Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Possible changes to the European map

 
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 >> Possible changes to the European map Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Possible changes to the European map - 4/2/2008 10:56:49 AM   
Peter Stauffenberg


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

Map
With Mike Fisher looking over our shoulder, we are more comfortable with possibly making some changes to the European portion of the map. Up until now, we have been treating the European map as more or less sacrosanct, although we did nibble on it a bit around the edges. I have set aside the 15th of each month as “map update” day, so I am not doing small changes several times a week.


I remember from the European map thread that Patrice has made a list of possible map changes for the European map that will be discussed with ADG. Is it possible to post this list here and get comments from the forum members if other parts of the European map could be changed as well?

It's very interesting to hear that ADG want to see if some changes can be done to the European map to correct mistakes, improve something etc. That means the European map is no longer 100% "holy", only 95% holy. :) That gives us a possibility to improve something that may even have an effect on WIFFE in a new version. I think we have already made a change to the map regarding Cernauti and that will be part of the WIFFE errata (meaning Cernauti is part of Bessarabia).

Would it be a good idea to have a list of possible map changes and add that list with suggestions from the forum readers. When we have enough comments we could make a vote about which changes we would like to present to ADG for change? This is similar to what we did with map changes for the China map. E. g. we could discuss changes with ADG that get more than 67% of the votes.

Post #: 1
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/3/2008 10:32:38 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen
I remember from the European map thread that Patrice has made a list of possible map changes for the European map that will be discussed with ADG. Is it possible to post this list here and get comments from the forum members if other parts of the European map could be changed as well?

Suggested European Map changes :
Suggestions, Algeria
• Add Constantine (114k inhabitants) in Algeria (Froonp).
• Extend the S going railway spurs in Algeria to their real length (Froonp). Draft map done.

Suggestions, Czechoslovakia
• Slovakia became an “independent” country (capital Bratislava) and a German minor ally in March 1939 as Germany invaded Bohemia-Moravia (what is now the Czech Republic). If the Sudetenland warrants a border, so too should Slovakia with Bohemia-Moravia (marcuswatney).

Suggestions, Denmark
• Make Bornholm Danish, and move it SE of Malmo. It was 'liberated' by the Russians in 1945, and they gave it back. Should be in the hex SE of Malmö (marcuswatney).
• The connections between the Denmark islands in the NW were questioned. This mostly has to do with the hexes being larger than the islands so some hexes contain 1 and a half islands.
• The connections SE and SW from Copenhagen's island are shown as straits, and that was questioned too.
• And I have questions about the rail lines that cross between islands. I am unhappy that there isn't a clear statement of what a rail line crossing the open sea means (Steve).
• Should be there a straits crossing between Lubeck and the Danish island hex to the NE? I checked on the German invasion of Denmark and German troops crossed on the mainland border in Schleswig, landed from ship in Copenhagen, and took the air base in the north of the country by paratroop. They did not attempt to use the crossing from puttgarden (Lubeck hex) to Lolland and Falster islands, probably because there is a bridge between those two islands and yet another crossing after that, to Sjaelland/Zealand. it would have taken too long on the timescale the Germans were working to, with risk of delay if any of the ferries and bridges were disabled. if so they would need Kriegsmarine support and if they had that they may as well go straight to Copenhagen. Which they did, as this operation was part of the larger 'operation Weser' invasion of Norway. But that does not mean there is not a ferry from lubeck/puttgarden to lolland island. it is about the same distance as the Odense-Sjaelland and Lolland-Langeland straits, and shorter than the Copenhagen-Malmo strait, all of which have crossing arrows (Mike Fisher).

Suggestions, Finland
• Rename Hanko (Finnish Spelling) as Hango (Swedish Spelling) (English spelling?). Keep Hanko (ahlner).
• Add Mannerheim Line as an on-map fortification.
• The border with the USSR in the SE of Finland, including the lakes and the river (Svir?) that connects them. Possibly also the Finnish borderlands just north of this area. The reality was not as well modelled by the MWIF map as it might be, partially because of the movement ability of the Finnish units to penetrate deep into the USSR, cutting off Leningrad from the east (Steve). My 1942 atlas shows the Finnish Borderlands around Lake Ladoga is far too big. The problem is that Lake Ladoga is badly drawn: it is more rectangular than square. Along the north cost of the lake, the Soviets annexed only a corridor varying in width between 10 and 20 miles. All they wanted was the railway line that comes up from Leningrad, and which skirts the lake (marcuswatney).

Suggestion, Ireland
• Cosmetic : Lough Neagh is 25 km long and 15 km wide. This is not large enough to be relevant in a WiF FE hex (marcuswatney).

Suggestions, Hungary
• The NE hexes of Hungary (Ruthenia) were actually a part of Slovakia until autumn 1938 - at the time of Munich, Slovakia had a border with Romania. So these hexes should be shown as negotiable, just like the Sudetenland (marcuswatney).
• Add Lake Balaton (jcprom). 77 km long 14 km wide. It is on the NW hexside of the resource hex.

Suggestions, Italy
• Add Lake Garda, halfway between Milan & Venice. It is about 50 km long and 16 km wide at its largest. A WiF map hex has an average diameter of 89 km, which means that a hexside has an average length of 51 km. These figures say that this lake would be long enough to be added to the map. I would place it on the W hexside of hex 60,37 (the hex NW of Venice).
• Add Lake Maggiore. 66 km long, extending from within Switzerland into Italy. It can be placed on the W hexside of hex 60,35 (the hex NW of Milan).

Suggestions, Mediterranean Sea
• Add Lampedusa (hex 76,37, position 15) and Pantellaria (hex 74,37 position 18) islands (West Med).
• Elba Island (NE of Corsica) should be moved over to the hex adjacent to the Italian coast there, or move that part of Corsica out of the same hex with Elba (marcuswatney, jcprom).

Suggestions, Morocco
• Add a railway going south from Casablanca, and then eastwards to Marrakech (North Africa - Morocco 1941 - 1.jpg) (Froonp).
• Shift Casablanca & Mogador a couple of hexes southwards (Froonp).
• Add Marrakech and Fez (144 inhabitants) as cities (Froonp).

Suggestions, Netherlands
• The hex west of Dusseldorf should be Dutch... and yes the rail-line from Dusseldorf to Antwerp really does go through the Netherlands! Note that Aachen is right up against the Dutch border (marcuswatney).

Suggestions, Poland
• Make Danzig a free city under the League of Nations and not part of the Polish Corridor. After all, the Polish Corridor was a corridor owned by Poland leading to the sea at Gdynia (marcuswatney).

Suggestions, Russia
• Volga is very wide between Stalingrad and Astrakhan: warrants something more than mere river status?
• The entire stretch of the Volga north to Saratov and to some distance south of Stalingrad is pretty much a lake hexside rather than just a river. It's not really passable. You can run ships across it, and the Russians had ferries that ran across it, but to rate it the same as all other rivers is a bit misleading.
• There's a piece of land called the Okhosha (sp?) land bridge, which is basically what Kiev sits on. Both side of that, north and south, the Dneiper is pretty much impassable. I'd rate the 2 hexsides N and 2 hexsides S (and a few others to the S, check Google maps for example or an atlas, the geography hasn't changed much since 1945) as lake hexsides. This is what makes the defence of Kiev so important, as it's the only way across the Dneiper in that area.
• The Dneiper river hexes south of Dnepropetrovsk should also be marked as Lake Hexsides.
• Vilna was given to Lithuania on 10 October 1939 by the Soviet Union, as a sweetener for allowing Soviet forces in. It is now the capital of Lithuania. Since this happened at the time of the annexation of the Baltic States, and before the occupation of Bessarabia, an alternative border should be delineated (marcuswatney).
• Leningrad is not a major port. The major naval port is Kronshtadt, an island about 50 km W of Leningrad, I'd put it one hex west.

Suggestion, Sweden
• There could be Strait crossing arrow from Oland Island, to the hex that Kalmar would be in (Mike Fisher).

Suggestions, Switzerland
• Add Lake Constance (jcprom). 64 km long 14 km wide. It is on the NE hexside of Zurich hex.
• Add Lake Geneva (jcprom). 73 km long 14 km wide. It is on one of the hexsides of 59,32.

Suggestions, Tunisia
• There are several rail lines in Eastern Algeria and Central Tunisia which should be added. They all existed pre-1938. Draft map done.
o From Sousse through Kasserine Pass is a railway that continues all the way past Gafsa to Tazeur in the salt marshes. This would run from Sousse on the coast 1 hex W, then 1 hex SW, then 1 hex W again then 2 further hexes SW to the far western swamp hex. This rail line was one of the major reasons for the Battle of Kasserine Pass, as it would have allowed the Germans to outflank American positions in Algeria to the west, and they in fact attempted this very thing resulting in the well known Battle.
o On the Algerian side of the border is the line that runs from Bone to Tebessa and another from Algiers to Tebessa. Again this rail line was of importance as it outflanked German positions in Tunisia, and was the reason for the American push into the interior of Tunisia. This line would run from Bone to Tebessa (hex 77,32). A second line would split off half way between Algiers and Bone and head SE towards Tebessa. Tebessa was the main American railhead for the attacks on central Tunisia and was the launching point for their attacks towards Kasserine Pass (Norman42). Are these railways all able to be used by armies? (Froonp)
• The entire Eastern and Western Dorsal Ranges are missing completely from Algeria / Tunisia. They are currently empty desert hexes when in fact they should be a mountain range. Kasserine Pass was really a *pass* through the Dorsal Range and is what made it important (which is why the railways went both there and to Tebessa on the far side of the pass). Control of the passes (there were 3, but only Kasserine was considered an all weather road) equalled control of Central Tunisia. If the railroads cannot be added, perhaps at least look at adding 4 or 5 mountain hexes (not all desert mountain, the northern Dorsals often had torrential rainfall during turning the area into 5 foot deep mud) to the area with Kasserine as a gap between them. Then at least the terrain is accurate and the value of Kasserine on map makes some sense instead of being one of 15 hexes of empty Tunisian desert. Note: my suggestion would be to make hexes 76,33 and 76,34 mountains, label hex 77,33 as Kasserine, and make the line of 77,31, 78,32, and 78,33 desert mountains to represent the Western Dorsals (Norman42). Draft map done.

Suggestions, Turkey
• My 1936 map shows Turkish rail-lines going from the Soviet border to just a little bit beyond Erzerum, rail-lines going up from Aleppo as far as Malatva (3 hex SW Erzerum) and the line from Samsun going as far as Sivas (2 hex SE 1 hex E Samsun) as shown on the game-map. But the 1942 map shows not only the Erzerum to Aleppo line completed as shown on the game-map, but also the Erzerum to Ankara link via Sivas completed. That's to say, the Samsun rail-line should continue 1 hex SE 1 hex E from Sivas (the valley) to connect with the existing line.

Suggestions, United Kingdom
• Add Isles of Scilly (marcuswatney).
• A forum member from Scotland was quite annoyed by the rendering of his homeland on the map..
• Surely, Scapa Flow, the base for the main battle fleet had rail supply. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_North_Line there is a railway that ended at Thurso on the coast opposite, with a ferry to the islands and "The line did become strategically important during WW1 and WW2 as part of a supply route for Scapa Flow, Orkney: Jellicoe's Express linked Thurso directly with London (Euston) and Portsmouth". There is probably a case for putting in the rail line from Inverness to Thurso and a crossing arrow Strait from the mainland to Scapa Flow / Orkneys (Mike Fisher).


Suggested for new terrain types :
For MWiF product 2.
Hexside
• Create a "Coral Reef" hexside type. Invasion is impossible across a Coral Reef hexside. Designed for NW Australian coast (Froonp).
• Create a new “Grand Canyon” hexside type. Similar to an Alpine hexside (impassable except by Mountain troops) (Froonp).

Hex
• Create an “Atoll” terrain type. Stacking is 0 land units and 0 air units (except Flying boats when playing Option 8) (Froonp).
• Create a “Shallow Water” terrain type. Invasion would be impossible on coastal hexsides that are only adjacent to Shallow Water (Froonp).


Suggestions for non Europe :
Africa West Suggestions
• Saint Louis is not the capital of Mauritania, Nouakchott (96,8) is since 1960. But during WWII maybe there simply was no capital city (Wikipedia says that 90% of the population was still nomadic in 1960), so keeping Saint Louis may be better (Froonp).

America South - Brazil Suggestions
• Is the Mupuera River missing? (South British Guyana)
• Should the Paru River go up to the Amazons?
• Does rail to Campo Grande from the south really stops at Asuncion (Paraguay)? Confirmed “yes” by Forum members.

Suggestions, Australia
• The Swan River runs south of Perth, not north of it (delatbabel). The port is south of the river and some of the city, so I think its ok if the city is south of the river (Mike Fisher).
• 3 hexes SE of Mackay is a hex with a crossing arrow to an island hex to its E. That hex is where Airlie Beach & Shute Harbour are, and the island hex should contain Cid Harbour. During WWII these were important marshalling areas and supply ports for the Australian and US Navies and should rate minor port status at least (delatbabel).
• Add the contours of Eyre Lake, as RLS entries (Froonp).
• Make Rockhampton a Minor Port (on Rockhampton, it is not right that being inland it was not a port. the fitzroy was a navigable river allowing Rockhampton to function as a port from the mid 19th C, mostly supplies in and cattle out - until the river silted up and the port was transferred to the river mouth (port alma), a process completed in the 1960s. see http://www.rockhampton.qld.gov.au/rccnet/showarticle.aspx?id=9630. there were 70,000 US troops stationed there in WW2 and it was a trans-shipment point to north and south. Rockhampton was a larger port than Mackay and Cairns though. If you have Townsville, cairns and Mackay you should have Rockhampton (Mike Fisher)).
• The Snowy River should probably also lose its furthest inland hex-edge (Mike Fisher).

Suggestions, China
• Rename Peking to Peiping.

Suggestions, India
• Rate Goa as a minor port at least.

Suggestions, Burma
• Make the Delta area south of Rangoon a bit swampy. (trees trees). No, only the very southern tip is swampy (Froonp).
• Modify the Arakan range so that there is a corridor in the mountains through Imphal & Kohima using Alpine hexsides (marcuswatney).

Suggestions, Malaya
• Maybe the Minor Port that is in the Kuala Lumpur hex should be named George Town instead (hex 113,129). Or leave it where it is and say it is Port Dickson (Froonp).

Suggestions, Siam
• Remove Phuket railway (Froonp).

Suggestions, Persia
• Rename Teheran to Tehran (Froonp).

Suggestions, Alaska
• Remove the Oil from Alaska (Froonp).

Suggestions, Manchuria
• Add Antung on the coast & the Korean border (92k or 315k in 1940)
• Add Yingkow 2 hexes SW of Mukden (119k or 181k in 1940)
• Rename the Harbin MIL to Changchun MIL, and make it appear in Changchun.

Suggestions, Russia - Urals & East Urals
• Add Saransk (city between Kazan and Penza, 300k inhabitants). North and very slightly to the east of Penza (along the rail line) and where the rail line meets the north south going side river to Volga (Borger). No, it would be on the European Map (Froonp).

Suggestions, Russia - Urals & East Omsk
• Add Kurgan (W of Petropavlovsk, 335k inhabitants) (Borger). I prefer Petropavlovsk, and I'm not sure we can add 2 new cities (Froonp).
• Add Pavlodar (Northeastern Kazachstan, alongside Irtysh south of Omsk, 4 hexes south east of Omsk, hex 47,103, 300k inhabitants) (Borger). I just added the name (Froonp).

Suggestions, Russia - Urals & East Novosibirsk-Krasnoyarsk
• Add a city west of Novosibirsk, for supply between Novosibirsk & Omsk. Found no cities to add (Froonp). Wife born in Omsk, no city to add east of it (Borger).
• Add Tannu Tuva Territory, in the Sayan Mountains, near Mongolia. This was an independent country at the time (Froonp).

Suggestions, Russia - Urals & East Other
• Add one rail from 35,61 (3 hex N Vologda) to Kotlas (32,73), and from Kotlas (32,73) following the river at first, going through 22,86, following the western slopes of the Urals mountains up to 11,91 (Vorkuta – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorkuta), and then turning to the NW straight to 6,89 (Khabarov – No port here) (1941 map, Look at the World Atlas p36-37) (Froonp).
• Add one rail from Tomsk to the Trans Siberian (1941 map, Look at the World Atlas p36-37) (Froonp).
• Add one rail from Guryev to 51,85, and from there to 48,87 (Orsk) (1941 map, Look at the World Atlas p36-37) (Froonp).
• Add one rail from Karaganda to 58,103 (Balkhash) on Lake Balkhash (1941 map, Look at the World Atlas p36-37) (Froonp).
• Add one rail from Baikonur (55,93) to 54,102 on the previous railway (1941 map, Look at the World Atlas p36-37) (Froonp).

Solomon, Coral Sea, Papua, New Guinea Suggestions
• Northern part of Papua should be a separate Territory named Territory of New Guinea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territory_of_New_Guinea). It goes from 123,170 to 125,175 (125,174 stays Papua) that would include Admiralty Islands, New Ireland, New Britain too (marcuswatney).
• Bougainville should be part of the Territory of New Guinea (marcuswatney).
• Papua : Retain the hex S of the River Fly’s mouth as clear (127,171) and convert the other two to marsh / swamp (127,170 and 126,172) (The three clear hexes at the mouth of the Fly River are inaccurate, even today that area is mostly lowland swamp. At most I would only retain the hex south of the river mouth as clear and convert the other two to marsh/swamp. It is debatable whether the remaining clear hex oughtn't be swamp as well, it would have been mostly swamp in the 40s. You don't want to attract activity to an area that in WW2 was very difficult, unhealthy and remote country (Mike Fisher)).


Pre-1939 Map changes :
Map changes that could be done for a game start that is before S/O 39.
Europe
• Memel was a part of Lithuania until annexed by Germany on 23 March 1939 (it had been annexed by Lithuania in 1923). Since the game includes such features as the Sudetenland, implying a pre-war start, Memel should also be noted as able to change hands.
• Slovakia became an 'independent' country (capital Bratislava) and a German minor ally in March 1939 as Germany invaded Bohemia-Moravia (what is now the Czech Republic): if the Sudetenland warrants a border, so too should Slovakia with Bohemia-Moravia. The northeast hexes of Hungary (Ruthenia) were actually a part of Slovakia until autumn 1938 - at the time of Munich, Slovakia had a border with Romania. So these hexes should be shown as negotiable, just like the Sudetenland.


(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)
Post #: 2
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/3/2008 11:16:03 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
I also wanted to point out that some of these suggestions have already be turned down, and they appear only because they were backed up by good arguments (i.e. Goa port, Peking and Hanko renaming).

Some are ideas from me that I mull over over the time (i.e. Phuket railway -- I think I gonna remove it --, Teheran renaming).

A lot may be missing, as I only began assembling the whole list a couple of months ago. So a lot of turned down suggestions might not be here.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 3
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/3/2008 12:35:41 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22012
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I also wanted to point out that some of these suggestions have already be turned down, and they appear only because they were backed up by good arguments (i.e. Goa port, Peking and Hanko renaming).

Some are ideas from me that I mull over over the time (i.e. Phuket railway -- I think I gonna remove it --, Teheran renaming).

A lot may be missing, as I only began assembling the whole list a couple of months ago. So a lot of turned down suggestions might not be here.

A very impressive list. Thanks.

But other than that the map os perfect , right?

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 4
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/3/2008 3:52:07 PM   
Peter Stauffenberg


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

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Suggestions, Netherlands
• The hex west of Dusseldorf should be Dutch... and yes the rail-line from Dusseldorf to Antwerp really does go through the Netherlands! Note that Aachen is right up against the Dutch border (marcuswatney).


I guess this (good) change suggestion would also require that the resource in this hex is moved inside the new German border so there is no change in production.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 5
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/3/2008 11:07:03 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Suggestions, Netherlands
• The hex west of Dusseldorf should be Dutch... and yes the rail-line from Dusseldorf to Antwerp really does go through the Netherlands! Note that Aachen is right up against the Dutch border (marcuswatney).


I guess this (good) change suggestion would also require that the resource in this hex is moved inside the new German border so there is no change in production.


I've added your remark to my file Borger.

Also, for some suggestions, I have added the name of the person who suggested it, it is not for fame or fortune, it is so that I am able to question the person if I want further info. If reading the suggestions you find some of yours, do not hesitate to tell me, I'll write your name.

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)
Post #: 6
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 2:50:53 PM   
jcprom

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 5/1/2007
Status: offline
Great list! I would suggest splitting it in 2 parts:
-changes having little or no effect on game play, and/or correcting obvious mistakes/omissions,
-other changes.

The first part could be discussed/completed and later submitted for MWiF product 1.

Note: having Mannerheim line on-map typically belongs to part 2 (other changes). To make such a decision, you need to review the status of all fortifications (Siegfried line, German-Polish border line, Metaxas line, Konigsberg, Stalin line, Sebastopol, Leningrad, Tobruk, Gibraltar, Singapore, Maginot line…). Some of them are printed, others are counters, others don’t appear…

Terrain types (MWiF product 2):
-I like the « atoll » and « shallow waters » ideas. Also, some hexes can't be invaded due to other reasons (rocks/cliffs only, large water area just beyond the beach like in SW France or NW Poland…).
-generally, forest hexes represent rough/hills and low mountains. That's all right in continental Europe. However, there are few forests in North Africa (Tunisia...), Spain, Italy, Turkey... Consequently, all hexes are either clear terrain or mountain. I think WiF needs to make a difference between high mountains and low mountains.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 7
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 4:07:06 PM   
marcuswatney

 

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline
I agree that Morocco-Algeria-Tunisia 'feel' too mountainous at the moment.  'Low Mountains' in most games are catered for by the designation 'Rough'.

Since there are concerns about play-balance, these days I am not so worried at the non-appearance of the Mannerheim Line, given the single-hexside approach from Leningrad.  Indeed, it could be argued that the opportunity for the Axis to build a fortification here later in the game gives the USSR a useful motive to attack early, as was done historically.

Patrice, we have also debated shifting the southernmost tip of the Indian/Burmese border (Cox's Bazar), and having Akyab portrayed as swamp.

Quite a few proposals from me have been noted in this thread, but I would like to stress that there are only two which I consider REALLY important, and I would happily see all the others ignored if only we could get those two changed.

The first is the crazy Dutch border (see Post 4).  Ignoring an entire province of the Netherlands (Limburg), including the major city of Maastricht, lowers the whole tone of the game, as it is an error immediately noticeable by any European.  I appreciate that this change will alter 1940 play, but the military reality, in both 1914 and 1940, was that the Belgium/German border was actually rather short (about 80km ... that is to say, shorter than the Luxembourg/German border!), and created a choke point ... which is why the Eben Emael and Liege fortifications were so important.

The second important change is to redraw the Indian/Burmese border so that the Imphal-Kohima corridor (and in particular the plain of Imphal with its extensive airbases) has importance in the game as it had in reality.  This has been discussed extensively in the Burma thread.

(in reply to jcprom)
Post #: 8
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 7:22:19 PM   
Norman42


Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline
A simple review of the Mannerheim Line's history can put that issue to rest.  It was in *no* way a seriously fortified line compared to other on map printed fortifications.  At best it had trenches, log barricades, an anti-tank ditch, barbed wire, some mines on roadways, and machine gun and mortar emplacements that were not much more than log and earth covered pits.

In other words they had pretty much the exact same defence works that every major battlefield had given a few days for the defenders to dig in.  There were no massive concrete works, no heavy emplaced artillery, no "dragons teeth" anti tank obstacles, no deep minefields, no hardened bunkers.

What made it a "line" was the fact that the tenacious Finns refused to budge from it, and the absolutely horrible terrain that made defending it much easier, especially against armored vehicles.  The area was festooned with bogs and ponds, dense thickets of forest, and a single real road (which was demolished).  The fact that the Finns held the Soviet Juggernaut at this line for a long time was not due to the "fortifications", it was due to the Finns themselves and their well planned operations for defending a narrow front versus a larger enemy force.  Think of Leonidas and the 300 Spartans, then add 7 feet of snow.

< Message edited by Norman42 -- 4/4/2008 7:24:34 PM >


_____________________________

-------------

C.L.Norman

(in reply to marcuswatney)
Post #: 9
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 8:01:17 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22012
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jcprom

Great list! I would suggest splitting it in 2 parts:
-changes having little or no effect on game play, and/or correcting obvious mistakes/omissions,
-other changes.

The first part could be discussed/completed and later submitted for MWiF product 1.

Note: having Mannerheim line on-map typically belongs to part 2 (other changes). To make such a decision, you need to review the status of all fortifications (Siegfried line, German-Polish border line, Metaxas line, Konigsberg, Stalin line, Sebastopol, Leningrad, Tobruk, Gibraltar, Singapore, Maginot line…). Some of them are printed, others are counters, others don’t appear…

Terrain types (MWiF product 2):
-I like the « atoll » and « shallow waters » ideas. Also, some hexes can't be invaded due to other reasons (rocks/cliffs only, large water area just beyond the beach like in SW France or NW Poland…).
-generally, forest hexes represent rough/hills and low mountains. That's all right in continental Europe. However, there are few forests in North Africa (Tunisia...), Spain, Italy, Turkey... Consequently, all hexes are either clear terrain or mountain. I think WiF needs to make a difference between high mountains and low mountains.

If you are splitting mountain types into two, how does each of them interact with the rules?

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to jcprom)
Post #: 10
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 8:49:25 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
quote:

ORIGINAL: jcprom
I think WiF needs to make a difference between high mountains and low mountains.

If you are splitting mountain types into two, how does each of them interact with the rules?

I think that we don't want to do that. ALL the map would need to be redone.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 11
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 8:52:49 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

Patrice, we have also debated shifting the southernmost tip of the Indian/Burmese border (Cox's Bazar), and having Akyab portrayed as swamp.

Yes, but I did not necessarily list all the proposals that were turned down.
I'll add it, also adding that I don't think they're warranted.

(in reply to marcuswatney)
Post #: 12
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 9:03:04 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jcprom

Great list! I would suggest splitting it in 2 parts:
-changes having little or no effect on game play, and/or correcting obvious mistakes/omissions,
-other changes.

I disagree because IMO, the changes that have little or no effect on game play and / or that are correcting obvious mistakes / omissions are already done.
The remaining changes are only "other changes", that means that either they are changes that would have too much effect on game play (Dutch border example IMO), or are not proved to correct an obvious mistake / omission (swampy Burma coast for example IMO).

I repeat that I have faith in the original CWiF map design, and I only change it if there are strong evidences that it is wrong.

I've scrutinized the CWiF map for long hours, remember I did the draft coastline drawing for the whole map (Europe excepted) on which the coastlines are based now, and to do that I had to scrutinize the real world maps and compare them to the CWiF map, and I was astonished at the high level of good research that the original map had. I am not going to sweep this out on isolated remarks. This is my opinion.

(in reply to jcprom)
Post #: 13
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 9:07:04 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Quite a few proposals from me have been noted in this thread

Yes, and I would like to apologize for all the other people who have made suggestions and for whom I did not wrote the name.

Originaly, I only kept remarks that I had found interesting, but were turned down for some reason. I wanted to keep them for reference reasons, but at that time I did not care whose idea it was.

When Steve proposed that I do a list, I thought it would be normal to keep the name of the person(s) proposing the idea, and so old ideas don't have the name of the person proposing it (Goa rating as a minor port for example, whose idea was it ?)

(in reply to marcuswatney)
Post #: 14
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 10:30:25 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22012
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Quite a few proposals from me have been noted in this thread

Yes, and I would like to apologize for all the other people who have made suggestions and for whom I did not wrote the name.

Originaly, I only kept remarks that I had found interesting, but were turned down for some reason. I wanted to keep them for reference reasons, but at that time I did not care whose idea it was.

When Steve proposed that I do a list, I thought it would be normal to keep the name of the person(s) proposing the idea, and so old ideas don't have the name of the person proposing it (Goa rating as a minor port for example, whose idea was it ?)

I wouldn't be too concerned about who said what when. You have me down for one item where I was just recollecting what someone else had said. Indeed, it is quite possible that no one knows who suggested what first, and original ideas often mutate into other, better ideas. If you know who first suggested something, then fine. But if you don't, don't worry about it.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 15
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/4/2008 10:57:38 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
Yes, but I wanted to stress out that there is not preference for marcuswatney, and I would not want people to get pissed of that he is cited and not them. It just happen that when I began listing, Marcus was a big poster.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 16
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/5/2008 12:32:43 AM   
jcprom

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 5/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
quote:

ORIGINAL: jcprom
I think WiF needs to make a difference between high mountains and low mountains.

If you are splitting mountain types into two, how does each of them interact with the rules?

I think that we don't want to do that. ALL the map would need to be redone.


It would not be easy, I agree. I suppose "high mountains" would have the same effect as current mountain. "Low mountains" (or "rough") would have a reduced effect. Anyway, it's only an opinion.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 17
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/5/2008 12:39:04 AM   
jcprom

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 5/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: jcprom

Great list! I would suggest splitting it in 2 parts:
-changes having little or no effect on game play, and/or correcting obvious mistakes/omissions,
-other changes.

I disagree because IMO, the changes that have little or no effect on game play and / or that are correcting obvious mistakes / omissions are already done.
The remaining changes are only "other changes", that means that either they are changes that would have too much effect on game play (Dutch border example IMO), or are not proved to correct an obvious mistake / omission (swampy Burma coast for example IMO).


IMHO, Balaton for example is an obvious omission which has little or no effect on game play. It's all right with me if you disagree.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 18
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/5/2008 7:54:55 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3189
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
excellent work to summarize all that, Patrice

I really like the idea of improving the Dneiper and Volga situations. Wasn't the next crossing south of Kiev also the place where the Russians were able to cause massive German casualties in the 1944 retreat due to the bottle-neck nature of the geography? And didn't Dnepropetrovsk have a very important dam/crossing too? I think though, that opening this topic would require re-writing the entire Eastern Front in the game.

(in reply to jcprom)
Post #: 19
RE: Possible changes to the European map - 4/5/2008 9:52:40 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

excellent work to summarize all that, Patrice

I really like the idea of improving the Dneiper and Volga situations. Wasn't the next crossing south of Kiev also the place where the Russians were able to cause massive German casualties in the 1944 retreat due to the bottle-neck nature of the geography? And didn't Dnepropetrovsk have a very important dam/crossing too? I think though, that opening this topic would require re-writing the entire Eastern Front in the game.

Just a note to say that there was lots of barrage work on the Dniepr post WW2, and that looking at Google Earth to have an idea of the River may not be enough.

I'm OK with the volga, because WW2 maps shows it was really huge in places.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 20
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Possible changes to the European map Page: [1]
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

0.426