that the representation is somehow not as perfect as the one of France, Russia or Germany and Poland. We also saw that for Iraq and eastern Turkey and northwestern Persia, where we redrew the whole border area (see Caucasus map Thread).

I agree completely, for the same reasons.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 58
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 12:01:29 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

Now back to topic. I live in Sweden, Boden, and which might make me a bit partial but I still feel I need to bring this question to you all. Why is the 'Boden-hex' not a fortified hex? In the first half of the 20th century, Bodens fästning "The northern lock" was a effective Fortress. With a system of forts encircling 25 km with the city of Boden inside it. It contains roughly of 5 heavy artillery forts supported by flanking batteries and several infantry housing/storage forts some 1200 structures all in all. This supported by a garrison several mobile artillery divisions and infantry totalling about 15 000 men during the war. Built to protect the port of Luleå and the railway lines intersecting in Boden. So I'd would suggest that this fortress that might have been the strongest in northen europe (without a doubt the strongest in scandinavia) at the time warrants an all around fortress hex. I relise that this suggested change has little impact on the big picture in MWiF but to me it is a relevant historical fact that should be represented on the map.

Well, why not after all.
Chances are high that Boden sees as much action in the game as in reality, so why not add an all around fortification.

But Toed, comparing Boden Fortifications to the Maginot Line, of the fortifications of Sebastopol, or the Fortifications of Singapore, are you really really sure that Boden would deserve the same fortifications ?
Please note that the Siegfried line is not represented on the WiF FE map, not at all, so are you still sure about Boden ?
Patrice

(in reply to Toed)
Post #: 59
RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion - 8/5/2006 12:22:31 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7951
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
About the Clear hex east of the lake, that was proposed to be turned into a mountain :

quote:

I've been all across Norway at work (including Røros) and I know that the terrain here is not very army friendly. It's a 2MP hex (not a 1MP hex).

What about making it Forest ? It is 1 MP for leg units, but 2 MP for motorized units. And Blitz Breakthrough are impossible. Blitz attacks are possible, but not Breakthrough.

Or it can also be made Tundra (2 MP for leg, 3 MP for MOT), but combat is normal.

Well forest is maybe the best compromise, isn't it ?

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.141