Slitherine

quote:

I see no problem with dual names as we did for Boden/Lulea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

I see no problem with dual names as we did for Boden/Lulea.

I like this.
In that case, I'll make it so that names are both near the symbol they correspond to. For Lulea / Boden and Merida / Progreso this could not be possible because there is a single icon (port). Except it is demonstrated that Merida population in the 40s warranted a city (it is 793k inhabitants currently, so it may be)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Earl Uhtred
It's a minor point, but Merida in Yucatan isn't on the coast and thus isn't a port. The port of Merida is Progreso.

I wonder what to do.
Are Merida & Progreso of equal size, or is there one larger that the other ?
WiF FE has it that the port is named Merida, but this is a Pacific Scaled Area, so they took Merida even if it was not really coastal. Maybe it is larger ?

From wikipedia I get that Merida is the capital of Yucatan with 793k inhabitants, 11st Mexican city, 35 km from the coast.
From the same place, I get that Progreso has a 45k population, so while they are in the same hex, the name of Merida must stay.

It is this case with a good number of cities that are near the coast, but that are not coastal. There is Lima also for example, for which the port is Callao. The original WiF FE map has both names written in the same hex, Callao near the port, and Lima near the city. It may also be the case for Boden / Lulea in Sweden too.
But it seems this is never the case in MWiF.

Should 2 names appear for a hex, one for the port, one for the city, when there is a city near the shore, that is not a port, and another much smaller, that is the real port ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Earl Uhtred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Earl Uhtred
It's a minor point, but Merida in Yucatan isn't on the coast and thus isn't a port. The port of Merida is Progreso.

I wonder what to do.
Are Merida & Progreso of equal size, or is there one larger that the other ?
WiF FE has it that the port is named Merida, but this is a Pacific Scaled Area, so they took Merida even if it was not really coastal. Maybe it is larger ?

From wikipedia I get that Merida is the capital of Yucatan with 793k inhabitants, 11st Mexican city, 35 km from the coast.
From the same place, I get that Progreso has a 45k population, so while they are in the same hex, the name of Merida must stay.

It is this case with a good number of cities that are near the coast, but that are not coastal. There is Lima also for example, for which the port is Callao. The original WiF FE map has both names written in the same hex, Callao near the port, and Lima near the city. It may also be the case for Boden / Lulea in Sweden too.
But it seems this is never the case in MWiF.

Should 2 names appear for a hex, one for the port, one for the city, when there is a city near the shore, that is not a port, and another much smaller, that is the real port ?

Merida is certainly much bigger and much older, but while the only thing in the hex is a port... If Merida appeared on the map as a city, or if Progreso was a suburb of Merida rather than a physically separate community, then by all means use that name, but until then surely it makes more sense to use the name of the anchorage that is the main defining feature of this hex?

Taking your example of Callao: I seem to remember on the America in Flames map it got its own hex and was named. Can't remember whether Lima was in the same hex. But it's been a while since I broke AiF out so who knows.

quote:

I am also confused on the name of the Guatemalan pacific port. I have been there for 8 months and I never heard of the name Istapan. To be honest there is no real city along the coast that could warrant a port but if one would be chose it would be Puerto San José or Champerico (a real stretch on that last one though)

quote:

Merida was Spanish capital in Yucatan, a very old city by American standards (excluding indigenous cities of course) and it is very large. Most of the buildings are white I rememeber correctly and the city is even called "the white city". But it is FAR from the ocean so it does not make sense to call a port Merida.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

It's the "Falkland Islands", not "Falkland Island".

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

I believe they are both wrong, it is called "Las Malvinas"

quote:

ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan
I believe they are both wrong, it is called "Las Malvinas"

NOT!
Flipper

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
One more remote place : Patagonia.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
The Falkland Islands are a contested Area.
The British People call it the Falklands, and the Argentinian people call it Las Malvinas.
Not wanting to take side on any side, I simply left the name that there is on WiF FE maps.
The spelling error is not on the real MWiF maps.

quote:


It is not contested by the people living in the islands. In fact the people voted to stay part of Great Britain.

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan
Now...only 10 more corpsized INFs to go before all Germans INFs are done. Then of course all the other nations of the world remain

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

quote:


It is not contested by the people living in the islands. In fact the people voted to stay part of Great Britain.

All five of them?

Anyway let´s not discuss politics here. I have my opinion and you have yours. Let´s leave it at that.

Now...only 10 more corpsized INFs to go before all Germans INFs are done. Then of course all the other nations of the world remain

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I like how the edge of the world is a black abyss again, just like it was 500+ years ago.

Lots of nice work Patrice!

Could the weather line maybe be thickened up a bit?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ajds
Is it too late to comment on the America map detail? My first comment is with regards to the southern California resource placement. The current map has oil in the mountains to the northeast of the Los Angeles basin - to my knowledge there was no significant oil production in that area. Regional oil production was in the western Los Angeles basin and in Bakersfield. On the map this means I suggest moving the oil resources into the clear hex with the city marker and factories, or perhaps moving one there and putting the other into Bakersfield (the southernmost clear hex of the San Joaquin Valley north of Los Angeles). This latter idea would of course require a transportion connection to make the resouce usable and hence may not be tenable (as I don't believe we have pipelines in the game currently). There was (is) heavy crude production and refining in Bakersfield as well as Los Angeles.

My second comment is also with regard to the current location of the southern California oil resource, as it seems to be in the right place for a normal resource marker, perhaps the one currently in the mountains southeast of San Jose. I say this because the Kaiser steel mills were historically in the San Bernardino area east of Los Angeles, served by the Eagle Mountain iron mine even further east. I am not suggesting there isn't significant resources in the coastal mountains where the current resource marker is, I just am not aware of them, but the Kaiser mills and related mine were substantial in the WWII timeframe. In addition there was and is quite a bit of strategic mineral mining in the desert hexes to the northeast of Los Angeles (notably potash and cement), supporting the resource on that side of Los Angeles.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is what the Northwest of the USA looks like in MWiF, with the draft coastlines I drew.

Wise Men Still Seek Him

quote:

US Pacific ports between San Francisco and Seattle

I notice there are currently no US minor ports between San Franciso and Seattle. Is that true or have we forgotten some port that had any

importance during WW2? I can't find any suitable port, but maybe it's like this because there is no such port. I don't know.