Modifications to MWiF China Map portion

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Modifications to MWiF China Map portion

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Modifications to MWiF China Map portion

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:14:00 PM

Froonp

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

With Steve�s encouragement I decided to try to do the modifications to the China portion of the MWIF map.�. After having made the modifications to the Scandinavia map (with Nils Ulrik Andresen -- who designed the first version of the modified Scandinavia -- and Claes Insulander -- who did the actual modifications in the CSV files *), I had the graphical tools and knowledge to do it. As I love geography, maps & mapmaking it was a pleasure to hunt down all the China maps I could gather, from the web and from my own atlases.

After a few back and forth communication mails with Nils who commented on my maps modifications (the communication between the two of us for the Scandinavia work was so fine that he agreed on commenting the China map work), we settled down for that version, and Steve told me to show it to the Matrix MWiF Forums for comments.

* Those modifications are not yet incorporated into the playtest MWiF.

Patrice

Post #: 1

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:14:58 PM

Froonp

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

Foreword :
The original MWiF maps are shown as of 23 May 2006
As you may already know if you�ve monitored those forums from the start, there is a supposed to be a problem in China with the new European scale map. The land is very large now (over 6 times more hexes), and there are the same number of units to battle here, so problems might arise.
It was 10 hex rows from Peking to Canton, it is 24 hex rows now.
It was 7 hex columns from Shanghai to Lan Chow, it is 19-20 hex columns now

Reminder of the problem with the MWiF map :
As it is there are not enough cities in China to keep the Chinese Army in supply as they would be on the MWiF map.
Because of this supply problems, the Chinese Army have difficulties establishing a defense in place it could defend in WiF FE, and often risks being surrounded and be put out of supply.
The communists are easier to annihilate in MWiF, because if they defend Si-An, they tend to all get out of supply when it falls, and then all destroyed. Adding new cities in the Communist area is necessary to make it less subject to total annihilation, and make this as hard as in WiF FE.

The unzoom factor (from an email I have from Steve when modifying the Scandinavian map) :
The conversion of the Pacific scaled map to MWIF mean having to address the scale change. The number of hexes increases by a factor. When creating the pacific scaled maps, the original designers had to make a lot of compromises (actually all map makers have that problem). The revisions we are making now gives us the opportunity to provide more detail. Which is also a difficulty, because, by necessity, it means making the MWIF map markedly different from the WIF FE pacific scaled maps.
My general opinion on this is that we should take advantage of the opportunity the finer scale provides and make small improvements. I believe that if we follow the pacific scaled maps precisely/religiously, we will introduce errors that the original designers would not have made if they had had the finer scale to work with. From my programming background I am familiar with the errors that occur when a graphic/picture is compressed and then the compressed file is expanded back to its original size. Any errors from the compression are magnified when the "restored" graphic is viewed. A similar problem would occur here if we followed the pacific scaled maps precisely.

Notes about the modified maps :
In the modified maps I show the 1939 start line just as a reminder of its position, I did not modify it.
I also show the weather lines, for the same reason, and I did not modify them neither.
The maps are given in pieces of less than 200 kb to comply with the Matrix Forums, but you will be able to assemble them in more or less 1 complete map of China if you want. There will be bit missing, places where I did no modifications.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 2

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:16:36 PM

Froonp

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

China North (Communist) - As it is in WiF FE

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 3

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:18:04 PM

Froonp

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

China North (Communist) - As it is in MWiF

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 4

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:19:23 PM

Froonp

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

China North (Communist) - in MWiF, After modifications

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Froonp -- 5/24/2006 8:21:09 PM >

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 5

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:20:55 PM

SurrenderMonkey

Posts: 124
Joined: 10/5/2005
Status: offline

Yikes! That's a big difference. Curious to see how this works out.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 6

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:22:10 PM

Froonp

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

China North (Communist) - Comments

Things added :
Ankang : City. In the mountains south of Si-An, adjacent to the Han Kiang river. Added to provide Supply between Chungking & Si-An. I had to redraw the Han Kiang river in the mountains as it was passing too far away to the north. I redid some Alpine hexsides due to having moved the Han Kiang river. I would have extended the Alpine hexside 1 hexside eastwards if I could, to protect Si-An southern flank.

Sining (modern name Xining) : City. In the mountains west of Lan Chow. Added because it is a modern day Province Capital. It is a not very much populated province, so adding it can be debatable for this reason. Can be made Communist city, to help having the Communist survive, because in MWiF the Communist is much more vulnerable to eradication than in WiF FE (from my playtest experience). Lan Chow as it is in MWiF is changing the game. Adding Sining is a try to make the area less easy to conquer & control for the Japanese.

Baoji : Communist city. Between Si-An and Lan Chow. Added to make the fall of Si-An less catastrophic in MWiF.

Tianshui : Communist city. Between Si-An and Lan Chow. Added to make the fall of Si-An less catastrophic in MWiF.

Tongguan : City. East of Si-An. Added to provide Supply west of Chengchow. The railway from Tai-Yuan is modified to arrive here, because it is this way on the WWII China maps that I have, and because it seems that the WiF FE railway from Tai-Yuan would arrive here if Tongguan was on the map. Putting the railway at Tongguan also helps the Japanese who often find themselves plagued with supply problems when advancing along the Si-An Railway. Having 2 rails arriving near Si-An make it more difficult for Partisans to cut the supply and the reinforcements from coming.

Yinchuan : City. North east of Lan-Chow. Added because it is a modern day Province Capital. It is a not very much populated province and so adding it can be debatable. However, having no railway to or from this city doesn�t make it an extra threat for Japan, and it is a convenient place to add a city to provide some support to Lan-Chow, who is much more exposed in MWiF than in WiF FE. Note that the Chinese Wall is built around this area.

Things considered, but not added :
Adding a city (Yummen / Jiuquan / Ansi), about 6 hexes northwest of Sining, on the trip from Land Chow to Urumchi, but it would be quite useless. Pleasant but useless.

I resisted the temptation of adding the Silk Road, from Lan-Chow westwards.

Paotow (modern name : Baotou) : Northwest of Tai-Yuan, at the end of the railway. I wanted to add it because it is the pre-1947 Capital of Inner Mongolia Chinese Province. I did not add it because it would give the Chinese a starting point they do not have in WiF FE that far north, to flank the Japanese and stay in supply, and because it is a little populated area.

(in reply to SurrenderMonkey)

Post #: 7

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:23:26 PM

Froonp

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

China Coast - in WiF FE.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 8

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:24:43 PM

Froonp

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

China Coast - in MWiF before modifications

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 9

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:28:15 PM

Froonp

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

China Coast - In MWiF after modifications

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 10

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:29:06 PM

Froonp

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

China Coast - Comments

General comments :
The Nanking � Shanghai - Wuhan area. This area was a city battle also on WIF FE maps. The same very high density of cities the WIF FE map showed from Peking - Tay Yuan - Tsing Tao area. I therefore added cities to make that area more of a cities campaign area.

Things added :
Hefei : City. Near Nanking. Added because it is a modern day Province Capital.

Xinhailian (modern name : Lianyungang) : Minor Port on the China Sea. Added to allow the resource point to exit China by the sea without Shanghai nor Tsing-Tao. The resource is on the shore on the WiF FE map and does not need any port to be shipped outside of China if needed. It could be transformed into a city, but I suspect this is a small place as it is not on most maps of China I have. Also added a rail way to it, as it is shown on WWII maps of China I have.

Nanchang : City. East of Chang Sha. Added because it is a modern day Province Capital, and to provide supply near Foochow & Hang Chow, and because Battle of Nanchang takes place here.

Suchow (modern name Suzhou) : City. Between Nanking & Tsin-Nan. Added to provide Supply between Tsi-Nan & Nanking.

Xiangfan : City. Between Chengchow & Wuhan. Added to ease supply in this area west of Wuhan.

Baoding : City. West of Peking. Added because it was the capital of the Hebei province from 1935 to 1958, and for supply reasons.

Terrain feature modified :
I added 2 mountains hexes around Wuhan as my maps warrant them.

Things considered, but not added :
Hankow, just 1 hex northwest of Wuhan across the river, because it is placed on most WWII maps of China that I have, but I read that both cities tend to form a a single Wuhan city, so I did not add it.

A city northwest of Peking on the railroad, but this would add an extra supply source for the Chinese that is not on WiF FE maps to flank Peking by the north.

Questions :
Should more cities be added to the Nanking � Shanghai - Wuhan area and Peking - Tay Yuan - Tsing Tao areas to make them more cities campaign areas ?

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 11

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:30:21 PM

Froonp

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

China South - In WiF FE

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 12

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:31:41 PM

Froonp

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

China South - In MWiF before modifications

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 13

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:33:00 PM

Froonp

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

China South - In MWiF after modifications

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 14

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:33:44 PM

Froonp

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

China South - Comments

Things added :
Chihchiang : City. In the mountains on the Burma Road between Chang-Sha and Kwei Yang. Added to provide Supply between Kwei Yang & Chang-Sha. Operation Alpha also takes place here.

Liuchow (modern name : Liuzhou) : City. Northeast of Nanning, added to provide Supply toward Canton. Note that on China WWII maps that I have, the railway from Canton stops here, and does not link to Nanning. Maybe it was built during the war, but I preferred not to change it. A problem is that the city is placed right where the resource already is. So this make the resource easier to defend. This was corrected by moving the resource 1 hex northwest of the city and adding a rail from it to the city.

Terrain feature modified :
On the WIF FE map Chungking have four river hexsides around it. In MWIF three. Chungking is an important place (capital of China, factories & resources), so I think it should have the same terrain features protecting it. I moved the river a little to have Chung King with 4 river hexsides around it. I could also have moved Chungking 1 hex southeast, and re drawn the river here around the city. That way the hexes behind the river would have been mostly mountains, as in WiF FE. I�m still undecided about this.

Things considered, but not added :
Adding a city south of Chang-Sha, on the Canton - Chang-Sha railway, but wondered if it was necessary because the mountains east of Canton are a supply hole for the Chinese in WiF FE, and should stay a supply hole.

Questions :
I feel that 1 more city could be added, the Chungking / Chengdu area, for defense & supply reasons, but I�m not sure. Comments ?

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 15

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 8:34:26 PM

Froonp

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

Conclusion

Sum up :
21 cities and 1 minor port exist in WiF FE China (10 of these cities are controlled by Japan, so 11 are left to conquer -- of which 2 are very very far).
13 cities and 1 minor port were added to China (3 of these cities are controlled by Japan, so 10 are left to conquer).
It is necessary that the US Entry cost is lowered from 4 to at least 3 to keep some equilibrium here in US Entry. The number of conquerable cities in China has gone from 9 to 19.

Manchuria :
I considered Manchuria for a moment, and concluded that no cities should be added there, as there are not lot more cities that you can see on Manchuria WWII maps.

Waiting for your comments.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 16

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 10:15:42 PM

lomyrin

Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

From having played quite a few complete games of CWiF against capable opponents I have a few comments about the proposed China map modifications:

I have found that in CWiF China is completely conquered or thoroughly lamed about half the time.

While the supply problems for the Chinese are difficult in CWiF's China, so are the Japanese supply situations.

Japan does tend to build more land units early in the game in CWiF versus WiFFE in order to perform a China campaign and Japan also tends to have a larger resource base in CWiF as compared to WiFFE by taking control of Chinese resource hexes. I also feel that as a consequnece the Japanes stance against the USA is a bit stronger in CWIF than in WiFFE.

Increasing the Chinese City count certainly makes it easier for the Chinese to survive and to keep their units in supply. Since these Cities do not offer the Japanes any secondary supply, they are not helped. As a result the power balance in China will shift quite a bit towards the Chinese. One effect of that will undoubtedly be a less formidable Japan against the USA in the Pacific since more Japanese units will be tied down in China, and more units lost there, and fewer resources are likely to be captured by Japan. With double the number of Cities in China that must be die rolled for if they are captured by Japan, a reduction in the US entry roll risk is of course also needed. A reduction to '3', although less than corresponding to the City number increase ratio in the above posts, may still be the right one since fewer Japanese City captures are likely to be a consequence also. If that were not so, then the US entry levels and actions would be skewed.

As always when making changes in the game, unforeseen ripple effects usually also occur, often leading to additional changes to compensate.

I think increasing the Chinese City count is a good way to balance the new map versus the WiFFE map but I am also comvinced that only a few, perhaps 3 or 4 new Cities should be added to the existing map. Adding as many as was proposed in the posts preceeding this one will almost certainly distort the power balance in the Asia/Pacific regions and change the whole game in an unforeseen direction.

Lars

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 17

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 11:05:27 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Conclusion

Sum up :
21 cities and 1 minor port exist in WiF FE China (10 of these cities are controlled by Japan, so 11 are left to conquer -- of which 2 are very very far).
13 cities and 1 minor port were added to China (3 of these cities are controlled by Japan, so 10 are left to conquer).
It is necessary that the US Entry cost is lowered from 4 to at least 3 to keep some equilibrium here in US Entry. The number of conquerable cities in China has gone from 9 to 19.

Manchuria :
I considered Manchuria for a moment, and concluded that no cities should be added there, as there are not lot more cities that you can see on Manchuria WWII maps.

Waiting for your comments.

My comments are as a player here.

The 10 cities in WIF FE that Japan can capture are all worth capturing, for one reason or another. So for a complete conquest of China, looking just at the US Entry costs for taking cities, is .4 * 10 = 4, on average.

Given the 19 cities you propose for the Japanese to capture, the cost would be 5.7, even if you reduce the penalty frmo .4 to .3.

In WIF FE Communist China falls when Lan-Chow falls. Letting it linger on past then is a major change.

Not all the cities you add are necessary for keeping the Chinese in supply when defending forward parts of the line. Indeed, there is a built in assumption that the Chinese HQs are not around.

The collapse of the Communist Chinese as the cities are laid out in CWIF is pretty predictable. Without an HQ, any units defending around Cheng-Chow would be out of supply when that city falls. Regrouping to Si-An would be very difficult with out of supply units. The same thing repeats when Si-An falls. Certainly it would not be unusual for the Japanese to be able to take Cheng-Chow, wipe out the out-of-supply Communist Chinese around Cheng-Chow and then meet only token resistance the rest of the way to Lan-Chow.

My suggested changes to what you propose are:

South China - as is.

China Coast - remove Hefei and Su-Chow. They are not needed for Chinese supply when counterattacking.

North China - remove Baoji, Yinchuan, and Sining. Baoji is not needed for maintaining Chinese supply given the two other new cities.

This reduces the new, conquerable cities to 16. They all would be worthwhile taking for the conquest of China. At .3 per, the cost in US Entry points would be 4.8, which is still a little high. If need be, we could make some of the less important cities cost .2, to make it come out to an even 4 as in WIF FE.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 18

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 11:51:01 PM

lomyrin

Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Conclusion

Sum up :
21 cities and 1 minor port exist in WiF FE China (10 of these cities are controlled by Japan, so 11 are left to conquer -- of which 2 are very very far).
13 cities and 1 minor port were added to China (3 of these cities are controlled by Japan, so 10 are left to conquer).
It is necessary that the US Entry cost is lowered from 4 to at least 3 to keep some equilibrium here in US Entry. The number of conquerable cities in China has gone from 9 to 19.

Manchuria :
I considered Manchuria for a moment, and concluded that no cities should be added there, as there are not lot more cities that you can see on Manchuria WWII maps.

Waiting for your comments.

My comments are as a player here.

The 10 cities in WIF FE that Japan can capture are all worth capturing, for one reason or another. So for a complete conquest of China, looking just at the US Entry costs for taking cities, is .4 * 10 = 4, on average.

Given the 19 cities you propose for the Japanese to capture, the cost would be 5.7, even if you reduce the penalty frmo .4 to .3.

In WIF FE Communist China falls when Lan-Chow falls. Letting it linger on past then is a major change.

Not all the cities you add are necessary for keeping the Chinese in supply when defending forward parts of the line. Indeed, there is a built in assumption that the Chinese HQs are not around.

The collapse of the Communist Chinese as the cities are laid out in CWIF is pretty predictable. Without an HQ, any units defending around Cheng-Chow would be out of supply when that city falls. Regrouping to Si-An would be very difficult with out of supply units. The same thing repeats when Si-An falls. Certainly it would not be unusual for the Japanese to be able to take Cheng-Chow, wipe out the out-of-supply Communist Chinese around Cheng-Chow and then meet only token resistance the rest of the way to Lan-Chow.

My suggested changes to what you propose are:

South China - as is.

China Coast - remove Hefei and Su-Chow. They are not needed for Chinese supply when counterattacking.

North China - remove Baoji, Yinchuan, and Sining. Baoji is not needed for maintaining Chinese supply given the two other new cities.

This reduces the new, conquerable cities to 16. They all would be worthwhile taking for the conquest of China. At .3 per, the cost in US Entry points would be 4.8, which is still a little high. If need be, we could make some of the less important cities cost .2, to make it come out to an even 4 as in WIF FE.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 19

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/24/2006 11:57:03 PM

lomyrin

Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

Sorry, I do not seem to be able to grab sections of text and quote without a false send of the whole thing...

The the fall of Commmunist China: typically Cheng Chow would only be defended by Nationalist units - The ChungKing Mil and perhaps also the Kunming Mil unit. The Communists wold be grouped in the mountains near Si-An with the Mao HQ very near Si An.
Both the Communist Mil units would be placed to take the first shot from the Japanese after they have taken Cheng CHow.

This way the Communists usually hold out and get strong enough by reinforcements to last at least until mid or late 40.
If the Japanes go allout for the Commies, the Nationalists have time to get into good defensive postions with supply.

Lars

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 20

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 3:44:46 AM

Mziln

Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

On your WiF map Wuhan is on the north bank at the juncture of the Han Kiang and Yangtze rivers.

On your MWiF/CWiF map it is on the south side.

Most maps of Wuhan (on the internet) show the majority of the city on the north side of the rivers.

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 21

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 8:13:49 AM

c92nichj

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

quote:

From having played quite a few complete games of CWiF against capable opponents I have a few comments about the proposed China map modifications:

I have found that in CWiF China is completely conquered or thoroughly lamed about half the time.

While the supply problems for the Chinese are difficult in CWiF's China, so are the Japanese supply situations.

Been posting this before but will repeat anyhow. I have been playing a fair amount of CWIF games and also in my games China have been wiped out frequently. However the japaneese supply situation is as bad as the chineese one, I have seen my opponent advance building japaneese HQ's to be able to perform the landcampaign.

With the old CWIF map Japans main goal was to kill or subdue China before getting to war with the wallies else he would not have any HQ's or troops to fight USA.

When Japan fails to kill off china, china will get on the advance and can just simply walk around japan and threaten to put her out of supply. As any defence on this type of map is to be mobile japan cannot afford to perform as many Naval and combined actions but need to take landactions to defend in China.

Overall I think that the changes proposed will severely limit the Japaneese option of performing a succesful game.

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 22

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 12:03:32 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln
On your WiF map Wuhan is on the north bank at the juncture of the Han Kiang and Yangtze rivers.
On your MWiF/CWiF map it is on the south side.
Most maps of Wuhan (on the internet) show the majority of the city on the north side of the rivers.

Wuhan was already on the MWiF Map when modified it. I remarked that the original cartographer (Michael Fisher) had made a pretty accurate map in most areas. Sure, there were areas that were less accurate than others, and areas less close to the WiF FE. So his work has to be considered with respect from my point of view.

Wuhan in reality is a metropolitan area consisting of three parts - Wuchang, Hankou, and Hanyang, commonly called the "Three Towns of Wuhan" (hence the name "Wuhan", combining "Wu" from the first city and "Han" from the other two).
(taken from the Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan) (See also http://english.wh.gov.cn/ where a map is provided -- long java-thing to load).

The nowadays Wuhan seems to be situated more on the north bank than on the south bank (http://www.maps-of-china.com/wuhan-ow.shtml). But what about the 1940 one ?

On most WWII maps of China I have, the city shown is Hankow (Hankou), not Wuhan, and it is shown on the north bank.
Source for WWII maps : http://www.historylink101.com/1/world_war_II/maps.htm
There is even a 1920-1950 China map who show the 3 cities.

My approach when I made the modifications to the China portion of the map was to be minimalist and to try not to modify already existing features. That's why I did not change Wuhan position. I had added Hankow on the north bank for a while, but deleted it when I learned that Hankow was part of Wuhan.

Maybe I would put Hankow back again on the north banks ?
Or simply as you say, put Wuhan on the north bank, as it is on the WiF FE map too.

I'll wait further comments on this to change it.

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 23

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 12:18:49 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

quote:

From having played quite a few complete games of CWiF against capable opponents I have a few comments about the proposed China map modifications:

I have found that in CWiF China is completely conquered or thoroughly lamed about half the time.

While the supply problems for the Chinese are difficult in CWiF's China, so are the Japanese supply situations.

Been posting this before but will repeat anyhow. I have been playing a fair amount of CWIF games and also in my games China have been wiped out frequently. However the japaneese supply situation is as bad as the chineese one, I have seen my opponent advance building japaneese HQ's to be able to perform the landcampaign.

With the old CWIF map Japans main goal was to kill or subdue China before getting to war with the wallies else he would not have any HQ's or troops to fight USA.

When Japan fails to kill off china, china will get on the advance and can just simply walk around japan and threaten to put her out of supply. As any defence on this type of map is to be mobile japan cannot afford to perform as many Naval and combined actions but need to take landactions to defend in China.

Overall I think that the changes proposed will severely limit the Japaneese option of performing a succesful game.

The previous discussions about the Play balance in China (See that thread -- http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=903208) concluded that one of the solutions to adopt to help having a China campaign more balanced was to add cities to the China portion of the map.

I just did this, and I'm looking for comments about which city to add, about whether I added too much or not enough (and which ones to add or not). Comments about the original WMiF/CWiF map features are welcomed too, such as Wuhan position off the Yangtzee from Mzlin, and the modification of the river around Chungking from Nils (that I had prior to post this thread).

I'm sorry I'm not sure to understand fully your comment c92nichj. Are you arguing that adding cities to the China map would not be good ? I was not one of the more convincted that the CWiF/MWiF map was wrong in China, but having played it too, I'm sure those supply holes are not good for the Chinese, not good and not realistic neither, so adding cities to China is a must if only on this regards.

(in reply to c92nichj)

Post #: 24

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 12:31:38 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

My suggested changes to what you propose are:
South China - as is.

I did not change it a lot anyway.

quote:

China Coast - remove Hefei and Su-Chow. They are not needed for Chinese supply when counterattacking.

The main reason to add Hefei & Suchow (why do you spell it Su-Chow ?) were to give back the map the "City battle" feature that the WiF FE maps had.
The coast has a lot of cities, and on the WiF FE map there is nearly 1 city in each hex you want to advance. Adding those was to make the area more like this, you see ?
Moreover those cities are already conquered by Japan, so they do not add an US Entry roll.

quote:

North China - remove Baoji, Yinchuan, and Sining. Baoji is not needed for maintaining Chinese supply given the two other new cities.

This reduces the new, conquerable cities to 16. They all would be worthwhile taking for the conquest of China. At .3 per, the cost in US Entry points would be 4.8, which is still a little high. If need be, we could make some of the less important cities cost .2, to make it come out to an even 4 as in WIF FE.

I added Baoji feeling that it was maybe too much (with Tianshui).
Nils also asked me to remove Sining & Yinchuan before I post this to this thread, so I believe you must be right the both of you.
It removing both, I will then modifiy the river around Lan-Chow to cover it on 3 sides as it is on the WiF FE maps.
Would you agree ?

I noted down your proposals.
I'll wait further forum members comment before making changes, is this OK ?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 25

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 3:15:38 PM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

Some questions, hints and thoughts:

1. What is the main criteria for placing cities on the map: "strategic value" (as seen in the light of future game situations) or contemporary significance (population numbers, economic values)? Cities like Baoji at that time were really small places, relatively speaking.

2. Anybody seen the quite detailed, huge "railay, highway and aviation map" in: Tang Leang-Li (ed.) Reconstruction in China, Shanghai 1935, China United Press. According to it, for instance: there was no Railway from Xian to Lanzhou (not even planned), just a "highway" and an "airway".

3. Please be careful with chinese city names. You are using at least 2-3 different transcription systems for Chinese characters: modern post-49 Pinyin (Baoji) and different sorts Wade-Giles (Nanking, Nan-King. Baoji would be Pao-Chi). Unify it: Either delete all "-", or use them uniformly between the Syllables Shang-Hai. Better delete them. And: World War 2 Peking ("Nothern Capital") schould be Peiping ("Nothern Peace").

4. Well: Chinese Communists and cities... They were the ones in WW2 who were the least dependant on "supply cites", because they were using grass-root manufactering and captured weapons for their regular troops. One would need far more complex rules, to simulate this.

Regards

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 26

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 3:39:15 PM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

Depends on criteria: little Chengchow should be deleted for the far more important provincial capital Kaifeng (just the hex right of Chengchow, at the railway line).

The distance between Nanking and Shanghai seems to be too long.

The rail between Hangchow and Nanchang was not completed (1935), also the one Changsha - Canton. Not sure about 1939.

The Rail between Nanchang and Changsha was not even projected in 1935.

There should be a "highway" from Chengtu-Chongking-Kweiyang. But not one from Kweiyang to Changsha. The route Kweiyang - Kunming is debatable, because it was built, as much infrastructure in Yunnan and Sichuan Provinces in wartime. Much of the traffic was by river.

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 27

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 3:53:33 PM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

From Nanning to Changsha there should be no railway, just some sort of "Highway".

There should also be a "Highway" from Nanning to Canton.

The rail line Hanoi-Nanning should end just before Nanning. And be exchanged by Highway.

Perhaps one should delete all the highways in China anyway. Better not to substitute them by railway, as sometimes has been done in wif maps. Long distance transportation in China WAS a mess. But then the Japanese would get problems with transporting ressources by land. So at least delete most of the connections between Inland provinces (Yunnan and Sichuan) and costal China. Provincial modernization in KMT-Hinterland just slowly started bout 1935 as ressource and armament centre and as Chinese "Alpen fortress".

Regards

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 28

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 3:58:09 PM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

and pardon: I ment Chungking (Chongqing) and not Chongking

Regards

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 29

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 5/25/2006 5:10:00 PM

Froonp

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

Wosung, you seem well aware of China during WWII, I'm happy someone like you is around to provide help.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung

Some questions, hints and thoughts:

1. What is the main criteria for placing cities on the map: "strategic value" (as seen in the light of future game situations) or contemporary significance (population numbers, economic values)? Cities like Baoji at that time were really small places, relatively speaking.

For the Chinese controlled areas I used WWII campaign maps I downloaded from the web (there http://www.historylink101.com/1/world_war_II/maps.htm for example), and WWII campaign maps I found in my atlases, and added cities where I found that the Chinese would need supply. There are places on the WiF FE maps where the Chinese can't be put out of supply, and on those same places on the MWiF maps they could have been. I added cities in those places. Those cities added for supply reasons are denoted as such on my comments posts.
For Baoji, I was suggested to add either Baoji or Tianshui, and I added both, so that future comments would allow me to choose which one to keep.
For the moment, the comments I gathered lead me to think I should delete Baoji and keep the other.

quote:

2. Anybody seen the quite detailed, huge "railay, highway and aviation map" in: Tang Leang-Li (ed.) Reconstruction in China, Shanghai 1935, China United Press. According to it, for instance: there was no Railway from Xian to Lanzhou (not even planned), just a "highway" and an "airway".

Don't know this book.

quote:

3. Please be careful with chinese city names. You are using at least 2-3 different transcription systems for Chinese characters: modern post-49 Pinyin (Baoji) and different sorts Wade-Giles (Nanking, Nan-King. Baoji would be Pao-Chi). Unify it: Either delete all "-", or use them uniformly between the Syllables Shang-Hai. Better delete them. And: World War 2 Peking ("Nothern Capital") schould be Peiping ("Nothern Peace").

In fact, I did not want to change the things that are coming from the WiF FE maps.
It is a game design decision to make MWiF a computer version of WiF FE as close as possible.
Anyway, for the new cities, I would be very happy to add the names as they were in 40-45, and as uniformely as possible, unfortunately it is very hard to find them.
Maybe you can provide me for new names for the added cities ?
The added cities are those whose name is in blue in the maps I uploaded.
The black cities I won't change (they are those inherited from the WiF FE maps), I'll leave this to Steve to decide.

quote:

4. Well: Chinese Communists and cities... They were the ones in WW2 who were the least dependant on "supply cites", because they were using grass-root manufactering and captured weapons for their regular troops. One would need far more complex rules, to simulate this.

Well, unfortunately, the Communist army in WiF FE is like any other regular Army. It needs supply frm primary sources.
Anyway, WiF game experience shows that the regular Communist army receive support from the Partisans who appear in China. Those partisans are considered Communists, and cooperate with the Communist regular Army. Those partisans do not need supply, they are always considered in supply.
So in the latest part of the game, the Communist army is composed of a part of regulare Army and a part of Partisan Army.

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 30