Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) 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 Russia (Urals & East) 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 Russia (Urals & East) Map portion

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion - 7/3/2006 8:44:17 PM

Froonp

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

Hello,

Having nothing more to do around the Caucasus & the Caspian, I embarked on a trip to the Urals, from Kazan to Krasnoyarsk, and down to the Afghan, Persian & Chinese borders.

Equipped with some maps (harder to find than the Caucasus & China ones) I reviewed the area, compared to WiF FE, to real geography, and did some modifications. Those modifications are proposals, to make the map better.

A. Corrections from WiF FE maps :

- There is a piece of rail from Astrakhan between 51,76 and 46,75 that should not exist. I deleted it on the modified map.
- Karaganda (47,93) wrongly placed. I pushed it 11 hexes SE. Hence, I modified both railways who lead to it.
- Vyatka (35,79) does not exist (but why not leave it as is).

B. Modifications proposed :

Cities on this portion of the WiF FE map (shown below) are few, and often 4 hexes in between, that is, a unit moving on foot from one to the next, in fine weather, is always in supply. On the MWiF map, most of theses 4-hex-apart-cities are more than 8 hexes apart, thus putting a moving unit out of supply in the middle of the trip. For this reason, I looked on the WWII maps if there were significant cities that were not on the WiF FE map, to add them to the MWiF map. I found 3.

- Added Petropavlovsk & Tyumen (west of Omsk), for supply between Omsk & Chelyabinsk.
- Added a Tomsk (west of Krasnoyarsk), for supply between Krasnoyarsk & Novosibirsk.

I would have liked to add cities in the below list too, but I did not find any.
- Add a city west of Kazan, for supply between Kazan & Penza --> Found no cities to add.
- Add a city west of Novosibirsk, for supply between Novosibirsk & Omsk --> Found no cities to add.

- Slightly modified rail around Omsk & Semipalatinsk.

- Added lake hexsides on Volga between Kazan & Kuibyshev.
- Added lake hexsides on Kama between Ufa & Perm.
- Added lake hexsides on Kama north of Perm.

Those are added because the maps show very very large rivers here, and also because it allow to hamper the enemy movement a little.

On these maps I drew the lakes hexsides and hexes, and I also drew the provinces borders. The Yellow line is the place where the map ends in WiF FE.

Attachment (1)

Post #: 1

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/3/2006 8:46:52 PM

Froonp

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

Here is the modified map showing the Ural region.
Here the suggested modifications are :

- There is a piece of rail from Astrakhan between 51,76 and 46,75 that should not exist. I deleted it on the modified map (this shows where the railway is a black line drew by me).
- Added lake hexsides on Volga between Kazan & Kuibyshev.
- Added lake hexsides on Kama between Ufa & Perm.
- Added lake hexsides on Kama north of Perm.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 2

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/3/2006 8:49:20 PM

Froonp

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

Here is the modified map in the Omsk Region.

Here, the suggested modifications are :
- Added Petropavlovsk & Tyumen (west of Omsk), for supply between Omsk & Chelyabinsk.
- Added a Tomsk (west of Krasnoyarsk), for supply between Krasnoyarsk & Novosibirsk.
- Karaganda (47,93) wrongly placed. I pushed it 11 hexes SE. Hence, I modified both railways who lead to it (black lines).
- Slightly modified rail around Omsk & Semipalatinsk (black lines).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 3

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/3/2006 8:51:27 PM

Froonp

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

Here is the modified map in the Novosibirsk-Krasnoyarsk region.

Here, the suggested modifications are :
- Added a Tomsk (west of Krasnoyarsk), for supply between Krasnoyarsk & Novosibirsk.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 4

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/3/2006 8:55:20 PM

Froonp

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

Forgot to say that the added cities are written in blue.
Without those cities on this map, a withdrawing Russian Army who has lost its HQ is dead meat, which is not the case on the WiF FE maps.

I know this is an area of least interest, far behind China and the Caucasus, but I wanted to see if this area (Urals & East) was right. Even if it is far behind those, it is still in front of the Americas for example. I intend to look at Siberia & Manchuria next, and then I would like to look at the Russian far north.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 5

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/3/2006 9:31:18 PM

lomyrin

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

I think this would help a Russian player who has been really pushed far into Siberia. The impact should not be very large and it does give the Russian some more hope of survival as well as a few more places to situate reinforcements.

These changes sound fine to me.

Lars

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 6

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 12:38:41 AM

Ullern

Posts: 1837
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline

Me too.

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 7

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 1:25:21 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

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

Hi. I'm looking at the Urals and Siberian maps and they look very nice. But I have (as usual

) some comments:

* The city of Vyatka should be renamed to Kirov. The city was renamed from Vyatka to Kirov in 1934. It got the
name from the great Soviet leader Kirov who was assassinated 1th December 1934. The city is still called Kirov
today. Kirov has about 500.000 inhabitants, so it's not a very small city. I think it should be on the map.

* The resource in the Magnitogorsk hex conceals partly the name Magnitogorsk

* For a city between Kazan and Penza you could think about adding the city Saransk. It has 300.000 inhabitants.
It's located 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.

* Another option for a city to add could be Ylyanovsk along the west bank of Volga halfway between Kazan and
Kuybyshev. Ylyanovsk has about 620.000 inhabitants. Ulyanovsk is the city Lenin was born in and got the name
from Simbirsk in 1924. But if you think about a strategic location for supply then I would prefer Saransk.

* I noticed that you drew the rail line to Karaganda from the city Petropavlovsk on the Transsiberian railway.
But on my map it shows that the rail to Karaganda goes from the city called Kurgan further west.
Petropavlovsk has about 200.000 inhabitants. Kurgan has a population of about 335.000.

Look here for a link to Russian rail lines:
http://www.parovoz.com/maps/supermap/index-e.html

Here you will see that the rail line from Kurgan to Karaganda is a double track line while the one from
Petropavlovsk to Karaganda is a single track rail line. I don't know if it existed in 1939.

Kurgan is located mainly on the west bank of the Tobol river. You can draw the rail line from Kurgan
south east until you reach the river Ishim. Then you draw the rail line directly eastwards until you
meet the rail line you drew from Petropavlovsk to Karaganda. From this intersection and southwards the
rail line is as you drew.

Maybe it's possible to keep both Kurgan and Petropavlovsk as cities on the map for supply purposes?
If only one city can be chosen the Kurgan is the biggest and should maybe be chosen.

* For the location of lake Chany close to Omsk

Click on this link to look at the area between Omsk and Novosibirsk (click on the east arrow a time or two
and reduce the zoom level just a little):

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/mapcenter/map.aspx?TextLatitude=54.1839312793336&TextLongitude=45.1718306165165&TextAltitude=8&TextSelectedEntity=29870&SearchEnc=false&MapStyle=Comprehensive&MapSize=Large&MapStyleSelectedIndex=0&searchTextMap=omsk&MapStylesList=Comprehensive&ZoomOnMapClickCheck=on

Here you will notice that lake Chany is almost halfway between Omsk and Novosibirsk (slightly closer to Omsk). So this lake is
positions not right on the map. I think it should be placed 1-2 hexes eastwards on the map and maybe make a bit smaller.

* My wife is from Omsk and she says there are no large cities between Omsk and Novosibirsk. The only towns worth
mentioning are Tatarsk and Barabinsk. Tatarsk has about 25.000 inhabitants and Barabinsk about 32.000 inhabitants.
Both are along the trans-siberian rail line. If you need a city here for supply purposes you can choose the city of
Barabinsk. It's exactly haftway between Omsk and Novosibirsk. Just north-east of the easternmost part of lake Chany.
Maybe in the eastern part of the clear hex along the rail line just before you enter the first swamp hex (when going
from Omsk).

* Maybe it's possible to add the city of Astana in the rail intersection hex north of Karaganda for supply purposes?
It's the capital of Kazachstan and has about 350.000 inhabitants. This city has changed it's name many times and at the
times of Stalin it had the name Akmolinsk. But if the city is not needed for supply it doesn't really have to be added.

* I think you should change the name for Kuznetsk. This city was renamed to Novokuznetsk and has about 550.000
inhabitants. But during the time of Stalin the city had the name Stalinsk. So maybe it should be called Stalinsk on the
map?

Look here for details?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novokuznetsk

Look here for details of the city Kuznetsk?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznetsk

It's another city located close to Penza.

So for historical accuracy it should be renamed to Stalinsk. It was called this for it's big coal mining industry and
production of steel. Novokuznetsk is one of the most polluted cities in the world.

This is all I found now. Feel free to use whatever info I found you think is useful.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 8

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 2:44:55 PM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
I know this is an area of least interest...

Rubbish! I will be driving my panzers onward....ever onward. East...always east....until the Zionist-Bolshevik scourge is finally erased! They can have a break in Vladivostok.

Cheers, Neilster

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 9

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 5:51:37 PM

Froonp

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

Thanks for your answer Borger.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen
* The city of Vyatka should be renamed to Kirov. The city was renamed from Vyatka to Kirov in 1934. It got the
name from the great Soviet leader Kirov who was assassinated 1th December 1934. The city is still called Kirov
today. Kirov has about 500.000 inhabitants, so it's not a very small city. I think it should be on the map.

Agreed for the name.
For being on the map, it is already indeed. It is not on the WiF FE maps (it is out of their frame anyway), but it was added to the MWiF maps prior to me looking at them.

quote:

* The resource in the Magnitogorsk hex conceals partly the name Magnitogorsk

No worries, I did not change that on my map, because my map will not appear as I drew it, in the game.
For the map in the game, I believe that Steve will review the positions of the cities and the position of the text labels on the map at one moment.

quote:

* For a city between Kazan and Penza you could think about adding the city Saransk. It has 300.000 inhabitants.
It's located 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.

This seems good to me. I'll look at my maps once at home.

quote:

* Another option for a city to add could be Ylyanovsk along the west bank of Volga halfway between Kazan and
Kuybyshev. Ylyanovsk has about 620.000 inhabitants. Ulyanovsk is the city Lenin was born in and got the name
from Simbirsk in 1924. But if you think about a strategic location for supply then I would prefer Saransk.

I noted both suggestions.

quote:

* I noticed that you drew the rail line to Karaganda from the city Petropavlovsk on the Transsiberian railway.
But on my map it shows that the rail to Karaganda goes from the city called Kurgan further west.
Petropavlovsk has about 200.000 inhabitants. Kurgan has a population of about 335.000.

For this one, I used the WiF FE map as the main source of truth for the railway.
The WiF FE map has the Karaganda Railway starting from the the Trans-Siberian railway, just east of the Ishim River. This is exactly the position of Petropavlovsk, so I prefer to leave it that way.

quote:

Maybe it's possible to keep both Kurgan and Petropavlovsk as cities on the map for supply purposes?
If only one city can be chosen the Kurgan is the biggest and should maybe be chosen.

I'm hesitant to add more than one. I'll look at my Russia map in the WWII companion book tonight to see if Kurgan appears too.

quote:

* For the location of lake Chany close to Omsk
Here you will notice that lake Chany is almost halfway between Omsk and Novosibirsk (slightly closer to Omsk). So this lake is positions not right on the map. I think it should be placed 1-2 hexes eastwards on the map and maybe make a bit smaller.

Humm, you're obviously right, but the WiF FE map display it at the same position, that is more close to Omsk.
Anyway, this is not a big problem to move it 1 or 2 hexes eastwards.
I moved it 1 hex eastwards.

quote:

* My wife is from Omsk and she says there are no large cities between Omsk and Novosibirsk. The only towns worth
mentioning are Tatarsk and Barabinsk. Tatarsk has about 25.000 inhabitants and Barabinsk about 32.000 inhabitants.
Both are along the trans-siberian rail line. If you need a city here for supply purposes you can choose the city of
Barabinsk. It's exactly haftway between Omsk and Novosibirsk. Just north-east of the easternmost part of lake Chany.
Maybe in the eastern part of the clear hex along the rail line just before you enter the first swamp hex (when going
from Omsk).

So be it, no cities will be added between Omsk & Novosibirsk. There begins the wilderness.

quote:

* Maybe it's possible to add the city of Astana in the rail intersection hex north of Karaganda for supply purposes?
It's the capital of Kazachstan and has about 350.000 inhabitants. This city has changed it's name many times and at the
times of Stalin it had the name Akmolinsk. But if the city is not needed for supply it doesn't really have to be added.

I think it should be added.

quote:

* I think you should change the name for Kuznetsk. This city was renamed to Novokuznetsk and has about 550.000
inhabitants. But during the time of Stalin the city had the name Stalinsk. So maybe it should be called Stalinsk on the
map?

On the WiF FE map it has the name of Kuznetsk, so I can't change it.
If Steve wants to change names on the map because they were different during WWII, he'll decide.
It's been the decision taken for China, but the canges were not big.

Thanks for all your comments.

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 10

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 6:38:28 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Agreed for the name.
For being on the map, it is already indeed. It is not on the WiF FE maps (it is out of their frame anyway), but it was added to the MWiF maps prior to me looking at them.

That is good. We rename Vyatka to Kirov on the MWIF map.

quote:

I noted both suggestions.

Good. Choose which of Saransk and Ylyanovsk you think will be most needed for
supply purposes.

quote:

For this one, I used the WiF FE map as the main source of truth for the railway.
The WiF FE map has the Karaganda Railway starting from the the Trans-Siberian railway, just east of the Ishim River. This is exactly the position of Petropavlovsk, so I prefer to leave it that way.

I know that, but the Asia scale WIF FE maps are not very detailed and accurate. I
think we can have the freedom to refine those map when we create an European
scaled version of this area. I have an impression that this map area was created
without looking much to details because ADG (Harry et. al.) never expected any
combat to occur here. So the map needed to be pretty accurate. What's important
is the number of resources, factories and the railway link east-west. Exactly which
hexes these parts appear in on the Asian scaled map was not that important
because of the scale. But using the European scale we have try for better accuracy.

quote:

I'm hesitant to add more than one. I'll look at my Russia map in the WWII companion book tonight to see if Kurgan appears too.

Then I propose you add the city where the rail intersection will turn out to be.
That means you remove Petropavlovsk if you decide to place the rail intersection in
Kurgan, or you don't add Kurgan if you decide to let the rail intersection be where you
placed it now.

quote:

Humm, you're obviously right, but the WiF FE map display it at the same position, that is more close to Omsk.
Anyway, this is not a big problem to move it 1 or 2 hexes eastwards.
I moved it 1 hex eastwards.

Again I think the original WIFFE map of this area is not very accurate. So I think we have
the freedom to place this lake in a more accurate position because we change the scale.

quote:

So be it, no cities will be added between Omsk & Novosibirsk. There begins the wilderness.

What consequences does it have for units moving using land movement instead of
rail movement to go from Omsk to Novosibirsk? I think we can live with these
consequences. I guess if the Russian player would be so unlucky that he has to
fight the Germans in this area (a front between Omsk and Novosibirsk) he will
definitely use a HQ in this area. So the only situation I can think of would be
lone Russian units moving the hard way from east to west by land movement
instead of rail movement. Maybe because the rail capacity is better needed for other
units?

quote:

I think it should be added.

OK. Try adding Akmolinsk.

quote:

On the WiF FE map it has the name of Kuznetsk, so I can't change it.
If Steve wants to change names on the map because they were different during WWII, he'll decide.
It's been the decision taken for China, but the canges were not big.

Thanks for all your comments.

If you don't want to change the city name from Kuznetsk to Stalinsk then I propose
it's changed to Novokuznetsk. This is the name of the city today. It dead wrong to
keep the name Kuznetsk because Kuznetsk is located near Penza much further to the
west.

It's a similar situation if the WIFFE map of America had written York instead of
New York for the big American city on the Atlantic coast. I'm sure nobody would say
that we had to keep the name York because it was printed on the WIFFE map. York
is as you know located in central Great Britain.

I think Novokuznetsk has not been detected as a typo because very few players
know the details of Russian geography and the city is located in an area where very
little action occurs.

I think renaming the city to Novokuznetsk is so similar to Kuznetsk that's printed on
the WIFFE map of this area that nobody would be confused.

Remember that the prefix Novo means New in russian. So Novokuznetsk means New
Kuznetsk.

Steve has to decide which name is better suited for being placed on the MWIF map.
Maybe we can even ask Harry about it?

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 11

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 7:13:00 PM

c92nichj

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

I would want to limit the amount of new russian cities as it makes the somewhat crazy strategy to abandon European Russian and go all out against japan more likely to succeed.

The comments about changing rail lines and adding lakehexsides I like though.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 12

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 9:09:51 PM

fuzzy_bunnyy

Posts: 27
Joined: 8/26/2005
Status: offline

I think that strategy would fail spectacularly with the new maps. If Russia is pushed back, or runs back, to the Urals then the European scale maps would give the german tanks much more room to blitz and kill. Japan might be hurting for a while, but the long term consequences for the allies would be devestating.

_____________________________

Member #3 of the EBEA
Comrade #4 of the e-Socialist Liberation Army

(in reply to c92nichj)

Post #: 13

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 9:25:53 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

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

I like the way this discussion is going - very much so.

Accuracy vis-a-vis the real world at the time of WW II is my preference, over adhering strictly to the WIFFE Asia map, because of the various reasons mentioned earlier by myself and others when we were working on the China map.

Correcting the name of Stalinsk is the only change I have read about in the above posts that I would want to make to the European part of the WIF FE map.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 14

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 9:48:37 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I like the way this discussion is going - very much so.

Accuracy vis-a-vis the real world at the time of WW II is my preference, over adhering strictly to the WIFFE Asia map, because of the various reasons mentioned earlier by myself and others when we were working on the China map.

Correcting the name of Stalinsk is the only change I have read about in the above posts that I would want to make to the European part of the WIF FE map.

I agree with this too. Stalinsk (Novokuznetsk or Kuznetsk on the WIFFE map) was on the
Asian part of the WIFFE maps. So far we have not changed anything on the European map part of Russia (except in Caucasus).

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 15

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 10:42:41 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I like the way this discussion is going - very much so.

I'm happy about that

quote:

Accuracy vis-a-vis the real world at the time of WW II is my preference, over adhering strictly to the WIFFE Asia map, because of the various reasons mentioned earlier by myself and others when we were working on the China map.

Yes... but...

We should not change the strategic picture by changing the map, because the geography warrants it, WiF should stay WiF.

Correcting the name of Stalinsk is the only change I have read about in the above posts that I would want to make to the European part of the WIF FE map.

I would prefer "Novokuznetsk", because it looks like Kuznetsk, so it will be easy for players used to Kuznetsk to recognize it.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 16

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 10:57:18 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen
Good. Choose which of Saransk and Ylyanovsk you think will be most needed for supply purposes.

Ulyanovsk has my preference, both because it is not located on the rail, and also because it seems that Saransk would be located on the portion of the map that is on the WiF FE Eastern European map, that I do not want to touch.

quote:

quote:

For this one, I used the WiF FE map as the main source of truth for the railway.
The WiF FE map has the Karaganda Railway starting from the the Trans-Siberian railway, just east of the Ishim River. This is exactly the position of Petropavlovsk, so I prefer to leave it that way.

I know that, but the Asia scale WIF FE maps are not very detailed and accurate. I think we can have the freedom to refine those map when we create an European scaled version of this area. I have an impression that this map area was created
without looking much to details because ADG (Harry et. al.) never expected any combat to occur here. So the map needed to be pretty accurate. What's important is the number of resources, factories and the railway link east-west. Exactly which
hexes these parts appear in on the Asian scaled map was not that important because of the scale. But using the European scale we have try for better accuracy.

Both seems equally right to me. I believe that the Asia map was well researched by Harry and the ADG team, and I believe that if the rail represented on the map is the one from Petropavlovsk, it is because it was this railway that existed at that time, and not the one from Kurgan. So for the moment, I'll stay with Petropavlovsk (is it the right name in the 40s ?).

quote:

quote:

So be it, no cities will be added between Omsk & Novosibirsk. There begins the wilderness.

What consequences does it have for units moving using land movement instead of rail movement to go from Omsk to Novosibirsk? I think we can live with these consequences. I guess if the Russian player would be so unlucky that he has to
fight the Germans in this area (a front between Omsk and Novosibirsk) he will definitely use a HQ in this area. So the only situation I can think of would be lone Russian units moving the hard way from east to west by land movement instead of rail movement. Maybe because the rail capacity is better needed for other units?

I think the only case of units moving using land movement instead of rail movement from Omsk to Novosibirsk wwould be if a fight ever come up to there. I believe the Russian won't ever walk a reinforcing unit there in place of rail moving it.

Anyway, it's right to me that this area is badly supplied, because it is the start of Siberia, the real wilderness. I can understand that Russian units here can be out of supply. I have more difficulties imagining a Russian unit out of supply around Kazan / Perm / Sverdlovsk / Omsk.

quote:

If you don't want to change the city name from Kuznetsk to Stalinsk then I propose it's changed to Novokuznetsk. This is the name of the city today. It dead wrong to keep the name Kuznetsk because Kuznetsk is located near Penza much further to the west.

I like renaming it Novokuznetsk.

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 17

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 11:05:48 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Yes... but... We should not change the strategic picture by changing the map, because the geography warrants it, WiF should stay WiF.

Hi. That is true too, but I don't think we change the strategic picture of WIF by the
changes we propose. We don't add unnecessary cities just because we want to. We
add cities when they're needed to keep Russian units in the area in supply because
we changed the map to the European scale.

I think we have to distinguish between the pretty accurate European scale maps
and the not so accurate Asian scale maps. Now we're changing the Asian scaled
part of Russia into the European scale. That gives us some opportunities to make
it more accurate without changing the strategic picture. We also have the chance
to fix typos etc.

I would prefer "Novokuznetsk", because it looks like Kuznetsk, so it will be easy for players used to Kuznetsk to recognize it.

That is fine too because Novokuznetsk is the name of the city today. So we don't
make a very big mistake by using Novokuznetsk instead of Stalinsk. I have a list
of different cities changed during the communist time. Not all of them are as well
known as Stalingrad, Stalino, Kalinin, Kuybyshev, Molotov, Kirov etc.

The city of Perm on our WIFFE European map was called Molotov from 1940 till
1957. See here for a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perm

But since we play from 1939 I think it's best to keep the original name of Perm.

Here is the list I have of the cities the communists changed the name for:

Perm -> Molotov
Mariupol -> Zhdanov
Tver -> Kalinin
Lugansk -> Voroshilov
Vladikafkas -> Ordzhonikidze
Vyatka -> Kirov
Nizhniy Novgorod -> Gorki
Samara -> Kuybyshev
Stavropol -> Voroshilovsk
Tsaritsyn -> Stalingrad (now Volgograd)
Yushovka -> Stalino (now Donetsk)
Dushanbe -> Stalinabad
Yelizavetpol -> Kirovabad
Ekaterinburg -> Sverdlovsk
Petrograd -> Leningrad (now St. Petersburg)

So we won't make a big mistake by using sometimes the old name or sometimes
the communist name. One reason is because the time of the change was sometimes
AFTER the start of WIFFE.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 18

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 11:14:20 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

Hi. That is true too, but I don't think we change the strategic picture of WIF by the changes we propose. We don't add unnecessary cities just because we want to. We add cities when they're needed to keep Russian units in the area in supply because we changed the map to the European scale.

I think we have to distinguish between the pretty accurate European scale maps and the not so accurate Asian scale maps. Now we're changing the Asian scaled part of Russia into the European scale. That gives us some opportunities to make
it more accurate without changing the strategic picture. We also have the chance to fix typos etc.

I agree with you, albeit what I wrote before.
About the addition of Russian cities in this area, I definitely think this will have absolutely no effect on the macro strategic aspect of the game. It's just as you said, a mean to keep the "in supply" situation of the WiF FE map into the MWiF maps.

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 19

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/4/2006 11:23:32 PM

Peter Stauffenberg

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Ulyanovsk has my preference, both because it is not located on the rail, and also because it seems that Saransk would be located on the portion of the map that is on the WiF FE Eastern European map, that I do not want to touch.

That is fine. We add Ulyanovsk and don't add Saransk. Could so post the new
versions of the maps in Russia so we can see how they look after the changes?

quote:

Both seems equally right to me. I believe that the Asia map was well researched by Harry and the ADG team, and I believe that if the rail represented on the map is the one from Petropavlovsk, it is because it was this railway that existed at that time, and not the one from Kurgan. So for the moment, I'll stay with Petropavlovsk (is it the right name in the 40s ?)

Ok. That is fine too. Keep the rail line as is and add Petropavlovsk. The main thing is to
keep the Russians in supply along the rail line.

Here is some info about Petropavlovsk. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petropavl

Now the city is called Petropavl. But many people still calls the city Petropavlovsk. So
I think you can choose whether you prefer Petropavl or Petropavlovsk.

quote:

I think the only case of units moving using land movement instead of rail movement from Omsk to Novosibirsk wwould be if a fight ever come up to there. I believe the Russian won't ever walk a reinforcing unit there in place of rail moving it.

That is fine. We can easily live without a city between Omsk and Novosibirsk.

quote:

Anyway, it's right to me that this area is badly supplied, because it is the start of Siberia, the real wilderness. I can understand that Russian units here can be out of supply. I have more difficulties imagining a Russian unit out of supply around Kazan / Perm / Sverdlovsk / Omsk.

I agree with the imagination that the wilderness starts east of Omsk. I guess my wife
would agree too.

But Siberia itself starts much further west. Novosibirsk is in
central-Sibiria. Omsk is in western-Siberia. I know that personally because I've been
in Omsk 2 times (5 months ago the last time). And you can't avoid to know it's part of
Siberia. You see it for example by the names of companies etc. The TV weather etc.

My wife tells me that the region of Siberia starts just east of the Urals mountains and
goes eastwards to Irkutsk.

quote:

I like renaming it Novokuznetsk.

Fine. Novokuznetsk it is.

I can't wait to see your new versions of the Russian maps.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 20

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/5/2006 12:04:50 AM

Froonp

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

Here is map 1b, in a very very very low res version, but showing the whole area I reviewed.
I'll post the 3 parts with better res after.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Peter Stauffenberg)

Post #: 21

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/5/2006 12:09:09 AM

Froonp

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

Here is the ural part.
Sum up of the discussion here :

A. URAL REGION
1. Corrections from WiF FE maps :
- There is a piece of rail from Astrakhan between 51,76 and 46,75 should not exist. I deleted it.
- Vyatka (35,79) does not exist on WiF FE maps, but why not leave it as is. Renamed Kirov (500.000 inhabitants) (Borger).

2. Modifications proposed :
- Add Ulyanovsk (city between Kazan and Kuybyshev, 620.000 inhabitants). Along the west bank of Volga halfway between Kazan and Kuybyshev. Ulyanovsk is the city Lenin was born in, and got the name from Simbirsk in 1924 (Borger).
- Added some lake hexsides on Volga between Kazan & Kuibyshev because of very very large rivers here.
- Added some lake hexsides on Kama between Ufa & Perm because of very very large rivers here.
- Added some lake hexsides on Kama north of Perm because of very very large rivers here.

3. Proposals for Modifications
- Add Saransk (city between Kazan and Penza, 300.000 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).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 22

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/5/2006 12:12:13 AM

Froonp

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

Here is the Omsk region.
Sum up of the discussion here :

B. OMSK REGION
1. Corrections from WiF FE maps :
- Karaganda (47,93) very wrongly placed. I moved it 11 hexes SE.
- Modified both railways who lead to Karaganda.

2. Modifications proposed :
- Added Petropavlovsk (west of Omsk, 200.000 inhabitants), for supply between Omsk & Chelyabinsk.
- Added Tyumen (west of Omsk), for supply between Omsk & Chelyabinsk.
- Slightly modified rail around Omsk & Semipalatinsk.
- Moved Lake Chany 1 hex eastwards (Borger).

3. Proposals for Modifications
- Add Kurgan (west of Petropavlovsk, 335.000 inhabitants) (Borger). I prefer Petropavlovsk, and I'm not sure we can add 2 new cities (Froonp).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 23

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/5/2006 12:15:13 AM

Froonp

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

Here is the Novosibirsk-Krasnoyarsk Region.
Sum up of the discussion here :

C. NOVOSIBIRSK-KRASNOYARSK REGION
1. Corrections from WiF FE maps :
None.

2. Modifications proposed :
- Added Tomsk (west of Krasnoyarsk), for supply between Krasnoyarsk & Novosibirsk.
- Added Akmolinsk (Astana) (Rail intersection hex north of Karaganda, 350.000 inhabitants) for supply purposes.
It's the capital of Kazakstan. This city has changed it's name many times and at the times of Stalin it had the name Akmolinsk.
- Renammed Kuznetsk (550.000 inhabitants) to "Novokuznetsk" (Borger). But during the time of Stalin the city had the name Stalinsk (Borger).

3. Proposals for Modifications
- 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).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 24

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/5/2006 1:16:58 AM

Peter Stauffenberg

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
3. Proposals for Modifications
- 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).

Hi again Froonp. Now things start to look really nice.

I'm studying a little bit
more about possible cities to add between Omsk and Novosibirsk. I found one
city called Kamen that is located on the west bank of Ob between Barnaul and
Novosibirsk. I think the city dot can be placed close to the Ob river in the river bend
where the text Ob is written. Maybe you can put it on the west side of the river and
place the city dot very close to Ob. Kamen has about 45.000 inhabitants.

Look here for more details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamen-na-Obi

It's also possible to think about including the city of Pavlodar.
See here for links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlodar

This city is in northeastern Kazachstan. It's alongside Irtysh south of Omsk.

This city is located 4 hexes south east of Omsk. It has about 300.000 inhabitants.
Can placement of Pavlodar help with the suply tracing situation in the region?

These are the only cities I can think of would help the supply situation in this region.
All other cities are much smaller and shouldn't be considered.

Keep up the good work.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 25

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/5/2006 10:50:14 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

I vote for Stalinsk. It seems historically accurate and in addition it exudes the cold, tyrannical and ruthless atmosphere that existed in the wartime Soviet Union.

WiF players are going to have to get used to a lot of changes anyway and this one is very minor. Let's go for accuracy and cold-bloodedness.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 26

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/5/2006 3:17:27 PM

Caranorn

Posts: 424
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Luxembourg
Status: offline

Just to remember, Stalinsk probably was not named after Stalin and rather after the steel industry. Afterall, Stalin means steel.

And yes, I also feel the WWII names are the only appropriate ones. Maybe add a list of tsarist-cadet-communist-stalinist-krutchev-modern name changes somewhere in the documentation. How one could go back to Tsarist place names is entirely beyond me. For me Leningrad is either Leningrad or Petrograd, never Saint Petersburg. Idem for Ekaterina or Sverdlovsk, never Ekaterinenburg... The tsarist names shoudl have been recognised as largely foreign and if the revolutionary names were not acceptable then the popular russian ones shoudl have been used.

But now I'm rambling politics...

_____________________________

Marc aka Caran... ministerialis

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 27

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/5/2006 5:58:16 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

Maybe add a list of tsarist-cadet-communist-stalinist-krutchev-modern name changes somewhere in the documentation.

Maybe also add the list of Chinese cities names, showing the WWII names and the current names.

(in reply to Caranorn)

Post #: 28

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/8/2006 5:23:33 AM

trees trees

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

don't forget you will need a definite boundary from the WiF East Europe map to this new map. regardless of how you feel about how the partisan and production rules work in WiF, and where "Siberia" actually starts, these parts of Russia are handled differently in the rules.

which reminds me...we'll probably need some way for the players to know how many rail moves are used up for a single unit/factory on these new scaled maps...unless this has already been covered earlier in this forum somewhere?

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 29

RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map por... - 7/8/2006 9:25:11 AM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

don't forget you will need a definite boundary from the WiF East Europe map to this new map. regardless of how you feel about how the partisan and production rules work in WiF, and where "Siberia" actually starts, these parts of Russia are handled differently in the rules.

This already is.
The Siberia boundary is where I drew the yellow line.

quote:

which reminds me...we'll probably need some way for the players to know how many rail moves are used up for a single unit/factory on these new scaled maps...unless this has already been covered earlier in this forum somewhere?

This already is too. One rail move is now a certain number of hexes, no more a number of maps. I seem to remember it was 40 hexes = 1 rail move, but I could be wrong.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 30