Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

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).

quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

And here is the map of the Delaware River. It should begin roughly at the same latitude of Erie, Hartford and Providence. None of these cities are on the MWiF map, but, if they were, extending the river one hexside north would match up remarkably well it seems to me.

Peter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

And here is the map of the Delaware River. It should begin roughly at the same latitude of Erie, Hartford and Providence. None of these cities are on the MWiF map, but, if they were, extending the river one hexside north would match up remarkably well it seems to me.

Peter

The question is where the river first becomes an obstacle to moving military units. At some point it is too narrow and/or shallow to be important. But eventually both these rivers become substantial military obstacles. There are also issues related to the steepness of the river banks or where it runs through canyons. The Delaware River Gap comes to mind.

By the way, we are looking for 'homer' viewpoints. It saves us from having to tramp over all the world land masses during each season of the year with transits and other surveying gear.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

Well, al I can say that both these rivers are pretty big by the time they get down to my neck of the woods (which apparently is north of where they start in MWiF). I can't say when they might become a military barrier without some defining criteria. The Susquehanna is pretty impressive all the way up. There is also a western branch that's pretty deep and dangerous. Recall the 1972 flood that flooded NY and PA. Anyway, I would be willing to scout the Susquehanna and Delaware Rivers if you give me the criteria. It would be a fun project I could get my 13 year old to help out with.

Peter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

And here is the map of the Delaware River. It should begin roughly at the same latitude of Erie, Hartford and Providence. None of these cities are on the MWiF map, but, if they were, extending the river one hexside north would match up remarkably well it seems to me.

Peter

The question is where the river first becomes an obstacle to moving military units. At some point it is too narrow and/or shallow to be important. But eventually both these rivers become substantial military obstacles. There are also issues related to the steepness of the river banks or where it runs through canyons. The Delaware River Gap comes to mind.

By the way, we are looking for 'homer' viewpoints. It saves us from having to tramp over all the world land masses during each season of the year with transits and other surveying gear.

quote:

I do not know what criteria to use. My best idea would be to compare maps showing European rivers and the WIF FE European map to better understand where ADG had rivers 'begin'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

I do not know what criteria to use. My best idea would be to compare maps showing European rivers and the WIF FE European map to better understand where ADG had rivers 'begin'.

Well, I for one have a tendency to trust the CWiF's map first designer(s).
Even if there are scores of places where I found improvements to be made, generaly the map is well done and represents the areas in a good way.

In that particular case, there are quite al ot of rivers in the area, and maybe making those longer risk making this place too much "River rich".

quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002
It raises a fair philosophical question: Are we going for geographic fidelity or some sort of playability test? I only got interested in this case because I know the area. However, I see many sites are under consideration for tweaking. It seems once this box is opened there is no end to it!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: pak19652002
It raises a fair philosophical question: Are we going for geographic fidelity or some sort of playability test? I only got interested in this case because I know the area. However, I see many sites are under consideration for tweaking. It seems once this box is opened there is no end to it!

Well, the maps are changing from WIF FE due to the conversion to the European scale throughout the world. We've been reexamining all the maps with the philosophical criteria of:

1 - True to WIF FE
2 - True to geographical reality (the "real world")
3 - Playability considerations (e.g., supply lines, available invasion and attack hexes on important hexes).

#1 gets diluted because the European scale provides more detailed terrain. There are simply more hexes that have to be filled in with something. How the rivers run changes too. And given the increase in detail, we decided that we should use that opportunity to make improvements. Indeed, the non-European maps from WIF FE did not have the capability of being drawn with so much detail because of their larger scale.

#2 is the basis for any changes we make.

#3 intrudes rarely, and has to do with very specific cases. For example: supply in eastern USSR, invading Singapore, attacking Calcutta.

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99
Out of curiosity, why is there that tundra in Newfoundland? I haven't been to the area, but I do know people from The Rock (as it is affectionately known), and I suppose I could ask them what the terrain is like. I wouldn't think it was tundra, though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
And here is Panama.
Colon & Panama City are both adjacent to Both Sea Areas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here are the Antilles. Hummm.... can nearly feel the taste of rum cocktails.
This area strongly reminds me of the famous PC game, Pirate (Sid Meyer's). What a great experience !!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames

Patrice, I showed my local Albuquerque WiF group your work on the MWiF map, and other than removing the second mountain hex east of Albuquerque, they all suggested making the hexside due east an alpine hexside, to account for the cliff face of the Sandias (it's like a three thousand foot drop).

quote:

Thanks for your hard work, great job on Panama!

quote:

ORIGINAL: MPHopcroft

I am enjoying seeing these map sections, but they also bring up two interesting questions that are related to game play as much as anything else.

1. Historically, those Latin American nations that actually bothered to enter the war in a limited capacity joined the Allies, probably so they could continue to trade with the United States. Would it be possible in game for a Latin American country (such as an earlier-than-historical Peronist Argentina) to side with the Axis instead?

2. To continue the example, Would either the Axis or Argentina gain anything from them doing so, and would an Axis Argentina pose a strategic problem for the US and Britain?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: MPHopcroft

I am enjoying seeing these map sections, but they also bring up two interesting questions that are related to game play as much as anything else.

1. Historically, those Latin American nations that actually bothered to enter the war in a limited capacity joined the Allies, probably so they could continue to trade with the United States. Would it be possible in game for a Latin American country (such as an earlier-than-historical Peronist Argentina) to side with the Axis instead?

2. To continue the example, Would either the Axis or Argentina gain anything from them doing so, and would an Axis Argentina pose a strategic problem for the US and Britain?

Hopefully, someone else who is confident in their knowledge on this topic will answer you. In the meantime, I am about to post 7 more pages of the 2nd tutorial which will give you some information related to your question.

quote:

19.8 Allied minor countries
(...)
Brazil
The USA can declare that Brazil is aligning with it during any Allied declaration of war step if Brazil is neutral and the USA is at war with Germany, Italy and Japan.

Central America
The USA can declare that Central America is aligning with it during any Allied declaration of war step if Central America is neutral and the USA is at war with Germany, Italy or Japan.

Mexico
The USA can declare that Mexico is aligning with it during any Allied declaration of war step if Mexico is neutral and the USA is at war with Germany, Italy and Japan.
**********************************
Please note here, that "Central America" does not exist per see in MWiF. It is replaced by the real countries that were hiden behind this generic names, that is Panama, Costa Rica, and the others whose name escapes me for the moment.

quote:

**********************************
13.8 Victory check
(...)
Subtract 1 from an Allied major power’s total for each minor country on the American map that it declared war on. Subtract 1 from the USA’s total if the USA has declared that both Mexico and Brazil are aligned with it (see 19.8).
**********************************
Please note that in MWiF there is no such thing as the "America Map", but nevertheless all countries in MWiF are bound to a particular continent, whether American, Asia or Europe, for the enforcing of such rules that were linked to specifics maps in WiF FE.

RAW Quote :
**********************************
19.7 Axis minor countries
(...)
Argentina
Germany can declare that Argentina is aligning with it during any Axis declaration of war step if Argentina is neutral and an Allied major power has declared war on any minor country on the America map.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

**********************************
13.8 Victory check
(...)
Subtract 1 from an Allied major power’s total for each minor country on the American map that it declared war on. Subtract 1 from the USA’s total if the USA has declared that both Mexico and Brazil are aligned with it (see 19.8).
**********************************
Please note that in MWiF there is no such thing as the "America Map", but nevertheless all countries in MWiF are bound to a particular continent, whether American, Asia or Europe, for the enforcing of such rules that were linked to specifics maps in WiF FE.

RAW Quote :
**********************************
19.7 Axis minor countries
(...)
Argentina
Germany can declare that Argentina is aligning with it during any Axis declaration of war step if Argentina is neutral and an Allied major power has declared war on any minor country on the America map.

From this you may see that it is a very bad idea for any Allied Major Power to declare war on any American Country, because of the Victory City penalty, and because of the Argentina Alignement, which will cause havoc because Argentina has a relatively large army & navy who can make Brazil life difficult and attack far Allied convoy lines. Argentina on the other hand would not be a good supply source for Axis ships, because it would necessitate ARgentina's Capital to have a supply path to the Axis home Country of the ships.