MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea

Matrix Games Forums

A look through the keyhole #10!

The Age of Shadows on Distant Worlds starts now!

Paypal System Update

Distant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!

Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!

Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!

Armageddon invasion starts in 2014

Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!

Servers Update

The Deal goes Fourth!

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Coming Soon and In Development] >> World in Flames >> MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 8/31/2006 11:58:54 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Hello,

Here what could look this area in MWiF.

As it is quite large, I've cut it in two parts.

This first part is just east of the map covered in the "Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion" thread that you can read here http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1181574&mpage=1&key=.

The second part is east of the first part, and goes to Sakhalin & Japan.
Here first is how it looks in WiF FE the original game.

I'm posting my drawing here for comments.

Attachment (1)

Post #: 1

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/1/2006 12:01:55 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here is the first part.
Krasnoyarsk (from the "Urals & East" Map) is just 3 hexes west on the railway.

I've no special remarks here, it is a vast land with little supply sources, as in WiF FE.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 2

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/1/2006 12:06:22 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Here is the second part, where can be seen Manchuria & Korea.

I've got 2 remarks here :

- On the WiF FE maps, Konstantinovsk is 4 European hexes (2 Pacific Hexes) from Khabarovsk, so it is in supply from this city. Here on MWiF it is 7 hexes from it, so it is not in supply. This is secondary, but it was the fall back base of the Russian Pacific Navy when Vladivostok was falling to the Japanese, so now in MwiF there is no more fall back base.

- The strait hexside between Siberia & Sakhalin should be placed 1 hex southward.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Froonp -- 9/1/2006 12:07:45 AM >

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 3

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/1/2006 11:56:19 AM

Neilster

Posts: 1618
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

I can easily imagine Soviet armour pouring out of the Grand Khingans and racing across the Manchurian plain....

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 4

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/7/2006 10:30:05 AM

c92nichj

Posts: 440
Joined: 1/14/2005
Status: offline

Going back to the game balance discussion. I never had a Japan-RUssian war when playing the CWIF beta so not sure how it would play out.
The only thing that seems sure it that this area is very big compared to the number of units that usually occupies this space.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 5

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/7/2006 10:49:51 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

Going back to the game balance discussion. I never had a Japan-RUssian war when playing the CWIF beta so not sure how it would play out.
The only thing that seems sure it that this area is very big compared to the number of units that usually occupies this space.

The supply sources and supply paths (railways) are so scarse that they limit the usable space to the space actually in supply, this should be considered too when thinking game balance and Soviet Armour pouring.

I had a Japan-Russian confrontation when playing CWiF, but I do not remember the result. I just remember that I discovered at this occasion that Soviet units were limited by Foreign Troop commitment rule when entering Russia.
Oh, yes, I remember, but it was when I was playing past 1945, and the war in europe was finished, and the entire Russian Army was rail moving to the area to crush the Japanese. Manchuria was swept, but the Russians were stopped at the Chinese Frontier because of Foreign Troop Commitments, and that I only had 2 Russians HQ.

(in reply to c92nichj)

Post #: 6

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/11/2006 3:32:15 AM

composer99

Posts: 1360
Joined: 6/6/2005
Status: offline

It is well and good for the Russians to need Foreign HQ Commitment in order to enter China, as USSR and China do not co-operate. However, the map as it is currently consituted does seem a little pro-Soviet. The Japanese may find it a little easier to sweep Pacific-map Siberia clean of Russians, but I would expect the Soviets would find it much easier to boot the Japanese out of Manchuria where in regular WiF they would at least have to slug their way through if the Japanese make an effort to defend it in the late-game. Now the Japanese just won't have the army to defend Manchuria properly plus maintain any garrison in China in addition to defending the Home Islands and any remaining overseas objectives.

However, I do think there should be some way to make Konstantinovsk in supply in fine weather, as it would normally be in WiF:FE.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 7

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/11/2006 4:08:39 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 15461
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

It is well and good for the Russians to need Foreign HQ Commitment in order to enter China, as USSR and China do not co-operate. However, the map as it is currently consituted does seem a little pro-Soviet. The Japanese may find it a little easier to sweep Pacific-map Siberia clean of Russians, but I would expect the Soviets would find it much easier to boot the Japanese out of Manchuria where in regular WiF they would at least have to slug their way through if the Japanese make an effort to defend it in the late-game. Now the Japanese just won't have the army to defend Manchuria properly plus maintain any garrison in China in addition to defending the Home Islands and any remaining overseas objectives.

However, I do think there should be some way to make Konstantinovsk in supply in fine weather, as it would normally be in WiF:FE.

Do you mean for the Japanese? If so, I do not see any easy way to accomplish that.

_____________________________

Steve

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 8

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/11/2006 9:23:22 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

Do you mean for the Japanese? If so, I do not see any easy way to accomplish that.

Adding a city midway of both can do the job. I have none in mind, but I seem to remember seeing on some WWII map a bit of railway going north from Khabarovsk.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 9

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/11/2006 2:24:29 PM

Neilster

Posts: 1618
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

Sorry. I was a bit busy to mention this before but perhaps more mountains are needed near Blagovyeshchenk. It's not much of a bottleneck now and from the maps I've seen I think there should be more of a ring of mountains around Manchuria.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 10

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/12/2006 11:29:22 PM

composer99

Posts: 1360
Joined: 6/6/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Do you mean for the Japanese? If so, I do not see any easy way to accomplish that.

All the Japanese need to do to get Konstantinovsk in supply (in any weather) is run a convoy in the Sea of Japan (occasionally done to ship resources from the mainland if you don't want all your convoy eggs in the China Sea basket).

In the event of a war with Japan, however, that option is not available to the USSR because Japan can focus a lot more resources to sink any convoys it sends out and if Vladivostok falls, there's no supply source any Soviet convoy could trace through to anyway.

As a result, you are correct - there is no easy way to ensure Kontanivosk can be in supply in fine weather (for the USSR when it's at war with Japan) without doing something that I personally would probably be loath to suggest.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 11

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/12/2006 11:37:13 PM

wfzimmerman

Posts: 639
Joined: 10/22/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Do you mean for the Japanese? If so, I do not see any easy way to accomplish that.

As a result, you are correct - there is no easy way to ensure Kontanivosk can be in supply in fine weather (for the USSR when it's at war with Japan) without doing something that I personally would probably be loath to suggest.

like what?

_____________________________

Contribute to the Steve H. thank you book! http://www.nimblebooks.com/wordpress/2009/04/contribute-to-the-wargamers-wwii-quiz-book/

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 12

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/12/2006 11:52:55 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 15461
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99
As a result, you are correct - there is no easy way to ensure Kontanivosk can be in supply in fine weather (for the USSR when it's at war with Japan) without doing something that I personally would probably be loath to suggest.

like what?

Adding cities and/or rail lines, I suppose.

One of the driving forces in Russian geopolitics for centuries was gaining access to a ice-free port with easy access to the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Murmansk and Vladivostok (and Port Arthur) were as close as they ever came. If it had been possible to make other ports on the Pacific important transportation links, they would have done that. So, having Konstantinovsk quasi-isolated makes sense to me.

_____________________________

Steve

(in reply to wfzimmerman)

Post #: 13

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/12/2006 11:54:45 PM

composer99

Posts: 1360
Joined: 6/6/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

As a result, you are correct - there is no easy way to ensure Kontanivosk can be in supply in fine weather (for the USSR when it's at war with Japan) without doing something that I personally would probably be loath to suggest.

like what?

There are two ways you could do it, from what I can see. I actually don't mind them - I just don't want to be the one suggesting either of them be implemented.

The options are (1) adding a city 4 hexes from Kontantinovsk, and (2) shifting Kontantinovsk until it is 4 hexes from Khabarovsk (currently impossible from what I can see - all the coastal hexes seem to be 5 hexes away from Khabarovsk).

Given the high latitude of the area under discussion, and the resulting projection distortion, I suppose that (2) might actually be workable, but a little bit of re-working of the coast would have to be done to make it so.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to wfzimmerman)

Post #: 14

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 12:29:14 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

There are two ways you could do it, from what I can see. I actually don't mind them - I just don't want to be the one suggesting either of them be implemented. The options are (1) adding a city 4 hexes from Kontantinovsk, and (2) shifting Kontantinovsk until it is 4 hexes from Khabarovsk (currently impossible from what I can see - all the coastal hexes seem to be 5 hexes away from Khabarovsk).

Given the high latitude of the area under discussion, and the resulting projection distortion, I suppose that (2) might actually be workable, but a little bit of re-working of the coast would have to be done to make it so.

The simplest, would be to make Konstantinovsk a city itself indeed.
Moving the coastline is a too huge job that is not worth the trouble, and would lead to a bizarre map, and open opportunities to the Japanese that he should not have.

As Steve said, this area and Nikolayev to the north were quite isolated areas.

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 15

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 1:28:30 AM

Borger Borgersen

Posts: 402
Joined: 2/24/2006
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline

Could it help to add the inland city of Komsomolsk (on Amur)? This city has a population of about 280.000 and is located 356 km NE of Khabarovsk. Could it be within the range of the port of Konstantinovsk?

Look here for more details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komsomolsk-na-Amure

I think Konstantinovsk is called Vanino today. It's located in the area you drew Konstantinovsk.

Vanino is a big Russian port, but the population is very small. I read on the internet that the population in 2005 is just 19.000. So it's definitely not big enough for being a city.

The port of Magadan further north could maybe be a city. It has a population of about 160.000 today. It was the major port for arrival of new Gulag prisoners during the 30's. They were settled in Magadan or sent further to the Kolyma region. So Magadan grew considerably during the 30's. Many prisoners settled in Magadan after they had served their sentences and Stalin was dead. But maybe this city is not big enough either for being a city? But it's definitely much larger than Vanino.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 16

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 2:07:20 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

Could it help to add the inland city of Komsomolsk (on Amur)? This city has a population of about 280.000 and is located 356 km NE of Khabarovsk. Could it be within the range of the port of Konstantinovsk?

Look here for more details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komsomolsk-na-Amure

I think Konstantinovsk is called Vanino today. It's located in the area you drew Konstantinovsk.

Vanino is a big Russian port, but the population is very small. I read on the internet that the population in 2005 is just 19.000. So it's definitely not big enough for being a city.

If Konstantinovsk (Vanino) is too small to be a city, adding Komsomolsk would be the best Idea. I can place it 4 hexes West Northwest of Konstantinovsk, just north of the lone swamp hex, and then change the river so that Komsomolsk is on the left bank.
It is the best solution, because it adds no rails, and place the city 4 hexes from Konstantinovsk, thus putting it in supply only in clear weather impulses, exactly as it is in WiF FE.

Do you agree Steve ?

Also, by looking at this, I discovered the BAM (Baikal Amur Mainline) (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikal_Amur_Mainline) of which the first part from Tayshet to Bratsk was built in the 1930s.
I would locate Bratsk (who would deserve to be a city too, but I would not fight for that) 7 hexes NW of Irkursk, on the west shore of the Angara River, just before it is joined by the Oka River, and I would locate Tayshet (who do not deserve to be a city) on the Trans Siberian railway 10 hexes west of Irkursk.
This railway could be added to the map, even if of no use, just for completeness, and none of the 2 cities (Tayshet & Bratsk) need to be added.

Do you agree Steve ?

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)

Post #: 17

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 2:12:46 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

The port of Magadan further north could maybe be a city. It has a population of about 160.000 today. It was the major port for arrival of new Gulag prisoners during the 30's. They were settled in Magadan or sent further to the Kolyma region. So Magadan grew considerably during the 30's. Many prisoners settled in Magadan after they had served their sentences and Stalin was dead. But maybe this city is not big enough either for being a city? But it's definitely much larger than Vanino.

This port (Magadan) is already on the MWiF map it is very very far to the north & east nearly where Kamtchatka begins. It is not a city, only a port.
However, it does not exist in WiF FE, so it could be a city in MWiF, Steve would decide. Maybe we'll see that when I'll do the map for this area (Kamtchatka & Aleutians, which is the last map to look at before going to the Americas I believe).

(in reply to Borger Borgersen)

Post #: 18

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 2:24:56 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 15461
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

The port of Magadan further north could maybe be a city. It has a population of about 160.000 today. It was the major port for arrival of new Gulag prisoners during the 30's. They were settled in Magadan or sent further to the Kolyma region. So Magadan grew considerably during the 30's. Many prisoners settled in Magadan after they had served their sentences and Stalin was dead. But maybe this city is not big enough either for being a city? But it's definitely much larger than Vanino.

This port (Magadan) is already on the MWiF map it is very very far to the north & east nearly where Kamtchatka begins. It is not a city, only a port.
However, it does not exist in WiF FE, so it could be a city in MWiF, Steve would decide. Maybe we'll see that when I'll do the map for this area (Kamtchatka & Aleutians, which is the last map to look at before going to the Americas I believe).

A picture of this area under discussion would be of help. It could include Konstaninovsk, BAM, Komsomolsk, etc. and we could decide on them all at the same time.

_____________________________

Steve

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 19

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 11:57:49 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

If Konstantinovsk (Vanino) is too small to be a city, adding Komsomolsk would be the best Idea. I can place it 4 hexes West Northwest of Konstantinovsk, just north of the lone swamp hex, and then change the river so that Komsomolsk is on the left bank.
It is the best solution, because it adds no rails, and place the city 4 hexes from Konstantinovsk, thus putting it in supply only in clear weather impulses, exactly as it is in WiF FE.

Do you agree Steve ?

Also, by looking at this, I discovered the BAM (Baikal Amur Mainline) (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikal_Amur_Mainline) of which the first part from Tayshet to Bratsk was built in the 1930s.
I would locate Bratsk (who would deserve to be a city too, but I would not fight for that) 7 hexes NW of Irkursk, on the west shore of the Angara River, just before it is joined by the Oka River, and I would locate Tayshet (who do not deserve to be a city) on the Trans Siberian railway 10 hexes west of Irkursk.
This railway could be added to the map, even if of no use, just for completeness, and none of the 2 cities (Tayshet & Bratsk) need to be added.

Do you agree Steve ?

quote:

A picture of this area under discussion would be of help. It could include Konstaninovsk, BAM, Komsomolsk, etc. and we could decide on them all at the same time.

Here is a picture about both mods I spoke about (quoted above).
For Magadan, this port is very very very far away (more than 20 hexes) from the area under work for the moment, We'll see it later.

Here is first about the BAM (Baikal Amur Mainline). I'll see if I can discover how far east this railway was built in 1939-1945. I'm sure already that it went up to Bratsk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bratsk).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 20

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 11:59:24 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

If Konstantinovsk (Vanino) is too small to be a city, adding Komsomolsk would be the best Idea. I can place it 4 hexes West Northwest of Konstantinovsk, just north of the lone swamp hex, and then change the river so that Komsomolsk is on the left bank.
It is the best solution, because it adds no rails, and place the city 4 hexes from Konstantinovsk, thus putting it in supply only in clear weather impulses, exactly as it is in WiF FE.

Do you agree Steve ?

Here about this suggestion, here is how it would look.
I like it very much because it elegantly puts back Konstantinovsk in its WiF FE supply state, that is supplied only on clear weather impulses.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 21

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 12:53:40 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 15461
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

Well, I like both the BAM and the Komsomolsk additions. Let's see what other people have to say.

_____________________________

Steve

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 22

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 4:39:57 PM

Neilster

Posts: 1618
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

From wikipedia...

The route of the present-day BAM was first considered in the 1880s as an option for the eastern section of the Trans-Siberian railway.

The section from Tayshet to Bratsk was built in the 1930s. Most of the Far Eastern section was built during the years of 1944-1946, mainly by gulag prisoners, including German and Japanese prisoners of war, of whom possibly as many as 150,000 died.[citation needed] In 1953, following Stalin's death, virtually all construction work on the BAM stopped and the line was abandoned to the elements for more than twenty years.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 23

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 4:47:51 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster
From wikipedia...

The route of the present-day BAM was first considered in the 1880s as an option for the eastern section of the Trans-Siberian railway.

The section from Tayshet to Bratsk was built in the 1930s. Most of the Far Eastern section was built during the years of 1944-1946, mainly by gulag prisoners, including German and Japanese prisoners of war, of whom possibly as many as 150,000 died.[citation needed] In 1953, following Stalin's death, virtually all construction work on the BAM stopped and the line was abandoned to the elements for more than twenty years.

Cheers, Neilster

The Tayshet to Bratsk railway is the one depicted (black line) in post #20.
This Wikipedia article is what informed me about the BAM too.
I tried to google more information about its state of construction in 1939 & 1945 without finding more.

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 24

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 5:23:07 PM

Neilster

Posts: 1618
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

By the looks of that article, its status on the post #20 map is probably right for, say, 1939.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 25

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 7:47:53 PM

trees trees

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline

Ok, how would the Russians get diesel fuel and torpedoes to a new base on the Pacific after losing Vladivostok? By donkey-cart? Siberia would be a logistical nightmare for military forces. Logistics are already oversimplified in WiF, they shouldn't get any easier.

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 26

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 7:56:02 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees
Ok, how would the Russians get diesel fuel and torpedoes to a new base on the Pacific after losing Vladivostok? By donkey-cart? Siberia would be a logistical nightmare for military forces. Logistics are already oversimplified in WiF, they shouldn't get any easier.

In WiF FE, Konstantinovsk is in supply from Khabarovsk (see map from post #1), so donkey carts or not, the WiF FE designer estimated that torpedoes and fuel could be gathered at Khabarovsk to supply ships in Konstantinovsk.

In MWiF, we are only trying to get this right back as it is in WiF FE, nothing is any easier. The only difference is that, to keep the Geography right in the map, we leave Konstantinovsk and Khabarovsk at their real places, and we add a third city, Komsomolsk, that takes the role of Khabarovsk as for Konstantinovsk's supply.

< Message edited by Froonp -- 9/13/2006 7:57:37 PM >

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 27

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 9/13/2006 8:49:35 PM

wfzimmerman

Posts: 639
Joined: 10/22/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

Ok, how would the Russians get diesel fuel and torpedoes to a new base on the Pacific after losing Vladivostok? By donkey-cart? Siberia would be a logistical nightmare for military forces. Logistics are already oversimplified in WiF, they shouldn't get any easier.

Hezbollah seems to have done pretty well with donkey carts! It would be a mistake to underestimate what the Soviets could have done with mass quantities of prison labor in a situation of desperation.

_____________________________

Contribute to the Steve H. thank you book! http://www.nimblebooks.com/wordpress/2009/04/contribute-to-the-wargamers-wwii-quiz-book/

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 28

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 2/5/2008 6:27:44 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

Post 21: Since that post dates back to September 2006, perhaps the incorrect names around Sakhalin have already been corrected, but here goes...

Konstantinovsk = Sovietskya Gavan, rendered as Port Soviet on my 1942 map
Alexandrovsk is on the wrong side of the water! It should be 2W, where the river comes closest to the sea. The Sakhalin port is Dui.

I can confirm that it was the intent of the Soviets to withdraw their Far Eastern fleet to Sovietskya Gavan in the event of a Japanese attack, so they must have made some logistical preparations. The real problem of course is that it is ice-bound for most of the year. Vladivostok doesn't mean 'Jewel of the East' for nothing!

Interesting historical fact: the USSR had most of its submarine fleet based at Vladivostok. Now that must have been a good deterrent to the Strike North faction if ever there was one!

The resource in northern Manchuria (presently at Tsitsihar) represents the northwestern Manchurian gold fields. Could we move it northwest along the rail-line into the mountains where it belongs?

(in reply to wfzimmerman)

Post #: 29

RE: MWiF Map Review - Russia - Siberia, Manchuria, Korea - 2/5/2008 8:27:38 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7717
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

Post 21: Since that post dates back to September 2006, perhaps the incorrect names around Sakhalin have already been corrected, but here goes...

I've uploaded 3 screenshots to our FTP, for Steve to post them here to get you updated with recent screenshots of this place.

quote:

Konstantinovsk = Sovietskya Gavan, rendered as Port Soviet on my 1942 map

Already changed. Konstantinovsk was nowhere to be found.

quote:

Alexandrovsk is on the wrong side of the water!� It should be 2W, where the river comes closest to the sea.� The Sakhalin port is Dui.

I disagree. Alexandrovsk is placed here (West Coast of Sakhalin) on my Look at the World Atlas (1944) and on the WiF FE maps. You can also see that on Google Earth.

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 30