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: MWiF Map Review - America

 
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: MWiF Map Review - America Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/28/2006 4:50:07 PM   
JagdFlanker


Posts: 689
Joined: 7/26/2003
From: Halifax, Canada
Status: offline
thought i'd post anther pic of the area with the border hi-lited to fill in my double post. it's a 1915 atlas map with rail lines.

just so you know what i mean about the miramichi river here is a little blurb on it's size right at the top of the article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham,_New_Brunswick

the st john river (it's mouth is at st john) might be big enough to include on the map also.







Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Flanker Leader -- 9/28/2006 8:38:52 PM >

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 151
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/28/2006 5:13:19 PM   
JagdFlanker


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

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I see I had it wrong with Cape Breton island, I'll redraw it.
For the Bay of Fundy, I'll try at improving it. I understand that I should make it slimmer, is it that ? Also Nova Scotia should be a little slimmer south of Halifax, shouldn't it ?


for easy editing purposes the south shore of new brunswick should follow an almost straight line from charlottetown, PEI to portland, maine. at least mainland nova scotia is generally the right idea so no worries there!

i guess i can mention that the coast of new brunswick just below the gaspe peninsula is a little "pointy". i'm moving to the end of the little inlet there (miramichi city, formerly RCAF station Chatham flight training school during WW II) and the miramichi river is very wide for a ways inland so i extended the river a little.

also the maine/new brunswick border is too far west so i moved it in a little.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 152
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/28/2006 9:23:05 PM   
JagdFlanker


Posts: 689
Joined: 7/26/2003
From: Halifax, Canada
Status: offline
upon further research i discovered that the rail line i erased below was damaged by a flood in 1933 and never repaired so through traffic was not possible.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Flanker Leader -- 9/28/2006 9:25:26 PM >

(in reply to JagdFlanker)
Post #: 153
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/28/2006 9:26:33 PM   
JagdFlanker


Posts: 689
Joined: 7/26/2003
From: Halifax, Canada
Status: offline
here is a 1915 map of rails going through ontario - unfortunatly the only other map i have is 1957, but really there's not much added beyond this map due to that dang automobile invention




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Flanker Leader -- 9/28/2006 9:33:31 PM >

(in reply to JagdFlanker)
Post #: 154
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/28/2006 9:55:59 PM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: Flanker Leader
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
I see I had it wrong with Cape Breton island, I'll redraw it.
For the Bay of Fundy, I'll try at improving it. I understand that I should make it slimmer, is it that ? Also Nova Scotia should be a little slimmer south of Halifax, shouldn't it ?

for easy editing purposes the south shore of new brunswick should follow an almost straight line from charlottetown, PEI to portland, maine. at least mainland nova scotia is generally the right idea so no worries there!

i guess i can mention that the coast of new brunswick just below the gaspe peninsula is a little "pointy". i'm moving to the end of the little inlet there (miramichi city, formerly RCAF station Chatham flight training school during WW II) and the miramichi river is very wide for a ways inland so i extended the river a little.

also the maine/new brunswick border is too far west so i moved it in a little.

I've modified it, here is it again.
I did not modify the border the same way you did, and I straightened the south shore of New Brunswick.
I did not add the rivers though, because I'm not sure they should appear on the map at this scale.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to JagdFlanker)
Post #: 155
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/29/2006 7:56:20 AM   
Manic Inertia

 

Posts: 51
Joined: 2/7/2006
Status: offline
I think the white hexes look grouse (excellent), much more aesthetically appropriate for the arctic .. in what way do the rules for them differ from those for swamps?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 156
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/29/2006 9:01:54 AM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: Manic Inertia

I think the white hexes look grouse (excellent), much more aesthetically appropriate for the arctic .. in what way do the rules for them differ from those for swamps?

I don't think there are special rule for them.
Here are the terrain effect chart, that I took from old CWiF and where I put the MWiF new terrain graphics inside.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Manic Inertia)
Post #: 157
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/29/2006 3:23:52 PM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
One point that should be given particular attention, related to the american map, is the distance that a land based nav need to fly from the US/Canada to reach the Central Atlantic sea zone. This should be AT LEAST as far as when using the american mini-map. I dont have the maps in front of me, but i seem to remember that the asia-sized american map makes it slightly too easy to put navs into north atlantic.

It is already hard enough for germany to wage effective sub warfare vs the CW, so early in the war, the CW should have to use CV-s (or Iceland) to cover the atlantic gap with navs.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 158
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/29/2006 6:13:50 PM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: hakon
One point that should be given particular attention, related to the american map, is the distance that a land based nav need to fly from the US/Canada to reach the Central Atlantic sea zone. This should be AT LEAST as far as when using the american mini-map. I dont have the maps in front of me, but i seem to remember that the asia-sized american map makes it slightly too easy to put navs into north atlantic.

It is already hard enough for germany to wage effective sub warfare vs the CW, so early in the war, the CW should have to use CV-s (or Iceland) to cover the atlantic gap with navs.

USA - Central Atlantic distance
Using the America Minimap (1996) : 24 MP
Using the America Minimap (2000) : 18 MP
Using the America AiF map : 9 MP
Using MWiF : 14-15 MP.

Sydney / Halifax (Nova Scotia) - Central Atlantic distance
Using the America Minimap : 18 MP
Using the America AiF map : 7-8 MP
Using MWiF : 16 MP.

USA - North Atlantic distance
Using the America Minimap (1996) : 24 MP
Using the America Minimap (2000) : 24 MP
Using the America AiF map : 11 MP
Using MWiF : 23 MP

Sydney / Halifax (Nova Scotia) - North Atlantic distance
Using the America Minimap : 18 MP
Using the America AiF map : 8 MP
Using MWiF : 15 MP

Overall, I think that MWiF got it very well.

Also, I discussed a few years ago of a similar topic with Harry, to tell him that USA / Pacific distances were greater with MWiF than with AiF, and he told me that MWiF was more accurate regarding distances.

After having reviewed most of the maps, and checked some USA / Pacific distances with real world distance (using Google Earth to measure real distances), I found out that he was right.

(in reply to hakon)
Post #: 159
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/29/2006 8:07:36 PM   
Executioner Five

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 5/1/2005
Status: offline
Long Island shouldn't be connected the way it currently is on the map...it would have been way to easy to have those bridges blown in case of an Axis invasion.  I don't know myself what the right depiction is...but I dont' think the current one can be it.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 160
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/29/2006 10:21:18 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: Executioner Five
Long Island shouldn't be connected the way it currently is on the map...it would have been way to easy to have those bridges blown in case of an Axis invasion.  I don't know myself what the right depiction is...but I dont' think the current one can be it.

Here is Patrice's two proposals for NYC. We currently are gonig with the one on the left.




These hexes are each about 60 miles in diameter, while Manhatten is only about 1 mile wide east to west. The question then becomes where does Manhatten go? This version makes it part of Long Island. Clearly making it part of NJ is a poor solution. And making it part of southern NY state doesn't work either. As for the blown bridges, I believe the Brooklyn heights dominate Manhatten militarily and trying to hold Manhatten is untenable if Long Island is held by the enemy.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Executioner Five)
Post #: 161
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/29/2006 10:59:44 PM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: Executioner Five
Long Island shouldn't be connected the way it currently is on the map...it would have been way to easy to have those bridges blown in case of an Axis invasion.  I don't know myself what the right depiction is...but I dont' think the current one can be it.

Manhattan & Long Island is kind of Singapore & the rest of Malaya, and there are a whole lot of places where a small body of water separates a place from the rest of the mass of land of the hexagon where the place lies. With the scale used on the map, it is difficult to put in a single hex a place that is only a couple of miles large, so depicting small places separated by a small body of water from the main land by a single hex isn't that bad I think.

(in reply to Executioner Five)
Post #: 162
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 12:05:33 AM   
YohanTM2

 

Posts: 1143
Joined: 10/7/2002
From: Toronto
Status: offline
Halifax should indeed be a city and major port. Very large harbour and had signifcant defenses during WWII


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Perhaps it is not too big of a deal, but the current mini-map has a Canadian city/port that will never be iced in. I think it is in the Maritime provinces. The MWiF map does not. A Canadian unit coming on the map in the winter will likely not be able to get anywhere useful until next turn.

The map is certainly correct, but I wanted to call attention to the effect.

You're right indeed.
The (c) 2000 America minimap has Halifax as a city and Major Port.
The (c) 1998 AiF America map has it as a Major Port.
The (c) 1996 America minimap had not Halifax, but only Sidney as a minor port at this place.

As the (c) 2000 America minimap is the latest ADG production for WiF FE, I take it that ADG intention is to make Halifax a city plus a major port.
Moreover, the Canada 1941 census that someone posted on these forums has it that Halifax has 123k inhabitants in 1941.

So I will make Halifax a city. Comments ?


(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 163
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 2:12:54 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
How about some frostbites ?
Here is Hudson Bay.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to YohanTM2)
Post #: 164
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 3:16:05 AM   
Glen Felzien

 

Posts: 91
Joined: 5/21/2000
From: Swan Hills, Alberta, CDN
Status: offline
Thank you; good job on the maps.

I wish to add some detail to the prairies if I may. I only make these recommendations because I know that today, these are significant navigational obstructions. In the 1940s they were exceptionally difficult.



The area I marked with the letter A shows a marsh moved one hex east. Although not strictly accurate, it is more accurate than its original location. Especially in the '40s.

I have also added a river here. This is the Athabasca River. Lesser Slave Lake drains into it. The head waters for the river is in the Jasper area and the Columbia Ice Fields. This is a significant river with very few places to ford.

B is the North Saskatchewan River. Its head waters are also in the Rockies. It passes through the city of Edmonton. This river has over time cut a significant trench. Todays bridges are anywhere from ~50' to 100' above the river due to this massive gorge.

The Red Deer River, C, starts in the foothills of the Rockies. It is not as foreboding as the first two rivers as it runs a gentler course, however, it does present significant crossing problems. It drains into the South Saskatchewan that you have included.

Some may agrue that the Bow River ought to be included. This river passes through the middle of Calgary and joins up with the South Saskatchewan. As significant a river as it is (economically), there are many places (every few miles) that can be forded. As an obstruction to military operations, I would argue that the Bow river is insignificant. However, if you like fly fishing for trout, it is one of the world's best!



_____________________________

Glen

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 165
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 10:10:04 AM   
pak19652002

 

Posts: 280
Joined: 1/2/2005
Status: offline
On the left hand picture, is that a river that separates the Newark hex from the NYC hex? That is, can it be crossed by non-marine land units?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 166
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 10:39:42 AM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: Glen Felzien
The area I marked with the letter A shows a marsh moved one hex east. Although not strictly accurate, it is more accurate than its original location. Especially in the '40s.

I have also added a river here. This is the Athabasca River. Lesser Slave Lake drains into it. The head waters for the river is in the Jasper area and the Columbia Ice Fields. This is a significant river with very few places to ford.

B is the North Saskatchewan River. Its head waters are also in the Rockies. It passes through the city of Edmonton. This river has over time cut a significant trench. Todays bridges are anywhere from ~50' to 100' above the river due to this massive gorge.

The Red Deer River, C, starts in the foothills of the Rockies. It is not as foreboding as the first two rivers as it runs a gentler course, however, it does present significant crossing problems. It drains into the South Saskatchewan that you have included.

Great !
I'm happy you posted this, because I wanted to add the North Saskatchewan River sometime in the future, but was not sure of its whole path. I saw on Googlea Earth that it was as massive as the South Saskatchewan River, so I thought it deserved to be displayed. Also, I looked at the original WiF FE maps of the area, and saw that it was not here because of the scale and because there were already 2 rivers going in the area, so no room for it.

I think I'll mak all the mods you showed soon.

(in reply to Glen Felzien)
Post #: 167
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 1:14:40 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

On the left hand picture, is that a river that separates the Newark hex from the NYC hex? That is, can it be crossed by non-marine land units?

Now that you ask, I am not completely sure how Patrice set it up. I expect it to be a river - the Hudson to be exact.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to pak19652002)
Post #: 168
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 1:26:17 PM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002
On the left hand picture, is that a river that separates the Newark hex from the NYC hex? That is, can it be crossed by non-marine land units?

Now that you ask, I am not completely sure how Patrice set it up. I expect it to be a river - the Hudson to be exact.

That's a river. I drew the mouth of the Hudson too far maybe ?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 169
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 5:49:36 PM   
pak19652002

 

Posts: 280
Joined: 1/2/2005
Status: offline
That's what I was getting at. The Hudson is a river, of course. Maybe just make the picture thinner to avoid confusion.
I don't think it's wide enough to warrant a strait if you compare it to Gibraltar for example. I'm still fuzzy on how straits are defined in WiF.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002
On the left hand picture, is that a river that separates the Newark hex from the NYC hex? That is, can it be crossed by non-marine land units?

Now that you ask, I am not completely sure how Patrice set it up. I expect it to be a river - the Hudson to be exact.

That's a river. I drew the mouth of the Hudson too far maybe ?


(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 170
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 9/30/2006 8:04:23 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

That's what I was getting at. The Hudson is a river, of course. Maybe just make the picture thinner to avoid confusion.
I don't think it's wide enough to warrant a strait if you compare it to Gibraltar for example. I'm still fuzzy on how straits are defined in WiF.


Aren't we all? I think of a straits as a place where a ferry boat service runs. It's too wide for a bridge but it doesn't require a serious ocean-going ship. That's why at one point I was considering a straits to model the link between NYC and Staten Island/NJ. But as Patrice noted, it somewhat depends on where the hex grid falls. When an island is in the same hex as the larger land mass, the water separation may not be modelled at all (only visually/cosmetically).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to pak19652002)
Post #: 171
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 12:04:49 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
More frostbites, in Southern Alaska and Aleutians now.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 172
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 12:11:14 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
Here is northern Alaska. There are a lot of places like this one in the far north, with only wilderness.
Note that Beaufort Sea do not have Sea Box Sections. It is not neither adjacent to the Bering Sea (to its left).
I suppose this is to prevent ships from sailing there, because the Beaufort Sea is too Icy. This is an assumption from me, I do not know if the Beaufort Sea is Icy or not.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 173
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 12:32:21 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is northern Alaska. There are a lot of places like this one in the far north, with only wilderness.
Note that Beaufort Sea do not have Sea Box Sections. It is not neither adjacent to the Bering Sea (to its left).
I suppose this is to prevent ships from sailing there, because the Beaufort Sea is too Icy. This is an assumption from me, I do not know if the Beaufort Sea is Icy or not.


The two northernmost sea areas are isolated and are not available for naval operations: Kara Sea and Beaufort Sea. Given that they have no ports, it's not possible to place naval units there. So it is only a question of air units. And given that there are no naval units, what would the air units have to do?

As a counter example, the Caspian Sea has ports and sea boxes. Conveying resources across the Caspian is a definite possiblity.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 174
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 12:56:33 AM   
Froonp


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

The two northernmost sea areas are isolated and are not available for naval operations: Kara Sea and Beaufort Sea. Given that they have no ports, it's not possible to place naval units there. So it is only a question of air units. And given that there are no naval units, what would the air units have to do?

Indeed, Beaufort Sea is adjacent to Chukchi Sea where the 2 northernmost Alaskan hexes touch the map border. The Beaufort Sea is also adjacent to the Hudson Bay just above the peninsula that is at column 290-295.
The junction is out of the map area for both zones connexions, but except for the ices, nothing would prevent ships from traveling here.

I would love if WiF had a rule for ships to travel through the ice covered seas :
- Chukchi--> Beaufort --> Hudson --> Canadian Coast --> Atlantic, and
- Chukchi --> Kara --> Arctic Ocean --> Norwegian Sea

There was effectively 1 ship I know of that sailed the second path, from Kiel to the Pacific, it was one of German Raider, helped by Russian Ice breakers. Only 1 ship for all the war, the travel must not have been a pleasure cruise.

Anyway, I would love a rule about that :-))

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 175
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 1:33:07 AM   
wfzimmerman


Posts: 660
Joined: 10/22/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is northern Alaska. There are a lot of places like this one in the far north, with only wilderness.
Note that Beaufort Sea do not have Sea Box Sections. It is not neither adjacent to the Bering Sea (to its left).
I suppose this is to prevent ships from sailing there, because the Beaufort Sea is too Icy. This is an assumption from me, I do not know if the Beaufort Sea is Icy or not.


The two northernmost sea areas are isolated and are not available for naval operations: Kara Sea and Beaufort Sea. Given that they have no ports, it's not possible to place naval units there. So it is only a question of air units. And given that there are no naval units, what would the air units have to do?

As a counter example, the Caspian Sea has ports and sea boxes. Conveying resources across the Caspian is a definite possiblity.


Can a seaplane be based in the Beaufort sea during summer?

_____________________________


(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 176
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 3:43:49 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: Froonp
quote:

The two northernmost sea areas are isolated and are not available for naval operations: Kara Sea and Beaufort Sea. Given that they have no ports, it's not possible to place naval units there. So it is only a question of air units. And given that there are no naval units, what would the air units have to do?

Indeed, Beaufort Sea is adjacent to Chukchi Sea where the 2 northernmost Alaskan hexes touch the map border. The Beaufort Sea is also adjacent to the Hudson Bay just above the peninsula that is at column 290-295.
The junction is out of the map area for both zones connexions, but except for the ices, nothing would prevent ships from traveling here.

I would love if WiF had a rule for ships to travel through the ice covered seas :
- Chukchi--> Beaufort --> Hudson --> Canadian Coast --> Atlantic, and
- Chukchi --> Kara --> Arctic Ocean --> Norwegian Sea

There was effectively 1 ship I know of that sailed the second path, from Kiel to the Pacific, it was one of German Raider, helped by Russian Ice breakers. Only 1 ship for all the war, the travel must not have been a pleasure cruise.

Anyway, I would love a rule about that :-))


Actually no.

In CWIF the Alaskan land mass connected to the northern edge of the map with 2 adjacent hexes, denying the connection between the Beaufort and Chikchi Seas. As you have drawn it, the data files would have to be modified to denote that these two sea areas are adjacent. And then the Beaufort Sea would need sea boxes. I have no strong feelings either way.

As for the northwest passage across Canada through the ice from Europe to China, well, a lot of men died trying to achieve that. I think it would be a dishonor to their memory to connect the Beaufort Sea and the Hundson Bay.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 177
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 11:02:30 AM   
Froonp


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

Can a seaplane be based in the Beaufort sea during summer?

A seaplane can be based on any hex that have coastal or lake hexside, all year long.
Edit : If lake hexside and freezing, means that the seaplane is destroyed also, so, nearly all year long .

< Message edited by Froonp -- 10/1/2006 11:04:32 AM >

(in reply to wfzimmerman)
Post #: 178
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 4:20:14 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
Just passing through.  The Connecticut River (the one just East of Bridgeport) should run a more Northerly course (pretty much due North).  Up where I live now (near the Canadian border it is easily fordable over most of its length.  If I was drawing the map I'd end the river hexside in between the two mountain hexes two hexrows North of the Boston hexrow (not trying to be snotty just I've fished pretty much the whole river so I know it's depth and width pretty well).

Geez kinda always thought this the "Holy Grail" of wargames and was pleasantly surprised to see screenshots and hear that it's in Beta.  Guess I'll have to check more often.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 179
RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 10/1/2006 10:16:50 PM   
Froonp


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

ORIGINAL: spence
Just passing through.  The Connecticut River (the one just East of Bridgeport) should run a more Northerly course (pretty much due North).  Up where I live now (near the Canadian border it is easily fordable over most of its length.  If I was drawing the map I'd end the river hexside in between the two mountain hexes two hexrows North of the Boston hexrow (not trying to be snotty just I've fished pretty much the whole river so I know it's depth and width pretty well).

I corrected that, plus added the Cincinnati - Detroit rail that WiFzimmerman mentionned, and redrew slightly the coast betwween NYC and Newark so that the river is better seen.
I also shown the 4 cities that are proposed to be added (Columbus, Louisville, Grand Rapids, Syracuse).

I would like opinions about the latest especially.

Also, I would like opinions about the addition of Sudbury and Regina in Canada (See posts #132 and #134 for a map showing them).




Attachment (1)

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: MWiF Map Review - America Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.172