RE: Solomon Islands Map

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: Solomon Islands Map

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: Solomon Islands Map

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/7/2008 6:01:19 AM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

WiF gives every country free SeaBees, allowing airplanes to base almost anywhere, including jungle hexes. This changes the Pacific struggle somewhat and is probably the reason for a port symbol on Guadalcanal ... to make it into an even more valuable hex as an airbase that can base two planes instead of one.

Personally, I've never seen a fight for it...why not just skip it and head straight for New Ireland? Or skip the Nimitz/McArthur 2-prong strategy altogether and put the Green Machine on 'bulldoze' mode and go straight through the Marshalls.

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 31

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/7/2008 8:39:53 AM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

WiF gives every country free SeaBees, allowing airplanes to base almost anywhere, including jungle hexes. This changes the Pacific struggle somewhat and is probably the reason for a port symbol on Guadalcanal ... to make it into an even more valuable hex as an airbase that can base two planes instead of one.

Personally, I've never seen a fight for it...why not just skip it and head straight for New Ireland? Or skip the Nimitz/McArthur 2-prong strategy altogether and put the Green Machine on 'bulldoze' mode and go straight through the Marshalls.

Yes, I never fought for Guadalcanal either. I only used it a couple of times as the US to anchor slow BBs, and as a NAV base. I never used it as the Japanese.

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 32

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/22/2008 5:52:46 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

A minor matter which will not affect game-play, but, since you have chosen to show the northern border of the Solomons, should perhaps be drawn in for historical accuracy...

There's a border missing in New Guinea. New Guinea at this time was divided into three. The west, as you have marked, was Netherlands New Guinea. The eastern half was divided down the Bismark Range into plain Papua in the south and Territory of New Guinea in the northeast.

There was a subtle legal difference. Papua was owned by Australia outright, having been given to her by Britain round about 1906. The Territory of New Guinea was the German colony seized by Australia in 1914. After the First World War, Australia administered it under a League of Nations mandate. The Territory of New Guinea consisted of not only the northeast of New Guinea but also the Admiralty Islands, New Britain and New Ireland, right up to the border with the Solomons.

Buna was in Papua, but Lae and Salamaua were in the Territory. So I think the border should be shown running along the alpine hexsides to meet the northern coast at the hexside with the W of 'Papua (CW)'.

Since the Territory was broader than Papua, it would be more accurate to shift two of the alpine hexsides. Looking at the hex northwest of the word 'Bismarck', the NW alpine should be shifted to the W, and the E alpine shifted to the SE.

I think you should identify Buna as a historical site, as to the Australians it was a major (and very controversial) bloodbath which soured relations with the Americans, especially with Eichelberger. Buna is the jungle hex 2NE Port Moresby.

Lae needs to be moved one hex NE: it was on the other side of the bay. Where it is presently is Salamaua.

Under the mandates, the protecting powers were forbidden to fortify. I have often thought that building fortifications should therefore be illegal in all mandated territories until Japan militarises the Marshalls. This would discourage the unhistorical pre-war fortification of Rabaul by the Allies, while permitting the fortification of Port Moresby.

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 33

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/22/2008 8:27:34 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
I think you should identify Buna as a historical site, as to the Australians it was a major (and very controversial) bloodbath which soured relations with the Americans, especially with Eichelberger.� Buna is the jungle hex 2NE Port Moresby.

It's already there. You might have commented on old maps.

quote:

Lae needs to be moved one hex NE: it was on the other side of the bay.� Where it is presently is Salamaua.

I modified the place but not as you said. Lae is not in the hex NE, it is in the N of the hex it is now.

quote:

Under the mandates, the protecting powers were forbidden to fortify.� I have often thought that building fortifications should therefore be illegal in�all mandated territories until Japan militarises the Marshalls.� This would discourage the unhistorical pre-war fortification of Rabaul by the Allies, while permitting the fortification of Port Moresby.

The unhistorical pre-war fortification of Rabaul is moot, as the allies can't put a unit in Rabaul before the US play the right US entry Option. thus, if they put a fort here, it is worth nothing and destroyed freely by the Japaneses when they invade during their red wave. Same for Port Moresby.

I don't think that there is benefit in distinguishing Papua and the Territory of New Guinea.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 34

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/22/2008 10:57:49 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

It is simply that you have put red border lines between the Admiralty Islands and New Ireland, and between New Britain and North East New Guinea, when in fact all these were part of the same ex-German mandate and administered together. Those red-lines shouldn't be there, but the one down the Bismarcks should.

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 35

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/22/2008 11:54:50 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

It is simply that you have put red border lines between the Admiralty Islands and New Ireland, and between New Britain and North East New Guinea, when in fact all these were part of the same ex-German mandate and administered together.� Those red-lines shouldn't be there, but the one down the Bismarcks should.

So you're asking that the NE part of Papua down to Lae approximatively should be a separate Territory named Northeast New Guinea, and that Admiralty Islands, New Ireland, New Britain should all be a single Territory included in Northeast New Guinea. What you say is backed up by maps from the pre-war timeframe that I have.

I'd like to make Northeast New Guinea appear on the map (I love historical accuracy), unfortunately we are reaching the limit of the number of countries in the game. Merging all 3 into one would help, but I'm worried to do that because of conquest / liberations issues, especially with New Britain. New Britain now is conquered by conquering Rabaul only (which is free during the surprise invasions). Conquering Rabaul gives Japan all New Britain as soon as the conquest step comes. Having New Britain part of this new Territory would make the conquest of New Britain either be done hex per hex by the Japanese, or would need him to also conquer Wewak and Lae, which generaly are ignored by the Japanese as they give no good bases on no good targets. So the best from my point of view would be to create a new Territory (Northeast New Guinea), but we are already at the maximum number of countries... Unless Steve removes the limit ? But last time I asked, he told me... well... to forget about that

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 36

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/22/2008 11:57:19 PM

Froonp

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

There is another Territory that I would have liked to add in the game, this is Tannu Tuva, in the Sayan Mountains, near Mongolia. This was an independent country at the time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tannu_Tuva.
It has 0 impact in the game, and also 0 interest, but it was accurate.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 37

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 12:05:01 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

It is simply that you have put red border lines between the Admiralty Islands and New Ireland, and between New Britain and North East New Guinea, when in fact all these were part of the same ex-German mandate and administered together.� Those red-lines shouldn't be there, but the one down the Bismarcks should.

So you're asking that the NE part of Papua down to Lae approximatively should be a separate Territory named Northeast New Guinea, and that Admiralty Islands, New Ireland, New Britain should all be a single Territory included in Northeast New Guinea. What you say is backed up by maps from the pre-war timeframe that I have.

I'd like to make Northeast New Guinea appear on the map (I love historical accuracy), unfortunately we are reaching the limit of the number of countries in the game. Merging all 3 into one would help, but I'm worried to do that because of conquest / liberations issues, especially with New Britain. New Britain now is conquered by conquering Rabaul only (which is free during the surprise invasions). Conquering Rabaul gives Japan all New Britain as soon as the conquest step comes. Having New Britain part of this new Territory would make the conquest of New Britain either be done hex per hex by the Japanese, or would need him to also conquer Wewak and Lae, which generaly are ignored by the Japanese as they give no good bases on no good targets. So the best from my point of view would be to create a new Territory (Northeast New Guinea), but we are already at the maximum number of countries... Unless Steve removes the limit ? But last time I asked, he told me... well... to forget about that

Clearly you did not take my advice.

You were suppose to forget about that!

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 38

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 1:50:19 AM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

There is another Territory that I would have liked to add in the game, this is Tannu Tuva

I had noticed the non-appearance of Tannu Tuva, with its capital of Kyzyl Khoto at the source of the Yenessei, but assumed that this was because its independence was sham (China still claimed sovereignty over it, which was why before the war a pretence of independence suited Stalin: it was finally annexed by the Soviet Union in 1944). Perhaps it merits a name in red and nothing more, like Ruthenia?

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 39

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 2:01:14 AM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
I had noticed the non-appearance of Tannu Tuva, with its capital of Kyzyl Khoto at the source of the Yenessei, but assumed that this was because its independence was sham (China still claimed sovereignty over it, which was why before the war a pretence of independence suited Stalin: it was finally annexed by the Soviet Union in 1944). Perhaps it merits a name in red and nothing more, like Ruthenia?

I have put the name already

. I'll also add the name of the capital, good idea !

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 40

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 2:28:54 AM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I'd like to make Northeast New Guinea appear on the map (I love historical accuracy), unfortunately we are reaching the limit of the number of countries in the game. Merging all 3 into one would help, but I'm worried to do that because of conquest / liberations issues, especially with New Britain.

It's an intriguing dilemma. But I think North East New Guinea (note that 'North East' is two words here, though I have also seen it hyphenated) should appear and should include everything that constituted the German colony as a single entity. Because the campaign down the Kokoda Trail and then along the coast is well documented (unlike Tannu Tuva!), any avid reader of military histories is going to feel a bit put out if an entire mandate does not appear in the game.

As for the conquest requirements, I suggest a compromise: leave Lae and delete Wewak. I particularly like the idea of giving the Japanese an incentive to land at Lae, as it makes an overland attack on Port Moresby so much more likely ("Having come this far, may as well try for Port Moresby"). And Lae was much more important than Wewak.

Could you also have a look at the gap between New Britain and New Ireland? This seems too big to me. I thought the two were so close they might even have deserved a crossing arrow.

As a possession, Papua was administered differently from North East New Guinea. In June 1942 it had a battalion of militia (the 39th) and "the Papuan Infantry Battalion".

Please give me a rule reference preventing the garrisoning of CW possessions: I had a look at US Entry Options but couldn't find anything relevant.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 41

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 3:10:22 AM

Zorachus99

Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

Please give me a rule reference preventing the garrisoning of CW possessions: I had a look at US Entry Options but couldn't find anything relevant.

US Entry Option

36. CW reinforces Pacific - Allied land and aircraft units can�t enter Hong Kong or any CW controlled territory on the Pacific map until:
� you have chosen this option; or
� Japan is at war with the Commonwealth; or
� an Axis land unit has entered Hong Kong or any CW Pacific map territory.

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 42

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 11:58:06 AM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
It's an intriguing dilemma. But I think North East New Guinea (note that 'North East' is two words here, though I have also seen it hyphenated) should appear and should include everything that constituted the German colony as a single entity. Because the campaign down the Kokoda Trail and then along the coast is well documented (unlike Tannu Tuva!), any avid reader of military histories is going to feel a bit put out if an entire mandate does not appear in the game.

I will add the name of the Australian Mandate area, that is "Territory of New Guinea" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territory_of_New_Guinea) on the map, but will leave the rest as it is. I don't think this is much a problem to have Papua and the Territory of New Guinea being agglomerated into one single Papua entity. There are other places, like Baluchistan in western India, Jehol seized by Japan and annexed to Manchukuo, maybe some USSR republics too or territories in the NEI, that might deserve separate territory status under the rule of the country that controls them now, but I think this goes too far. The original designers could have done this to the original maps, there is the room for that, and in keeping with the minimalistic changes approach, I prefer not to open that pandora box.

quote:

As for the conquest requirements, I suggest a compromise: leave Lae and delete Wewak. I particularly like the idea of giving the Japanese an incentive to land at Lae, as it makes an overland attack on Port Moresby so much more likely ("Having come this far, may as well try for Port Moresby"). And Lae was much more important than Wewak.

the incencitive to land at Lae is already there, as it is in WiF FE : It is a mountain hex, and a minor port here allows you to base planes. It would have been better if the Sea Area border was at Lea instead of SE of it, but the designers had it this way, so be it.

quote:

Could you also have a look at the gap between New Britain and New Ireland? This seems too big to me. I thought the two were so close they might even have deserved a crossing arrow.

No, I can't. Too much work to do here.

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 43

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 12:05:34 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Please give me a rule reference preventing the garrisoning of CW possessions: I had a look at US Entry Options but couldn't find anything relevant.

US Entry Option

36. CW reinforces Pacific - Allied land and aircraft units can�t enter Hong Kong or any CW controlled territory on the Pacific map until:
� you have chosen this option; or
� Japan is at war with the Commonwealth; or
� an Axis land unit has entered Hong Kong or any CW Pacific map territory.

And usually, when the USA have reached the 34 entry level, they play the War Appropriation Bill, which is a 1-2 turn advance warning that they will declare war to Japan or Germany, so usually the USA are declared war upon real soon after option 34 and do not get the opportunity to play the option that follow.
Having played 18 global war scenarios (2 underway, and a couple not finished), I never seen the USA play that option. Sure it might happen, but this need exceptional circumstances IMO.
The bottom line is that in most games, Japan should be able to grab Rabaul, Hongkong, and any other CW territory they like to seize, for free during their red wave turn (Invasions on the suprise turn impose a penalty on the strength of the notional unit -- that defend any hex against an invasion -- that have it worth 0 combat points, except if that hex is a city or in the ZoC of unit -- In that case, the notional would need to be isolated to be worth 0 combat points).

(in reply to Zorachus99)

Post #: 44

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 1:15:34 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

Option 36 is a strong one. It is a good move to play it before 34 sometimes, I wouldn't play every game the same. You can easily get the entry level at the same time with a single chit draw. Yeah, costs a turn of using option 34, but dropping the Australian GARRison unit in Rabaul is a serious thorn in Japan's side. Perhaps most useful in a game where Japan is doing the best among the Axis.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 45

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 3:55:04 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

The Wikipedia entry for Lae confirms that Rabaul and Lae were part of the same territory:

"When the volcanic eruptions occurred in Rabaul in 1937 a decision was made to transfer the capital of the Territory of New Guinea to Lae. World War II got in the way of the transfer and in 1942 the town was occupied by the Empire of Japan. Lae, Rabaul and Salamaua became the major Japanese bases in New Guinea."

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 46

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 4:00:57 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

Option 36 twice has the word 'territory' in italics. What is the definition of a territory? Which CW areas on the map are free of this restriction because they are not territories?

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 47

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 4:14:34 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

Option 36 twice has the word 'territory' in italics.� What is the definition of a territory?� Which�CW areas on the map are free of this restriction because they are not territories?

In WiF, there are 3 political entities.
- Major Powers
- Minor Countries
- Territories.

Major Powers and Minor Countries have capital cities, it is what define them. Territories have no Capital. The difference between Major Powers and Minor Countries is just that the players control Major Powers, and that Major Powers can build an independent army.
Major Powers can control Minor Countries and Territories, and Minor Countries can control other Minor Countries and Territories.
Major Powers & Minor Countries are conquered when their capital and their factories are enemy controlled (Exceptions : France & Italy). They can surrender when half their factories are enemy controlled. Territories are conquered when all their ports, or all their hexes, are enemy controlled.

On the Pacific Map, Except for Australia and New Zealand who are CW Major Powers, there is no CW area that is not a Territory. Papua, New Britain, New Ireland, the Solomons, the Gilberts, etc... all are territories.

Also, see here : http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1272834

< Message edited by Froonp -- 2/23/2008 4:19:51 PM >

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 48

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 4:18:01 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

The Wikipedia entry for Lae confirms that Rabaul and Lae were part of the same territory:

"When the volcanic eruptions occurred in Rabaul in 1937 a decision was made to transfer the capital of the Territory of New Guinea to Lae. World War II got in the way of the transfer and in 1942 the town was occupied by the Empire of Japan. Lae, Rabaul and Salamaua became the major Japanese bases in New Guinea."

Ah la la... I'm very much tempted into merging those 3 territories (New Britian, New Ireland, Admiralties Islands, plus the northeastern part of Papua) into one.... "Territory of New Guinea".
Would need Japan to control Rabaul + Lae + Wewak to control what they controlled historicaly... It's true that I like that...

I just don't like the departure from WiF FE....

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 49

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 4:38:14 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

The really big change in MWiF is the change of scale in the Pacific. Measured against that earthquake, I don't think anyone is going to complain if we take the opportunity to improve geo-political accuracy in passing...

Could you display the relevant WiF FE maps for comparison please?

Just to nit-pick, though ... the red line north of Bougainville should be to the south, as that island was technically also part of the Territory of New Guinea (That doesn't affect anything of course).

Bougainville was a major airbase for first the Japanese and later the Allies. Yes, the north is mountainous, but the southwest is flat and low. I think the southern hex of Bougainville should be clear.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 50

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 6:39:10 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Could you display the relevant WiF FE maps for comparison please?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Froonp -- 2/23/2008 6:40:01 PM >

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 51

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 7:12:54 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
The really big change in MWiF is the change of scale in the Pacific.� Measured against that earthquake, I don't think anyone is going to complain if we take the opportunity to improve geo-political accuracy in passing...

Are there other opinions ? All what Marcus said is true about the Territory of New Guinea.
Do you think that it should be considered a Territory including New Britain, New Ireland, Admiralty Islands the northeast part of Papua, and Bougainville ?

quote:

Just to nit-pick, though ... the red line north of Bougainville should be to the south, as that island was technically also part of the Territory of New Guinea�(That doesn't affect anything of course).

Right, of course

This guy makes me feel miserable, he keeps finding problems

quote:

Bougainville was a major airbase for�first the Japanese and later the Allies.� Yes, the north is mountainous, but the southwest is flat and low.� I think the southern hex of Bougainville should be clear.

Clear ? Clear as a tank country ? Wouldn't it be better as Jungle ?
Hard to change for me as it is a coastal hex. Only Steve can do that [TERR file, change the 3rd digit for 125,184 from 5 to 4 for jungle, 2 for clear, regenerate the coastal hex file, include it in the master coastal hex file].
As a remark, WiF FE map has it a mountain too, but WiF FE has it in a single hex.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to marcuswatney)

Post #: 52

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 7:22:57 PM

Norman42

Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

Would need Japan to control Rabaul + Lae + Wewak to control what they controlled historicaly... It's true that I like that...

This seems like quite an anti-Japanese change to the capture of territories in this area, forcing Japan to commit quite a bit more then they normally do.

Lets face it, nearly all of Japan's gains in this area are during the single impulse of the 'red wave' as you call it. Requiring more forces to accomplish the same task is asking Japan to commit forces they generally dont have. The 'red wave' after all is usually just 3-4 corps and 5-6 divisions to conquer a couple million square miles of Earth.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 53

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 7:25:13 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Bougainville was a major airbase for�first the Japanese and later the Allies.� Yes, the north is mountainous, but the southwest is flat and low.� I think the southern hex of Bougainville should be clear.

Clear ? Clear as a tank country ? Wouldn't it be better as Jungle ?
Hard to change for me as it is a coastal hex. Only Steve can do that [TERR file, change the 3rd digit for 125,184 from 5 to 4 for jungle, 2 for clear, regenerate the coastal hex file, include it in the master coastal hex file].
As a remark, WiF FE map has it a mountain too, but WiF FE has it in a single hex.

I'd prefer jungle.
Bougainville nowadays is a member of the Solomons Islands Rain Forests ecoregion. That must be more jungle than clear terrain on Bougainville.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Islands_rain_forests

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 54

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 7:28:06 PM

Norman42

Posts: 244
Joined: 2/9/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline

Agreed, Bougainville south hex should be Jungle. There were mountains on the island, but the important parts militarily (the airfields) were on the lowland coastal areas that were covered in jungle. Splitting the isle into 1mtn and 1jng hex would show this nicely I think.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 55

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 7:43:10 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norman42

quote:

Would need Japan to control Rabaul + Lae + Wewak to control what they controlled historicaly... It's true that I like that...

This seems like quite an anti-Japanese change to the capture of territories in this area, forcing Japan to commit quite a bit more then they normally do.

Lets face it, nearly all of Japan's gains in this area are during the single impulse of the 'red wave' as you call it. Requiring more forces to accomplish the same task is asking Japan to commit forces they generally dont have. The 'red wave' after all is usually just 3-4 corps and 5-6 divisions to conquer a couple million square miles of Earth.

This is exactly why I'm asking the question.

(in reply to Norman42)

Post #: 56

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 8:27:57 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

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

I vote for keeping the 3 territories separate.

As for other changes that involve changing the coastal and'or river/lake bitmaps, I'll accept revisions once a month - let's say on the 15th of each month. It is a pain to do these.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 57

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 9:23:51 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I vote for keeping the 3 territories separate.

As for other changes that involve changing the coastal and'or river/lake bitmaps, I'll accept revisions once a month - let's say on the 15th of each month. It is a pain to do these.

Maybe we can just separate the Territory of New Guinea from Papua ?
Argg, I remember, he said me to forget it

This is said, I found a beautifull map about the Pacific (http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-P-Papua/maps/USA-P-Papua-I.html), done in 1943 and with the 1939 borders, and if you look at it, you see that Japan was given a Mandate over the Mariana, the Carolines, the Palau, and the Marshalls.

It would not be good for the game to merge all of them in a single Japanese Mandate, so maybe it is better to ignore the Mandates, and just keep the countries we have ?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 58

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 9:25:18 PM

Froonp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
As for other changes that involve changing the coastal and'or river/lake bitmaps, I'll accept revisions once a month - let's say on the 15th of each month. It is a pain to do these.

I'll keep them in a list then, that I'll give you once per month.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 59

RE: Solomon Islands Map - 2/23/2008 9:38:17 PM

marcuswatney

Posts: 279
Joined: 2/28/2006
Status: offline

My feeling is that expanding the scale brings with it an obligation to improve accuracy. Or looked at another way, errors which can be forgiven in WiF FE because those Pacific maps were drawn with a broad brush, and with a child's blobs for islands, aren't really excusable given the naturalistic look and superb detail achieved with MWiF. It's a well-documented area, and, for me at any rate, seeing the Territory of (North East) New Guinea not recognised as a functioning entity does make me wince.

Since considerable care has been taken to properly delineate obscure groups of islands such as the Marquesas, shouldn't we take at least the same care with territories that are actually in the front-line?

My feeling is that creating the Territory to include the northeast coast of New Guinea, Admiralty Islands, New Britain, New Ireland and Bougainville is a neutral change. Correct me if I am wrong, but my reasoning is:

1. The capture of Rabaul itself is not affected ... and ultimately that's the only hex which is truly important.

2. With the old division, the capture of Rabaul led to the control of the four other unimportant hexes of New Britain. With the new Territory, a Japanese ground unit will just have to expend some movement factors to pick these up and achieve the same result.

3. With the old division, control of Port Moresby, Lae and Wewak was necessary to gain overall control of 'Papua', so in practice the Japanese had to just pick up hexes by moving through them. With the new Territory, control of Rabaul, Lae and Wewak gives them overall control of everything north of the Bismarck Range (and nothing south of it).

4. Yes, it requires more effort for the Japanese to capture Rabaul, Lae and Wewak to get a 'result'. But the reward is greater ... automatic capture of northeast New Guinea, Admiralty Islands, New Ireland, New Britain and Bougainville without having to launch spurious invasions to pick up perimeter hexes.

5. And the point is that there is no obligation on the Japanese player to deviate from established practice (grab Rabaul, and pick up Lae later). He can still do that if he wants. But he also now has the alternative of picking up some real estate to hold as a defensive perimeter by taking the trouble to capture just three hexes.

With the new configuration, I think the standard strategy will be to take only Rabaul in the 'red wave', and in some other impulse (as needs dictate) invade Wewak and subsequently march overland to Lae. With Rabaul, Wewak and Lae controlled, the Japanese player can then deploy air units around a defensive perimeter as may be needed. I don't think that is a huge change.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 60