Matrix Games Forums

Happy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser Trailer
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Something wrong down under????

 
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] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Something wrong down under???? Page: <<   < prev  31 32 [33] 34 35   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Something wrong down under???? - 10/20/2009 4:31:03 AM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1691
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline
Not sure if it's been reported or not or if it's WAD but on Adelaide, it seems to want to keep 20k of resources at all times. I've loaded resources multiple times to move them to Melbourne & Sydney but Adelaide keeps sucking up to the 20k lvl. One thing, I'm not really sure where all the resources are coming from? Some seems to come from Melbourne & Sydney, not sure if it's production causing drop or xfer but it's not the 20k drop, but other bases closer to Adelaide don't seem to be effected by the drag, like Sale which also seems to stay at 4k regardless of how much I pull out as well.
I've also seen some supply lvls along the same lines at Newcastle & the port base just s of Sydney (I don't have game open right now at work). They seem to want to stay at 30k+ supply even though they need only a few hundred & I've tried to pull them out by transport & adjusting the supply lvl requirements of nearby bases but again it suck up to the 30K+ lvl.

Another thing I think the pw hex data for the road travelling n from Alice Springs to Darwin gets off 1 hex to the left for a couple of hexes as far as the way it looks like the troops are traveling on the map. I'm not at home so can't give hexes where it gets off right now but will try to get them the next time I load up game.

(in reply to mariandavid)
Post #: 961
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 10/23/2009 11:27:58 PM   
tbridges


Posts: 214
Joined: 6/25/2005
From: North Carolina
Status: offline
I'm sure this question has been answered before but my searches sure can't find it.

When building up a base does it make a difference if you build up one aspect at a time or all three simultaneously? Should you concentrate on building up one thing at a time, airfield, port, or forts? If you build only one aspect at a time does it concentrate resources on that one and make it go faster? If you start building all three at once will it dilute your efforts and result in each one taking longer? Does it matter?

< Message edited by tbridges -- 11/6/2009 2:36:46 PM >


_____________________________



The easy way is always mined...

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 962
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 10/23/2009 11:35:58 PM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 1940
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tbridges

I'm sure this question has been answered before but my searches sure can't find it.

When building up a base does it make a difference if you build up one aspect at a time or all three simultaneously? Should you concentrate on building up one thing at a time, airfield, port, or forts? If you build only one aspect at a time does it concentrate resources on that one and make it go faster? If you start building all three at once will it dilute your efforts and result in each one taking longer? Does it matter?

Building all three at the same time will split the resources {building points or whatever} among all three. If you want something built faster, concentrate on that. I usually build only one at a time. Except for Soviet bases which I let build all at once {playing the AI, I don't have to worry about the Japanese steamrolling the Soviets}.

(in reply to tbridges)
Post #: 963
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 10/23/2009 11:40:24 PM   
tbridges


Posts: 214
Joined: 6/25/2005
From: North Carolina
Status: offline
Ok, thanks rm, that's what I needed to know.

< Message edited by tbridges -- 11/6/2009 2:37:33 PM >


_____________________________



The easy way is always mined...

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 964
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 10/27/2009 1:51:38 PM   
Jonathan Pollard


Posts: 457
Joined: 2/25/2007
From: Federal prison
Status: offline
As someone who has been to both Butuan and Cebu, I find it hard to believe that the Butuan port was larger than Cebu's even in 1941. Today Cebu's port facilities are much more extensive than Butuan's (I would estimate that Cebu has at least 5x the capacity of Butuan) and I have a gut feeling that a similar situation existed in 1941. For those who wish to research further, Butuan's port facilities are actually located at Nasipit, over a dozen miles to the west. Here are details of Nasipit's port facilities as they currently exist, along with some photos of what it looked like in the past:

http://www.nasipitsite.com/portofnasipit.htm

_____________________________

"We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba." "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even Washington." - US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Operation Northwoods, 1962

(in reply to tbridges)
Post #: 965
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 10/27/2009 2:46:16 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9768
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Pollard

As someone who has been to both Butuan and Cebu, I find it hard to believe that the Butuan port was larger than Cebu's even in 1941. Today Cebu's port facilities are much more extensive than Butuan's (I would estimate that Cebu has at least 5x the capacity of Butuan) and I have a gut feeling that a similar situation existed in 1941. For those who wish to research further, Butuan's port facilities are actually located at Nasipit, over a dozen miles to the west. Here are details of Nasipit's port facilities as they currently exist, along with some photos of what it looked like in the past:

http://www.nasipitsite.com/portofnasipit.htm


Butuan and Nasipit are two separate ports which would be located in the same hex.

Ports of the Phillippines

Now as to their state in 1941/1942 that is another question.


As to CEBU -
One of the prioritized projects during the
American Regime was port development and
much attention was paid to the development of
the Iloilo and Cebu ports, in addition to the
port in Manila. Prior to the harbor project,
construction of 30 feet wide temporary timber
wharf at Cebu begun in March 1904 and
completed in September 1904, being
conducted by Messrs. Jones & Smith, Manila
(RPC, 1904, 1905).

From 1904 to 1913, port improvement in Cebu
was carried out by the government. One
project included “the construction of a concrete masonry dock and bulkhead about 2600 feet
long, the reclaiming of about 13 acres of land adjacent to the already congested business
portion of the city, and provides for vessels of 23 feet draft and for future extension of
docking facilities when needed” (RPC, 1903). The construction of the port, following to
temporary wharf, mobilized in April 1905, contracted by the J.G. White & Co. of New York
which was also the syndicate member for the railway development in Cebu (RPC, 1904,
1905). The 2,309 feet wharf became available in Cebu on April 15, 1908.

The completion of the port expected to bring more business and industrial development as
well as better sanitation and beauty in the City. Since Cebu was the trade center of not only
Visayas but also the country, improvement of its facilities would gain economic value not
only in Cebu but throughout the country. In fact, as we can see in the Plate 5, the Port of Cebu
had the significant advantage of direct access to the railway.

According to Gwekoh (1937) the following big international trading companies located their
firms in the City of Cebu by 1937: Pacific Commercial Company, Smith, Bell and Co., Ltd,
Ker and Co., W.F. Stevenson and Co., Procter and Gamble Trading, Philippine Refining,
Warner Barnes & Co., Madrigal and Co., Compana General de Tabacoe de Filipinas,
International Harvester, Daido Boeki Kaisha, Ltd., Mitsui Bussan Kaisha., etc.
With the improvement of port facilities, the port of Cebu became the second biggest in terms
of size and significance in the trading of the country. Though data during 1910s to 1920s were
not found, the data of exports volume from the port of Cebu to U.S.A and foreign countries
during 1930s are presented in Table 2. It is enough to understand that the port of Cebu had
increased its significance in the trading industry. Also, U.K., Japan, China, Spain, Netherlands,
Norway and Sweden maintained vice-consulates in the City of Cebu (Gwekoh, 1937).

Table 2 Export Volume from Cebu Port
Year Volume (PhP)
1932 - 20,678,225.12
1933 - 28,484,818.74
1934 - 28,208,644.55
1935 - 32,818,517.44
1936 - 43,692,898.08
Source: S.H. Gwekoh The Golden Book of Cebu, 1937

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Jonathan Pollard)
Post #: 966
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/6/2009 8:59:33 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 2651
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: The deepest, darkest pit of hell
Status: offline
I believe the potential airbase sizes should be toned down at bit at certain locations. A few examples: Tulagi can be overbuilt into a size 5 airbase, able to operate B-17s. Looking at photos and maps of that island I cannot imagine how. Wau is rated as SPS 3, so it can be overbuilt to size 6. I have trouble believing that Wau with its inclined airstrip airbase was able to accomodate and operate heavy bombers. Waigeo Is. is rated at SPS 5. But MacArthur had to cancel the occupation of this island because no suitable airbase locations could be found. 

_____________________________

Carpe Cerevisiam



WitP AAR "Six Years of War"

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 967
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/6/2009 9:58:56 PM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1913
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline
Here's a feature request that I think more and more people might start asking for.

Currently, the overland movement of resources to ports is a little chaotic. It seems that some ports are preferred, but resources can pop into other ports, plus it doesn't look like resources move every day and so it's very difficult to maintain a consistent transport network, particularly from the Asian mainland to Japan. You can pick up resources somewhere, and when the TF returns there's still nothing there. Although it might show up later. In some quantity.

It would be nice if on the base screen we could identify a port as a resource hub. When the overland movement is deciding how to flow resources to a port, it could prioritize sending them to a resource hub. There might be a limit on the range over which a hub helps so that something from Burma doesn't think it needs to go to Fusan.

If this is not doable or doesn't make the cut, it would be nice to have some description of how the resources move to ports from inland sites to allow us to plan better. I have not detected any clear pattern, although in fairness I haven't tried keeping detailed records and reverse engineering the pattern. (Has anyone?)

Any other JFBs finding this frustrating as well? It's nowhere near a game stopper, but it's annoying to send a TF to a port, find out it's still empty, so you send it to another nearby port that has resources, but a few days latter the first port fills up!




(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 968
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/9/2009 1:05:05 AM   
Empire101


Posts: 1956
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline
Can anyone point me in the right direction of the best build strategy for the Japanese? What I'm after is what are the engine factories/ airframe factories you can afford to switch over.

_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 969
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/9/2009 1:10:59 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 13933
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101

Can anyone point me in the right direction of the best build strategy for the Japanese? What I'm after is what are the engine factories/ airframe factories you can afford to switch over.


Empire, we're all learning as we go. In my AAR I'm discussing a lot of economics and talk about airframe & engine expansion as well as the supply cost in post 23:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2280485

I'm not saying it's right, or even good, but it's what I'm attempting. I always try to err on the low side. You can always increase production. If you overexpand, you just spent a lot of supply that you desparately need on the front line.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 970
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/9/2009 2:16:43 PM   
Empire101


Posts: 1956
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline
Thanks for your help!!


_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 971
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/9/2009 2:18:06 PM   
Empire101


Posts: 1956
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101

Thanks for your help!! Every bit of info is great as this is so vast!!




_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 972
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/9/2009 2:19:05 PM   
Empire101


Posts: 1956
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline






Thanks for your help!! Every bit of info is great as this is so vast


_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 973
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/10/2009 8:27:03 PM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline
The AI appears to be able to run a supply 'budget' in the same way UK politicians seem to be able to run our country.

I found the following after getting extremely frustrated by the heavy losses I was taking in assault ships whilst trying to take the Marianas. I prepared the assaults for months, training troops, conducting bombardments, setting a 40+ submarine picket line to prevent re-supply and stationing the FCTF off the islands for 6 weeks, rotating the various TG's in and out of Enitewok for resupply (which had standing replenishment groups in to keep the TG's topped up).

So getting my Amphib groups 'creamed' during the unload ops was not an immediate consideration, nor was the the thought of overly stubborn resistance from the defenders, after all - the prep work was very thorough.

So when I saw this (having rolled back to a previous save to take a 'peak' because I suspected something was awry), I was amazed.





As you can see the Japanese are running a deficit supply budget, indeed the CD units that knocked hell out of my amphibs all have a minus supply number - so what did they shoot me with?? Then after that, what did they reload with to shoot me again??

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bsq -- 11/10/2009 8:28:09 PM >

(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 974
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/10/2009 8:32:07 PM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline
Now if the above wasn't enough, this is the situation on Saipan where once again the CD units shot up the Amphibs and the ground units are putting up the mother of all fights. This is now 12 weeks after my 'siege' began:






There is clearly no supply on the island and no units are supplied, indeed all but 2 are running on negative supply.

Fine the AI needs an advantage, but this appears to be outright 'cheating'. Unless this is WAD and if it is, can the developers tell us how to run a deficit supply with minimal affects to our units. Every time I have run out of supplies on my side, my units have quickly succumbed to the negative effects.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bsq -- 11/10/2009 8:34:57 PM >

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 975
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/10/2009 9:22:59 PM   
Barb


Posts: 1573
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline
What difficulty you are playing on? If its hard or very hard AI never runs out of supply...

_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 976
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/10/2009 10:06:59 PM   
bsq


Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

What difficulty you are playing on? If its hard or very hard AI never runs out of supply...


Historical, but in the context of the views above this is surely irrelevant. You can model not running out of supply by either reducing or eliminating consumption based on difficultly settings. The views show that having used all of its supply the AI continues to draw on non-existent stocks - how is this right and under what penalties is it now. If it can do this with impunity then even the best crafted campaign will fail and the AI will only be overcome by shear weight of numbers. This is sledgehammer approach is surely not what was designed to happen?
Supply is supposed to be the abstracting of all things that are not fuel - run out and you're toast (unless you are the AI). Contrast this to what happens to poorly supplied units during the Japanese expansion.

The bottom line is due to these anomalies to the supply system, the Allies simply do not have enough ships or troops for this type of war and the game will peter out to a draw as the ability to conduct amphibious assaults diminishes because the AI is not bound by the same supply rules as the player.

I currently have enough specialist ships to lift 4 divisions plus tank and artillery support (mid 44), Tinian cost me 20% of my lifting ability to an almost un-supplied island. Saipan cost me another 20% to a completely un-supplied island.

< Message edited by bsq -- 11/10/2009 10:07:46 PM >

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 977
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/10/2009 10:11:16 PM   
Barb


Posts: 1573
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline
I just put the question to help the Devs to answere you. I would not like to lost 40% of lift capacity in 1944 

_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 978
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/11/2009 12:52:08 PM   
BigJ62


Posts: 1792
Joined: 12/28/2002
From: Alpharetta, Georgia
Status: offline
Post a save in tech support.


quote:

ORIGINAL: bsq

The AI appears to be able to run a supply 'budget' in the same way UK politicians seem to be able to run our country.

I found the following after getting extremely frustrated by the heavy losses I was taking in assault ships whilst trying to take the Marianas. I prepared the assaults for months, training troops, conducting bombardments, setting a 40+ submarine picket line to prevent re-supply and stationing the FCTF off the islands for 6 weeks, rotating the various TG's in and out of Enitewok for resupply (which had standing replenishment groups in to keep the TG's topped up).

So getting my Amphib groups 'creamed' during the unload ops was not an immediate consideration, nor was the the thought of overly stubborn resistance from the defenders, after all - the prep work was very thorough.

So when I saw this (having rolled back to a previous save to take a 'peak' because I suspected something was awry), I was amazed.





As you can see the Japanese are running a deficit supply budget, indeed the CD units that knocked hell out of my amphibs all have a minus supply number - so what did they shoot me with?? Then after that, what did they reload with to shoot me again??



_____________________________

Witp-AE
AeAi…AeAi …AeAi…Long live AeAi.

(in reply to bsq)
Post #: 979
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/27/2009 2:00:10 PM   
Rainer79

 

Posts: 603
Joined: 10/31/2008
From: Austria
Status: offline
This is for the new beta patch / scenario 2. While it is stated in the readme that the road network for the "Terrace" base has been reworked, that doesn't actually seem to be the case.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to BigJ62)
Post #: 980
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/27/2009 9:00:59 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 4874
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer79

This is for the new beta patch / scenario 2. While it is stated in the readme that the road network for the "Terrace" base has been reworked, that doesn't actually seem to be the case.







The road/railway networks were reworked, because the base was "moved" one hex for patch 2 (to a more correct location). However existing games will still have the base in the original hex. I requested that a base "move" be done for existing games, but it appears this was not done. So the result will be that Terrace will not be located on the railway and road for existing games using the updated map. I don't think this is a major problem, just an annoyance.

Andrew

(in reply to Rainer79)
Post #: 981
1094 beta - 11/28/2009 7:53:18 AM   
Pascal


Posts: 1637
Joined: 8/20/2003
From: in New England now after driving across US from CA
Status: offline
Hi,

checked scenario 1 in the 1094 beta patch. Christmas Island is occupied and has an airfield (and a dispersed TK). This is not correct. Check page 51 of the World War II Pacific Island Guide. There was nothing there except a few natives and Europeans. No units appeared until Feb 1942. Essentially, Christmas Island should be a port level 1 at best, airfield level 0 certainly.

Rottman's Guide, and the link I gave in a previous post to the Naval Administration histories, are some of the best sources.

< Message edited by Pascal -- 11/28/2009 9:25:04 AM >


_____________________________

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 982
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/28/2009 8:09:22 AM   
Rainer79

 

Posts: 603
Joined: 10/31/2008
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
So the result will be that Terrace will not be located on the railway and road for existing games using the updated map. I don't think this is a major problem, just an annoyance.


Thanks for the answer. It is certainly not a major problem and I only stumbled upon it because the patch readme seemed to indicate that it should behave another way.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 983
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/28/2009 8:17:59 AM   
Kull


Posts: 1043
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

The road/railway networks were reworked, because the base was "moved" one hex for patch 2 (to a more correct location). However existing games will still have the base in the original hex. I requested that a base "move" be done for existing games, but it appears this was not done. So the result will be that Terrace will not be located on the railway and road for existing games using the updated map. I don't think this is a major problem, just an annoyance.


In a new start of two scenarios (Ironman and Scen 1), the RCMP Terrace Base Force is still at the old location. Spotted a bunch of other Ironman issues, too, but will post those in the Tech Support forum.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 984
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/29/2009 10:49:13 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 4874
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
In a new start of two scenarios (Ironman and Scen 1), the RCMP Terrace Base Force is still at the old location. Spotted a bunch of other Ironman issues, too, but will post those in the Tech Support forum.


The base data and the LCU data are handled by different people. You can blame me for not communication my changes ("moving" the Terrace base) well enough.

Andrew

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 985
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 11/29/2009 2:24:24 PM   
Skyros


Posts: 1257
Joined: 9/29/2000
From: Columbia SC
Status: offline
Andrew, check scenario 6 the updates for Pago Pago and christmas island were also missed.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 986
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 12/6/2009 3:01:14 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1912
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
I see numerous Australian ports, inland towns and roads/highways on the map (labeled and unlabeled) that appear to have no apparent game connection (resources, etc). I figure some are potential invasion, defensive point/positions and maybe, some to and from military transportation routes. But, I am wondering if the others are they included only for aesthetics (if so fine by me)?

Shame on me for not knowing more about the Country.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 987
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 12/6/2009 10:41:22 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 4874
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I see numerous Australian ports, inland towns and roads/highways on the map (labeled and unlabeled) that appear to have no apparent game connection (resources, etc). I figure some are potential invasion, defensive point/positions and maybe, some to and from military transportation routes. But, I am wondering if the others are they included only for aesthetics (if so fine by me)?

Shame on me for not knowing more about the Country.


In remote areas bases are put on the map to help with moving resources and air units around, if that is required.

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 988
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 12/7/2009 12:48:45 AM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1912
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I see numerous Australian ports, inland towns and roads/highways on the map (labeled and unlabeled) that appear to have no apparent game connection (resources, etc). I figure some are potential invasion, defensive point/positions and maybe, some to and from military transportation routes. But, I am wondering if the others are they included only for aesthetics (if so fine by me)?

Shame on me for not knowing more about the Country.


In remote areas bases are put on the map to help with moving resources and air units around, if that is required.


Most have no resources. I checked before my previous post sensing the obvious reply if resources were present. That is what stimulated the question thinking that unless the were barren desserts some resources may be in those locations.
Here are some names: Meekatharra (and the road east to no where); Corunna Downs; Exmouth; Birdsville; Oodnanatta; Coen; Fenton; Winton; Emerald;Condamine; Cunderdin; Tooumwal; and Bisselton. Should there be resources in those areas?

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 12/7/2009 1:09:03 AM >

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 989
RE: AE Map, Base, Economic Issues - 12/7/2009 3:09:53 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 4874
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I see numerous Australian ports, inland towns and roads/highways on the map (labeled and unlabeled) that appear to have no apparent game connection (resources, etc). I figure some are potential invasion, defensive point/positions and maybe, some to and from military transportation routes. But, I am wondering if the others are they included only for aesthetics (if so fine by me)?

Shame on me for not knowing more about the Country.


In remote areas bases are put on the map to help with moving resources and air units around, if that is required.


Most have no resources. I checked before my previous post sensing the obvious reply if resources were present. That is what stimulated the question thinking that unless the were barren desserts some resources may be in those locations.
Here are some names: Meekatharra (and the road east to no where); Corunna Downs; Exmouth; Birdsville; Oodnanatta; Coen; Fenton; Winton; Emerald;Condamine; Cunderdin; Tooumwal; and Bisselton. Should there be resources in those areas?


Sorry. My bad. I meant supplies, not resources.

Andrew

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 990
Page:   <<   < prev  31 32 [33] 34 35   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Something wrong down under???? Page: <<   < prev  31 32 [33] 34 35   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

0.125