RE: 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

RE: 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 >> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion

Page: << < prev 11 12 [13] 14 15 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 1:05:27 AM

trees trees

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

here you go Patrice, I went through the whole list. A couple notes -

I am fine with however things fall on US entry. I suspect there were mini-Nankings going on all over the Chinese countryside, which was also crawling with American missionaries. The infamous incident in Nanking made a difference, but so did missionary reports. Rolling for each city is a simple way to simulate this.

As I mentioned I hope to one day work on mods to China using the provincial boundaries. I hate to ask for anything but a toggled on/off view of the provincial boundaries would be highly educational. The provincial structure was important to China from what I can tell and many histories of the country reference areas by province more than by capitals. Might it be a good idea to make all provincial capitals a city on the map?

Note towards the end of the list comments on the ports along the SE coast. Should be easy to sync these with history.

Ankang no (already isolated by physical geography)
Ningsia no (looks easy to cut-off)
Sining no (again inaccessible to rest of China)
Tianshui yes (looks hard to isolate)
Tungkwan yes (ditto; strategic location)
Yennan yes (for historical flavor; keep Si-an Nationalist too)
Paochi no (Tianshui and Si-an are plenty here)
Paotow no (nearly yes due to Yellow River access, but ADG voted no a long time ago)
Kweisui no (see above; maybe yes.5 or no.5; maybe one of the two cities here would be good; probably Paotow best)

Anking no (important river port I would think, but how hard is it to interdict, especially with control of the air?)
Kaifeng yes (also good links next door. I seem to recall this one on rudimentary China maps)
Nanchang yes (meet me at the junction)
Nanyang no (if it was more of a crossroads, OK)
Paoting no (hex SW looks more important)
Suchow yes (you know what I'm thinking by now)
Wuhsing no (if important wouldn't it have made the history books a bit more? especially compared to it's neighbors)

Chefoo yes (Tsingtao is what counts in this area, first thought no. but I think an ADG original. These mountains are the part of China I very much want to visit.)
Tsingkow yes (a railroad must lead to a usable port)

Hofei no (it was all about Nanking for a while)
Siangfan no (almost every rail hex could actually have a city in it)

Hangchow no port (going with original ADG here)
Wuhan yes move (sounds extremely complicated to model any way you do it)
Macao no city (for once the decision should be based on tactical military topography - would it be hard for an attacker to take?)

Chinkiang no (even without knowing where it is, if you can't recall would it've been that important?)
Ichang no (another Yangtze port? probably the river gateway to Chungking? I seem to recall from maps and readings. perhaps easy to isolate. the Japanese are doomed.)
Kalgan no (see Chinkiang comment, unless any of these are provincial capitals)
Ningpo no "
Shasi no "
Weihaiwei no "
Wuhu no "

Amoy yes (Japanese navy enclave in WWII I think. need some start lines around some of these ports?)
Pakhoi yes (if an historical port on the scale of say the French channel ports. not just to make attacking Nanning easier)
Swatow yes (see Amoy, also below)

Liuchow no (did you all vote on these to put a city every four hexes so the Chinese always have supply?)
Kwangchowan no

Chungking move ??? ("the cliffs of Chungking" sticks in my head from a book. sounds tough.)
Kunming move yes (I trust you did your homework)

Hengyang no (again going with ADG here)
Kiukiang no (see Kalgan to Wuhu comment above)
Wansien no "
Wuchow no "

Dianquan no (isn't this where Amoy is? Make all the little enclaves along here that the IJN actually took over into minor ports, they must have had their reasons. ignore the rest).

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 361

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 1:17:53 AM

wosung

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

Patrice, first let me say thank you for all that book-keeping democracy needs!!!

Want to add my vote for:

New Minor ports
All these were treaty ports and as such strategically important
Chefoo (yes, hey man, Confucius was born there!)

Wenchow (yes)

Existing cities modified
Hangchow becoming minor port yes

Cities proposed (not on the map)
Ichang (yes)
Kalgan (yes)
Ningpo (yes)
Weihaiwei (yes, biggest city on Shantung peninsular)

New minor ports
All these were treaty ports and as such strategically important.
Be aware that Amoy and Swatow were Japanese occupied bridgeheads from May/June 1938 onwards. Not sure about Pakhoi yet.
Amoy yes
Pakhoi yes
Swatow yes

Addendum:
If it's spelled Foochow, it's also spelled Soochow.
As you know was old Hankow city part of greater Wuhan. To avoid confusion with Hangchow perhaps we better should stick with Wuhan.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 362

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 1:19:33 AM

lomyrin

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

True, but Macao is not likely to become a problem for just about anyone and it might be of value for extra plane basings by the Allies in the later war.

Lars

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 363

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 1:24:05 AM

wosung

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

True, but Macao is not likely to become a problem for just about anyone and it might be of value for extra plane basings by the Allies in the later war.

Lars

But only if Portugal is in Allied camp.

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 364

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 2:55:30 AM

Incy

Posts: 336
Joined: 10/25/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees
I'm not completely convinced the Chinese need more cities, even on defense. If you want to defend that far from your bases, that is a risk you take. Chiang didn't take that risk. It's not too unlike WiFFe ... you can start out defending in the mountains, or you can come down to the plains and try and play. There are pluses and minuses.

The point isn't wether to fight in the plains or not. The point is that if China sets up a defence in and around a city (Sian is a good example), all the chinese units in the area will usually be hopelessly out of supply if that city falls. The cities used to be (in cwif) so far apart that it didn't really matter where china makes a stand, once it loses the city whatever troops that were holding the flanks, etc are typically 6-7 hexes or more away from the nearest supply source, which basically means they're dead.

China has a similar problem if it should decide that a line has become untenable and want to withdraw to a tenable line supplied from the next rearwards city. When falling back, the slow chinese typically have to run a long stretch oos before reaching the next area with supply.

Also, I see many people wote against several new rearward communist cities that are far away from the front/in areas where Japan would not want to advance. This leaves the communist without any good areas to fall back to if things go bad and gives Japan a very good chance to knock out the communists by taking only a few key cities. I think knocking out the communists in this way is very silly, unhistorical and bad for playbalance. Communist china didn't really depend that much on cities and had a proven track record of relocating and regrouping to some distant rear area. If things go bad for the communists I think they should have the option to regroup to some remote rear area. Japan will still have taken their production centres and have them cornered off and under control in some insignificant rear area. Remember, Sining , etc is NO help to a communist china that does well, it's sole real game effect is as a sanctuary for a communist china that is loosing bad.

More cities are a gift to the poor (i.e. the looser/defender), if you take from the poor and give to the rich it will make for a much more unbalanced game where things will either go very well or very bad.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 365

RE: Crazy Idea - 6/8/2006 4:50:33 AM

JagdFlanker

Posts: 689
Joined: 7/26/2003
From: Halifax, Canada
Status: offline

from an inexperienced outsider off-centre simple point of view, instead of adding (more than some?) cities a possible easy solution to chinese supply might be to double their supply range from cities from 5 to 10 hexes (or any preferred #), mabe only for inf corps/div's, and mabe only if in an "ORIGINAL" chinese territory - the chinese likely needed the by far least supplies for their army of all the major powers since they didn't need much/any fuel. i would guess that all a chinese force would REALLY need is food which i'm sure they could get off the land/locally. just throwing it out for fun!

(in reply to Incy)

Post #: 366

RE: Crazy Idea - 6/8/2006 6:50:51 AM

trees trees

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

Regarding Sining, I thought about that one for some time because of the possibility of the Communists needing it. But in WiF you can just have the Communists take over another city if Lan-Chow is seriously threatened, most commonly Cheng-Tu (send a Division that way for insurance on the big map); if you lose Cheng-Tu it's probably all over in China anyway. i guess you could put Sining on the map but it would make little difference. If the Japanese took Lan-Chow they would just screen it while they drove on Cheng-Tu.

And I did vote for Tianshui, because of it's logistical line to Lan-Chow behind it that would be hard to flank. I also voted for Yennan, against that same logic, more because it was the Communist base historically, and also because they probably didn't actually need a base in the real war, though they do in WiF. I doubt the Japanese would ever take Yennan, there is more profit to be had elsewhere. They could do it, and it would secure their flank for a drive on Lan-Chow, but it would most likely eat up their time available to drive on Lan-Chow. This would eliminate any threat to Tai-Yuan for them though, so perhaps it would be a good play after all. But the Communists would still exist.

I realize that units on the flank of a city that falls becoming out of supply can be a problem. But you could also say that this is the job of the HQ units, they could be halfway to the next city back to supply the retreat. Advance planning of the campaign comes into play. If it were Chiang's campaign, the retreat would be the campaign. Now if there were up to a dozen Japanese divisions, backed by ATRs, chasing the retreat, I could see where that would be a problem.

(I think without Chihkiang I would just park the Chiang HQ in the woods hex four hexes SE of Chungking).

Now if the Communists are still given Si-An, losing it with Yennan and Tianshui in the neighborhood wouldn't be a problem. If we go back to reality and keep the Communists north of the Yellow river (and move the Si-An MIL to Yennan), then they hold the north flank of Si-An, quite solidly, and the Nationalists have to defend the city. In this case I would put a strong force in Si-An and two weak units in the flank to the SW, which you would never lose and a two-hex assault on Si-An would still not be a sure thing for the Japanese. If you lose Si-An the flank force would be out of supply and out of luck if the Communists held Tianshui, but then I would suggest that such a force would have been historically as well. Perhaps the Chiang or Stilwell HQs could supply a retreat here, but they would probably be busy doing that elsewhere. (I am just realizing that perhaps one reason the Japanese never took Si-An in WWII was Chiang's best units were there holding the Yellow river line against the Communists. No need for the Japanese to stir up those forces.)

I am also still not quite convinced Japan can reach the farthest corners of China. Starting in Canton and Wuhan, with the terrain and weather in front of them (not to mention the Nationalist army), and the # of impulses available before the IJN starts eating them up in mid-41 or so, China should be able to hold out in front of them until the partisans start appearing behind the Japanese. Hopefully the Chinese player will be smart enough not to fight them on the beaches, but your average wargamer likes to fight them in the forests, on the river lines, on the rail lines, in the hills, and then in the mountains; i.e. many players stay in contact with the Japanese. The artillery opens up, the bombers arrive, their pieces flip over, and they are doomed. But that is their choice. Another additional leveler in China@Euro scale should be an existing optional, HQ Movement, but many players resist that one so far because it is rather new and wargamers just don't like logistical restraints on their cardboard or pixelated pieces. Again I don't think the game should be balanced on the map, but without changing rules it is a necessary concern here. Whether a city can fill the functions that a city performs in WiF should be the standard to make the decision.

One thing I would not do is boost the Chinese logistical capabilities. It is probably overrated as it is now. Supply is about ammunition much more than food; bullets don't grow on trees nor can they be scavenged from the countryside. A lot of China's ammunition arrived via Hanoi, Rangoon, and Calcutta.

Well it has defintely been fun playing WiF in my head thinking about these issues the last few days.

A final quick map note: there could be a lot more desert mountain hexes in Tibet and north China but I wouldn't spend much time on that.

(in reply to JagdFlanker)

Post #: 367

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 9:16:34 AM

Froonp

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

quote:

Chinkiang no (even without knowing where it is, if you can't recall would it've been that important?)

I don't know where it is because it was proposed by Wosung who seems very learned in China things. HE porposed a list of extra cities, that I took into account for, if the need of an extra city arrived in the future.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 368

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 9:22:31 AM

Froonp

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

quote:

Also, I see many people wote against several new rearward communist cities that are far away from the front/in areas where Japan would not want to advance. This leaves the communist without any good areas to fall back to if things go bad and gives Japan a very good chance to knock out the communists by taking only a few key cities. I think knocking out the communists in this way is very silly, unhistorical and bad for playbalance. Communist china didn't really depend that much on cities and had a proven track record of relocating and regrouping to some distant rear area. If things go bad for the communists I think they should have the option to regroup to some remote rear area. Japan will still have taken their production centres and have them cornered off and under control in some insignificant rear area. Remember, Sining , etc is NO help to a communist china that does well, it's sole real game effect is as a sanctuary for a communist china that is loosing bad.

I agree.
It helps also convey the idea that Communists needed no cities to survive. The no cities in questions can be Sinning, Yennan, Anking & Ningsia.
That is that they will survive when Sian is lost, as Incy Pointed out.

(in reply to Incy)

Post #: 369

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 9:26:43 AM

Froonp

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

quote:

The point isn't wether to fight in the plains or not. The point is that if China sets up a defence in and around a city (Sian is a good example), all the chinese units in the area will usually be hopelessly out of supply if that city falls. The cities used to be (in cwif) so far apart that it didn't really matter where china makes a stand, once it loses the city whatever troops that were holding the flanks, etc are typically 6-7 hexes or more away from the nearest supply source, which basically means they're dead.

That's it.

On the WiF FE map, there are places in the mountains that are in supply from Chungking or from Lanchow or from Chengtu, so that Sian or Changsha or Kweiyang can fall without the units around them being out of supply and lost.

On the MWiF maps those areas are so much far in the west that they cannot put units in supply in the mountains, thus the extra cities. Even a defenses with an HQ will be lost as the rail will be cut and he won't trace neither to a supply source.

What is said here was experienced during CWiF playtest (with an unmodified China map).

(in reply to Incy)

Post #: 370

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 10:40:02 AM

wosung

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

Chinkiang no (even without knowing where it is, if you can't recall would it've been that important?)

I don't know where it is because it was proposed by Wosung who seems very learned in China things. HE porposed a list of extra cities, that I took into account for, if the need of an extra city arrived in the future.

I mentioned Chinkiang (1 Hex NE of Nanking, Treaty Port, in 1930s 200k population) as an alternative additional City in the Nanking Shanghai area.* But I can perfectly live with Wuhsing.

* Data from Maritime Customs estimate 1931, in: Woodhead (ed.), The China Yearbook 1934, Shanghai 1934,p. 3.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 371

RE: Crazy Idea - 6/8/2006 12:11:07 PM

wosung

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

In NW-China WIF locations and setup don't match historical setting in 1939:

1. Communist forces should be strongly concentrated around Yennan, then the only Communist held City on map (8th Route Army).

2. Lanchow should be held by Nationalist forces (perhaps pro nationalist Warlord).

3. Sian should be held by Nationalist 8th Field Army (not by Communists, and not by Warlord Yen Hsi-shan, as I previously stated).

4. In 1939 should be little motivation for Japanese forces to go after Communists.

5. Also there should be little motivation for Japanese player for offensive action in NW for ecconomical reasons. Until now this area is one of the poorest parts of China.

6. In MWIF there should be Partisans on map from the start on (in 1939). remember Sino-Japanese war started in 1937. Quite early on there were Partisan areas in:

-Shansi-Chahar-Hopeh area (mountains west of Peking)
-In Shandong (around Tsinan)
-In Kiangsu, Anhwei, Chekiang, Province, especially in Kiangsi (NE of Nanchang): the New 4th Army

About Yennan:
It was the capital of the biggest, most important CCP Base Area in WW2, the Shaan/Gan/Ning area (Shaansi, Gansu, Ningsia area). Mao Tse-tung and party central commitee resided there in the war (Zhou En-lai was in Chungking as liason-chef). Ammunition manufatories were located in Yennan. Cadre universities were located there. The progressive intelligezia from whole China went there. The 1942 rectification campaigns took place there.

Yennan was overall centre of CCP - because it also was a marginal place, were no enemey had a real motivation to go, when there were other things to do. This was the result of the Long March, not a glorious propaganda tour through China, but a plain flight, escape.

About Lanchow:
After playing around with CWIF I thought, that Lanchow is Communist at set-up.
Problem is: It seems to be wrong, according to most sources, it should be national Chinese.

1. John Keegan (ed.), Times Atlas of Second World War, p. 34-35, 144-145 (depends on edition)

2. I.C.B. Dear, The Oxford Companion to the Second World War, p. 218, map

say so.

3. And in Barbara Tuchman's book about Stillwell, there are hints about him sent for inspection of Soviet Russian war materiel to Lanchow by Roosevelt (Register: Entry "Lanchow" for the pages, because I've a non-English edition).

Lanchow was the chief entry "port" for Soviet Russian war material since 1938. Even SU fighter sqadrons were stationed there (googel it out). Tuchman doesn't state, Lanchow was Nationalist or Communits Chinese. But the point is: SU mainly supported the military speeking seemingly stronger National Chinese to engage Japanese, not the CCP. (Realpolitik instead of ideoloy).

I today even read an George Marshall to Roosevelt quotation online, about Lanchow being the only (farthest) place in North Western China, with Nationalist Chinese Influence (sorry can't find web adress). Apart from that there was a regional warlord around Lanchow, and yes they had a shorttime CCP uprising there in 1936.

Lanchow had for a time some importance as Sovietrussian - National Chinese lend lease "port". There were no big resources around. It was a marginal place.

Additionaly Gansu Province, of which Lanchow was the provincial capital, had quite a strong Chinese muslim population (known as Hui zu). Its was quite independant minded (anti-chinese rebellions in 19th century) and warlike (Nationalist Chinese minister of war, Ho Ying-chin (He Yingqin) was a Hui himself AFIK). And there were muslim militia troops in Gansu.

About Sian:

In WW2 it was Headquarter of 8th Field army under Hu Tsung-nan. He was ex-Whampoa Military student, and therefor a close buddy of Chiang Kaishek. In Sian Hu Tsung-nan worked closley with Tai Li, another Huangpu buddy, then chief of Chinese secret police. There mission (aside from holding Sian) was to put Communist forces under quarantaine. 8th Field Army was a good equipped 400.000 men force. But it was neither best equipped nor only Nationalist force on innerchinese or anticommunist police duty.

Oxford Companion on WW2, p. 230.
Tuchman, Stillwell, see: "Sian" in index.
C'hi Hsi-Sheng, The military dimension 1942-45,in: Hsiung and Levine (ed.) Chinese bitter Victory: the war with Japan, 1937-1945, p. 175

About Warlord Yen Hsi-shan

He was veteran warlord of Shansi province (capital: Taiyuan), not Shensi province (capital Sian). I confused this one. After the loss of Taiyuan 1938 he managed to hold an undecided position between Japan, Nationalists and Communists. In WIF he would be situated between Taiyuan and Sian. But since there's no city between them, he probably won't be part of the game.

Wu T'ian-wei, Contending political forces, in: Hsiung and Levine (ed.) Chinese bitter Victory: the war with Japan, 1937-1945, p. 63.

About Communist partisan areas

Wu T'ian-wei, The Chinese Communist movement, in: Hsiung and Levine (ed.) Chinese bitter Victory: the war with Japan, 1937-1945, p. 79-106.
Johnathan D. Spence China's way into medernity (I hope this is the English title), p- 551-553.

Regards

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 372

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 2:04:16 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

I mentioned Chinkiang (1 Hex NE of Nanking, Treaty Port, in 1930s 200k population) as an alternative additional City in the Nanking Shanghai area.* But I can perfectly live with Wuhsing.

* Data from Maritime Customs estimate 1931, in: Woodhead (ed.), The China Yearbook 1934, Shanghai 1934,p. 3.

I put Wuhsing on the map because it was said that there were 3 cities in the area east of Shanghai, and that it would be well represented by at least one of the 3. I thing it was Incy. So I choose Wuhsing. What is the population of Wuhsing ?

About Chinkiang, it was part of your (welcomed) proposals for new cities, that I keep on reserve.
You had proposed a bunch of others :

Kiukiang (80k)
Ningpo (218k)
Shasi (113k)
Wansien (201k)
Weihaiwei (390k)
Wuchow (90k)
Wuhu (135k)

Could you tell me for those the place where it shuold lie on the map. And tell me if they are Treaty Ports too.

Also, you proposed cities for Manchuria :

Aigun (38k)
Antung (91k)
Chengteh (Pop ?)
Hsingan (920k)
Hunchun (39k)
Kirin (Pop ?)
Newchwang (106k)
Tsitsihar / Lungkiang (Pop ?)

Could you tell me where they are relatively to existing cities (bearing and km are ok for me) ?
Also, while we are at it, what would be the population of Nomohan in Manchuria ?

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 373

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 2:50:38 PM

wosung

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

Sorry, no population data on the questioned cities is available to me. Most statistics present provincial, not urban population. I grabbed, what I could.

I don't have direct access to China Maritime Customs (CMC) statistical data (e.g. Archive ducuments etc.). Sometimes parts of their statistics about city population are dispersedly quoted in Newspapers and Handbooks of the 1930s (China Handbook, North China Herald, Ostasiatische Rundschau, Shenbao).

Because CMC was a Sino-Western org. and because foreign press was written for Westerners, these sources heavily concentrated on treaty port matters, where the Westerners and Japanese lived and traded under privileged conditions, they enforced in 19th Century.

That means Chinkiang perhaps was (or even: had been) more important for Sino-Foreign relations than Wuhsing, but not, that it was per se the bigger city.

For Manchuria and the border regions up there it's even more complicated. Manchuria in WW2 was under Japanese Control. The border regions like Suiyuan province were quite independant or Japanese. That means less data. I don't have access to the Manchuria Handbook. Please note that Kirin (Jilin) then was name of the Province and of the provincial capital.

But if I stumble over some of the requested data, I'll post it.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 374

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 3:04:19 PM

Froonp

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

I post again the pieces of the map. I'm calling this version Map 5a.

Steve wants 2 maps possibilities.
One map with few added cities, one other with alot added cities.
I call the first Map 1, and the second Map 2.

I decided that Map 1 would contain cities whose votes are 75% YES or more.
I decided that Map 2 would contain cities whose votes are 50% YES or more.

This is subject to critisiscm and comment, and I could change it.

Cities' names for Map 1 appear in dark blue.
Cities' names for Map 2 appear in Violet, and also contains cities that are on Map 1.

Here is the northern portion of the Modified China Map.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 375

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 3:05:01 PM

Froonp

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

Here is the coastal portion of the Modified China Map.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 376

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 3:06:00 PM

Froonp

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

Here is the southern portion of the Modified China Map.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 377

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 3:06:59 PM

Froonp

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

Here is the southeastern portion of the Modified China Map (not posted usually).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 378

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 3:11:27 PM

Froonp

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

And the reduced eastern part of the Modified China Map

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 379

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 3:18:32 PM

wosung

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

Kiukiang (80k) (Jiujiang) 200 km SW of Anking
Ningpo (218k) (Ningbo) 200 km SE of Shanghai
Shasi (113k) must read Shashi, 300 km SW of Wuhan
Wansien (201k) (Wanxian) 450 km W of Wuhan
Weihaiwei (390k) most NE tip of Shandong Peninsular (were Tsingtao lies)
Wuchow (90k) (Wuzhou) 200km W of Canton
Wuhu (135k) 100 km S of Nanking

Also, you proposed cities for Manchuria :

Aigun (38k) ???
Antung (91k) (Dandong) 200 km SE of Mukden (Shenyang), at the Korean border
Chengteh (Pop ?) (Chengde) 200 km NE of Peking
Hsingan (920k) ??? maybe translated into "new peace", which would be Manchuran renaming. Sorry no Manchukuo Government map.
Hunchun (39k) 450 km E of Mukden (Shenyang)
Kirin (Pop ?) 150 km E of Hsinking (Changchun)
Newchwang (106k) 150km SW of Mukden (Shenyang), today rather small a place.
Tsitsihar / Lungkiang (Pop ?) (Qiqihar) 350 km NW of Harbin

Could you tell me where they are relatively to existing cities (bearing and km are ok for me) ?
Also, while we are at it, what would be the population of Nomohan in Manchuria ?

Sorry: no idea. what it was in WW2, but I think rather small.
[/quote]

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 380

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 3:28:11 PM

wosung

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

If I had to choose between them 2 maps, I'd go for the one with more cities on it.

Regards

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 381

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 4:58:29 PM

trees trees

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

I've been wondering if the "Silk Road" will be drawn out further?

I think Devin Culter among others has a House Rule (ut-oh) connecting it to Alma-Ata in the USSR?

The Soviets did use it to send some things to the Nationalists, including aircraft (note the models of the early Nationalist aircraft in the force pool), but it didn't amount to very much so I think ADG decided to simplify it out of the game. Having it on the map could be nice for the future.

I do recall in Tuchman's book that Stillwell was sent to Lan-Chow by the War Department to report on the volume of this aid. It does leave the impression that Lan-Chow remained in Nationalist hands as well.

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 382

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 5:37:09 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

I've been wondering if the "Silk Road" will be drawn out further?

It does not appear on the map.
I did put it for my own personal pleasure.

quote:

I think Devin Culter among others has a House Rule (ut-oh) connecting it to Alma-Ata in the USSR?

The Soviets did use it to send some things to the Nationalists, including aircraft (note the models of the early Nationalist aircraft in the force pool), but it didn't amount to very much so I think ADG decided to simplify it out of the game. Having it on the map could be nice for the future.

I believe that the Resource out North of Lanchow is here to represent (abstract) the lend lease from Russia down the Silk Road.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 383

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 6:06:25 PM

wosung

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

I've been wondering if the "Silk Road" will be drawn out further?

It does not appear on the map.
I did put it for my own personal pleasure.

quote:

I think Devin Culter among others has a House Rule (ut-oh) connecting it to Alma-Ata in the USSR?

The Soviets did use it to send some things to the Nationalists, including aircraft (note the models of the early Nationalist aircraft in the force pool), but it didn't amount to very much so I think ADG decided to simplify it out of the game. Having it on the map could be nice for the future.

I believe that the Resource out North of Lanchow is here to represent (abstract) the lend lease from Russia down the Silk Road.

Soviet help was for Nationalist China, not Communist China. Most of it arrived 1938-1940. Most of it was shipped from Odessa to South Chinese free or treaty ports. But smaller quantities came along traditional silk road. Imagine the difficulties.

There were a few Soviet Russian squadrons in China, perhaps about 1-2 airgroups (about 50-100 planes). Most of them defended Chungking, Chengtu. IIRC one fighter squdron was in Lanchow. They were flying I-16's and even older stuff. China was the rubbish heap for prewar military material.

Especially for the Russian airstuff in China see:
http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/sino-japanese-1938.htm
http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/George_Mellinger/china_skys_part_5.htm

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 384

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 6:21:29 PM

wosung

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I do recall in Tuchman's book that Stillwell was sent to Lan-Chow by the War Department to report on the volume of this aid. It does leave the impression that Lan-Chow remained in Nationalist hands as well.

Exactly this was my main point. There seems to be little info about Lanchow in WW2. But the things I found point in the same direction. And the infos about Chinese Soviet Border area puts the partisan base NE of Lanchow, and N of Sian. Even in 1944 these two places were outside Communist control.

Plus Lanchow wasn't exactly an industrial centre.

And if there are worries about Chinese Communist centre Yennan being too vulnerable, what about relocating Yennan to the mountain hex W of where it is now? But then it should be in the extrem Eastern part of that hex.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 385

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 7:10:28 PM

trees trees

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

At least all these ideas are on here for the future. I know nothing will change from WiF, and it will continue to simulate China quite bizarrely. Opening up the map opens the possibility to reduce some of the abstractions (Yennan, Si-An) necessary in the game WiFFe. I think it should be considered quite carefully whether to even put Yennan on the map and draw extra attention to this design compromise, if no other changes are going to be made. Without some new design input in this theater trying to 'balance' it will remain challenging; it will have to be done without reference to history.

One small piece of information above, about munitions facilities in Yennan, has me thinking now that maybe it is best for the Communists to have a city supply source like all WiF units. They proved on the Long March they could survive as a non-traditional army, like a fish through water, but in the process their strength went from perhaps 2 or 3 INF units to 1 or 2 Infantry divisions.

[ut-oh, not a map comment: There are some very good players out there who feel Japan's best strategy is not to even try advancing further in China. Send in some artillery, land-based air, garrisons, maybe a fort or two, and expand the Empire in other directions.]

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 386

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 7:37:19 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

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

Here are my votes.

North portion
New Cities on the map
Ankang: Yes
Ningsia: Yes
Sining: Yes
Tinshui Yes
Tungkwan: Yes
Yennan: Yes

Cities Refused (not on the map)
Paochi: No
Paotow: No

Cities Proposed (not on the map)
Kweisui: No

Coastal portion
New Cities on the map
Anking: No
Kaifeng: Yes
Nanchang: Yes
Nanyang: Yes
Paoting: Yes
Suchow: Yes
Wuhsing: No

New Minor Ports on the map
Chefoo (Minor Port) (2 hexes NE of Tsingtao): Yes
Tsingkow (Minor Port) (was Xinhailian): Yes
Wenchow (2 hexes NE of Foochow): Yes

Cities Refused (not on the map)
Hofei (was Hefei) (1 hex NW of Anking): No
Siangfan (was Xiangfan) (1 hex SW from Nanyang): No

Existing Cities modified
Hangchow becoming a Minor Port: No
Wuhan Moved 1 hex NW (should be named Hankow ?): Yes (keep name Wuhan)
Macao becoming a city: Yes

Cities Proposed (not on the map)
Chinkiang: No
Ichang (3 hexes W of Wuhan): No
Kalgan (hex NW of Peking): No
Ningpo: No
Shasi: No
Weihaiwei: No
Wuhu: No

Coastal portion
New Cities on the map
Chihkiang (was Chihchiang) + river south moved: Yes
Kweilin: Yes

New Minor Ports on the map
Amoy (port) (2 hexes SW of Foochow): Yes
Pakhoi (Port): Yes
Swatow (3 hexes E of Canton): Yes

Cities Refused (not on the map)
Liuchow (2 hexes SW of Kweilin): No)
Kwangchowan (Port): No

Existing Cities modified
Chungking moved southwards: No
Kunming moved 1 hex SW: Yes

Cities Proposed (not on the map)
Hengyang (2 hexes S of Changsha, on the rail): Yes
Kiukiang: No
Wansien: No
Wuchow: No
Dianquan/Dianqian (port) (2 hexes SW of Foochow): No

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 387

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 8:59:40 PM

wosung

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

At least all these ideas are on here for the future. I know nothing will change from WiF, and it will continue to simulate China quite bizarrely. Opening up the map opens the possibility to reduce some of the abstractions (Yennan, Si-An) necessary in the game WiFFe. I think it should be considered quite carefully whether to even put Yennan on the map and draw extra attention to this design compromise, if no other changes are going to be made. Without some new design input in this theater trying to 'balance' it will remain challenging; it will have to be done without reference to history.

But nobody would think about ommitting Washington D.C. from map. Even if it perhaps wasn't quite one of the industrial centres of USA.

One small piece of information above, about munitions facilities in Yennan, has me thinking now that maybe it is best for the Communists to have a city supply source like all WiF units. They proved on the Long March they could survive as a non-traditional army, like a fish through water, but in the process their strength went from perhaps 2 or 3 INF units to 1 or 2 Infantry divisions.

The info about ammunition production, by accident I've got out of a Chinese cultural history of Republican Era in 3 Volumes . This so called ammunition factory perhaps is best to be imagined as grass root manufactory (-ies?) for explosives and small calibre ammunition. Long march and War time Communism was a society of shortage and inventiveness. And because of the attraction of Yennan for intelligenzia they had some intellectual ressources up there - and the hard learned experience that practical thinking is necessary.

[ut-oh, not a map comment: There are some very good players out there who feel Japan's best strategy is not to even try advancing further in China. Send in some artillery, land-based air, garrisons, maybe a fort or two, and expand the Empire in other directions.]

Quite a strategy!!

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 388

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/8/2006 11:53:48 PM

trees trees

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

If the Communists are still given Si-An, Yennan will be one more place for them to defend from the Japanese divisions oozing past them. I agree it should be in the game, but then so should a lot of things. When it appears on the map more people will begin to question the realities of China in WiF.

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 389

RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion - 6/9/2006 12:28:42 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

If the Communists are still given Si-An, Yennan will be one more place for them to defend from the Japanese divisions oozing past them. I agree it should be in the game, but then so should a lot of things. When it appears on the map more people will begin to question the realities of China in WiF.

Not a bad thing to my mind. I see WIF, and all historically based war games, as an educational tool. Anything that stimulates more interest in the subject is good.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 390