Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Patrice,

Nice from what I can tell (I lived in Rochester for 4 long winters). The hex NE of Milwaukee should either be made bigger or eliminated completely (I do not care which). That small sliver of land doesn't warrant being a hex (IMO).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I know it's bizzare, but the great lakes should be at least one sea zone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
I know it's bizzare, but the great lakes should be at least one sea zone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I know it's bizzare, but the great lakes should be at least one sea zone.

Size would warrant it. The Aral Sea too would warrant it, but I did not raised the question because I wondered if it was useful or not. If war goes to this point, it is useful, because Sea Areas allow for Ships and planes to patrol them, as well as supply to be traced for, and troops to be transported across them. All of which are impossible with Lakes.

History may warrant it too, because I seem to remember that there were training warships sailing the Great Lakes, especially a training Carrier.

SThe question for the Great Lakes would be :
- Can a warships sail from one of those to all the others, thus having one Sea Area ?
- Can warships sail from them to the Atlantic through the St Laurent ?

It would also need a rule to restrict its access to the possession of one keypoint such as London for the North Atlantic & Brest, or to the possession of some hexes such as the Kiel & Suez Canal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
I know it's bizzare, but the great lakes should be at least one sea zone.

I do not see a need for this.

In WIF sea areas are transportation routes for resources, supply, and land/air units. They serve no other purpose. Given that the Great Lakes are far from any salt water, and that the St. Lawrence Seaway was built in the 1960s (?), they are isolated from other sea areas. The area around them contains a lot of railroads so adding a sea area for supply and resource transportation seems pointless. I also have trouble envisioning an invasion fleet sailing from Detroit to take out Chicago. As another example, if the Axis were able to fly a naval air unit into the Great Lakes, it would not affect Allied logistics. If we are thinking in terms of an all-out Axis invasion of the US and fighting raging across the midwest (i.e., around the Great lakes), then the impact of a sea area for the Great Lakes would still be inconsequential - given all the other stuff that would be happening.

quote:

Given that the Great Lakes are not a sea area, why is it that Duluth is a port on them?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flanker Leader

mr. composer brought up a good point about the big park/forests up there - i'm not too sure about the resource that is supposed to be there, but it can't hurt.

although it looks fine as it is if you prefer here is a more accurate assessment of the transport routes going north in the area - they all radiate from north bay which is the 'gateway to the north' (my dad/family was stationed at the NORAD base there from '86-'90)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hairog
Silly me of course the St. Lawrence Seaway was not completed until 1959. Duh.

The mine sweepers, subs and landing craft made in Manitowoc, WI were sent down the Mississippi system during WWII. The heyday of Manitowoc, WI shipbuilding was during World War II when 28 submarines were built. In fact, more than 100 vessels including landing craft, minesweepers and submarine chasers were constructed for the war. All made their way to the Gulf of Mexico and from there to where ever they were assigned. There were a number of mock invasions to test out landing craft etc. held on the western shores of Michigan. Nice beaches there.

So you'd have the equivalent of river warfare during the Civil War with torpedo boats trying to slip past the forts along the Ohio river etc. Probably wouldn't have happened even if the Axis had some how got to the US.

The ore freighters during WWII were still huge and their work vital to the war effort but they went from Duluth to the steel mills in Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland etc. Most of the steel for WWII came from this route. The freighters had to stay within the Great Lakes system however. They couldn't get out into the Atlantic until 1959.

This fact might be worth while modeling. It would have been a huge setback to the war effort if these freighters could not transport the ore from Duluth to the steel mills. It would have taken enormous amounts of trains and trucks to do the same thing.

quote:

Though I am loathe to add rules, we might treat this similar to the way the Swedish resources get to Germany through Narvik. That would require (1) designating a resource(s) which has to go to Duluth by rail, (2) control of the choke points (e.g., from Lake Superior to Huron & within Lake Huron just above Detroit), and (3) use within the factories at Chicago, Milqaukee, Detroit, Cleveland, and Buffalo.

That seems like a lot of effort for very little gain. Perhaps as part of America in Flames in a future MWIF product?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Here is a draft drawing of the coastlines of the East Coast.
On the real maps, most of the rivers and lakes are named, and most of the city & ports names are better placed.

The most difficult places to draw were New York and Washington areas.

Long Island (to the east of New York) is not a real island on this MWiF map (it was originaly, but it led to a strange drawing due to the hexes), because it is easy to enter and leave this island, it is so close to the continent and I suppose there are lots of crossing means between New Yok Island and Long Island.
I hope it is OK, and wait for your comments.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Edit : Here it is the area around New Orleans that was very hard to draw. Especially because of this lake on the NW hexside, that I first wanted to remove, but it is really large in reality.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is the southern US coast.

Miami was not part of this map originaly, but I added it because in 1940, 172,172 people lived in the city (Wikipedia). I also added a minor port to it (not visible on the picture, because I forgot to place it here), tell me if this is ok, I did no researchs on Miami's Port capacity.

Also, I forgot to say that on previous picture, I added Connecticut river (river west of Boston), because it was on the WiF FE maps and not on this one. Wikipedia confirms that it is an obstacle to movement.

Edit : Here it is the area around New Orleans that was very hard to draw. Especially because of this lake on the NW hexside, that I first wanted to remove, but it is really large in reality.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is the southern US coast.

Miami was not part of this map originaly, but I added it because in 1940, 172,172 people lived in the city (Wikipedia). I also added a minor port to it (not visible on the picture, because I forgot to place it here), tell me if this is ok, I did no researchs on Miami's Port capacity.

Also, I forgot to say that on previous picture, I added Connecticut river (river west of Boston), because it was on the WiF FE maps and not on this one. Wikipedia confirms that it is an obstacle to movement.

Edit : Here it is the area around New Orleans that was very hard to draw. Especially because of this lake on the NW hexside, that I first wanted to remove, but it is really large in reality.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Well, I did not understand quite well all what you said, especially with the river Hudson.
I did not understood wether you advised to remove the river hexside and put an all sea hexside (because you speak of a strait), or wether letting it as it is but just removing the graphic coastline.

So I tried to improve the drawing. I increased the size of the NYC strip of land (I forgot the name) and placed the icons better (as you said for NYC).

In the below graphic, for clarity, I show the map as it is with the coastline, and the same map as it is with the current CSV data I'm working on.

Comments ?