RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 12:15:44 PM)

quote:

Kalgan (hex NW of Peking) (proposal) (0 YES, 1 voters) (NO : Froonp) NO, but I think rail coming from NW mountains should connect through that hex

You're right about the rail, I modified it.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 12:22:35 PM)

quote:

New City: Jianling(Sashi) 3 hexes SW of Nanyang, where Yangtze is printed on map (reason: This looks like a reasonable-sized city, and currently there is no good supply source in the area between the Yangtze and HangKiang, which is an important bit of front real estate, and also the area between/along those rivers seem to have good infrastructure ans heavy population, but there are no cities)
Ichang (3 hexes W of Wuhan) (proposal) (0 voters) NO (Yianling seems the bigger, and I don't think both are waranted) YES if no Yianling


Well, on the WWII maps, Ichang is often present, and Jianling (Sashi) (or Yianling ?) is not.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 12:45:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yohan

I have one comment for those who discuss CWiF as part of the analysis on MWiF for China. It is flawed. The game was flawed and there is no where enough statistical data to make a valid analysis.

I don't understand why you say that.
The unmodified MWiF map is exactly the same now as the CWiF map was. So all games that has occured in the China Theater in CWiF is exactly the same as game in the China Theater in MWiF if the map is untouched. So, play experience from CWiF in China is usefull to understand where the map is flawed. The map vision only is not enought, the play experience is usefull too because of the weather effects.

quote:

Patrice, I think it is time to draw a line in the sand and call the map with hte current votes. Let the play testers have at it.

I think I will do it soon.
I wanted to let it live on the thread for a month or so, so that nothing hasty was made. We're soon at th month, I posted this initialy on 24 May. But if everyone is happy with things as they are and if no more modifications are done, I'll draw the line in the sand.

Moreover, Steve isn't finished with entering the Scandinavia map modifications data in the CSV files, so I bet he hasn't time to enter the data for the China map in the CSV files for the moment.

As I already wrote Yohan, you didn't really vote for each city (except saying NO for 3 of them) aren't you interested in rating the others ?

Note : With Incy latest ratings, Hengyang appears on the map 2, 2 hexes SW of Changsha on the railine, with 8 votes & 4 YES (Froonp, Wosung, Incy & Borger), and 4 NO (ullern, lomyrin, Trees & Shannon).



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 1:37:51 PM)

As I modified the rail around Peking, I thought I'd post how it looks.
I'm calling it map 5b.
[image]local://upfiles/10447/EB05B9D673E8453D841F48B32F094425.jpg[/image]



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 1:40:00 PM)

Here is the north part.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/766BBDA0A4944A51AECC801F79D7416F.jpg[/image]



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 1:41:38 PM)

And the South part.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/CE929909735F47B0AA16D9DF6BA4731D.jpg[/image]



YohanTM2 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 10:02:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

As I already wrote Yohan, you didn't really vote for each city (except saying NO for 3 of them) aren't you interested in rating the others ?



I was yes except for the no votes <g>

I like the minor port additions as well. Overall I think the map changes are great but it will be the playtesting and frankly the first hundred games or so that will really test the excellent work you have done.

As stated I think there are issues that need troops to address that are caused more by the changes in map scale. BUT, until it has been play tested and gamed who knows.

Look at SC2 as a good example. The playtesters did a fine job but there were serious play balance issues that resulted in some signifigant changes once the game hit the street. I think that Steve has shown a fantastic willingness to listen and if changes are needed once it hits the street I am sure they will be made.

Thanks again for taking this task in hand, I hope it did not affect your day job too much!

Rob



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 10:48:42 PM)

quote:

quote:

As I already wrote Yohan, you didn't really vote for each city (except saying NO for 3 of them) aren't you interested in rating the others ?

I was yes except for the no votes <g>

You mean, YES to all other cities & ports that are on the map, that's it ?
Not YES to all cities & ports proposed that are not on the map ?



Incy -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/11/2006 11:25:32 PM)

Then I vote yes for Ichang.

btw, I'd also really like to see more bad terrain between the Hankiang and the yangtze, especially in the northern part (north of the Wuhan-Ichang hexrow). Google has a few areas with really good resolution in this area, and it's visible that the terrain is 90% forested hills (Unlike most other hilled areas in eastern china, witch show mostly farmed terraces in hilly terrain with high resolution).

Incy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

New City: Jianling(Sashi) 3 hexes SW of Nanyang, where Yangtze is printed on map (reason: This looks like a reasonable-sized city, and currently there is no good supply source in the area between the Yangtze and HangKiang, which is an important bit of front real estate, and also the area between/along those rivers seem to have good infrastructure ans heavy population, but there are no cities)
Ichang (3 hexes W of Wuhan) (proposal) (0 voters) NO (Yianling seems the bigger, and I don't think both are waranted) YES if no Yianling


Well, on the WWII maps, Ichang is often present, and Jianling (Sashi) (or Yianling ?) is not.




Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 12:43:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Incy
btw, I'd also really like to see more bad terrain between the Hankiang and the yangtze, especially in the northern part (north of the Wuhan-Ichang hexrow). Google has a few areas with really good resolution in this area, and it's visible that the terrain is 90% forested hills (Unlike most other hilled areas in eastern china, witch show mostly farmed terraces in hilly terrain with high resolution).


In a previous post, you also wrote :

quote:

The area between Han Kiang and Yangzee seems to have way to good terrain. My suggestion: Hex NW+W of Wuhan (east of Han Kiang): clear->Mountain , Hex west of that: clear->forest , Hex west of that: clear->mountain , Hex west of that: forest->mountain , Hex NE of that: clear->mountain , Hex NW of that: clear->forest (linking up to forest north of river)


At the time I answered :

quote:

I agree that it seems there is too much good terrain, but I think that the mountains here are not elevated enough or broken enough to warrant all that. Also, those modifications would widden the mountain between Wuhan & Chungking too much. What do you think for this place others ? Wosung ? Nils ?


I'm reluctant to add more moutains (as I said above) but I agree that the terrain should be more broken, so could you be specific as to where you would add forests ?

[image]local://upfiles/10447/2F442703FD1A456686D6125F168636AA.jpg[/image]



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 1:07:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
quote:

ORIGINAL: Incy
btw, I'd also really like to see more bad terrain between the Hankiang and the yangtze, especially in the northern part (north of the Wuhan-Ichang hexrow). Google has a few areas with really good resolution in this area, and it's visible that the terrain is 90% forested hills (Unlike most other hilled areas in eastern china, witch show mostly farmed terraces in hilly terrain with high resolution).

I'm reluctant to add more moutains (as I said above) but I agree that the terrain should be more broken, so could you be specific as to where you would add forests ?
[image]local://upfiles/10447/2F442703FD1A456686D6125F168636AA.jpg[/image]

Incy, I'm thinking about adding 3 forest hexes. 2 where Hankiang is written and a 3rd NW of the Western one. All 3 are on the Western / Southern Hankiang bank.

Would you agree with this placement ?

Also, I'm realizing (I seem to remember that someone raised that issue, but am not sure) that Nanyang may be placed at the wrong place. Measuring and looking at Google Earth, I think that it should be in the hex NW from where I placed it (still on the rail).
I would remove the Mountain from this hex too.

What do you think of that ?



Incy -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 3:21:51 AM)


quote:

Incy, I'm thinking about adding 3 forest hexes. 2 where Hankiang is written and a 3rd NW of the Western one. All 3 are on the Western / Southern Hankiang bank.

Would you agree with this placement ?


Yes. More or less exctly what I was hoping for.

quote:

Also, I'm realizing (I seem to remember that someone raised that issue, but am not sure) that Nanyang may be placed at the wrong place. Measuring and looking at Google Earth, I think that it should be in the hex NW from where I placed it (still on the rail).
I would remove the Mountain from this hex too.

What do you think of that ?


Defiantely better, yes. There's still something wrong with the proportions in this area, according to google the distances
Nanyang<->Sian and Nanyang<->Wuhsan should be just about equal. Maybe Nanyang should be placed yet another hex further west (so NW+W fgrom wheree it is now)? This would also place it more correct with respect to Chengchow.

Problem with moving it there is that it moves across the starting line into chinese-held territory. Did Japan hold Nanyang sept 1 '39 ??
Mountains would also have to be rearranged, of course (mountain-> clear in hexes SW and E of new location, clear-> mountain in current nanyang location ?) Also, the railraoad seems wrong here. The rail runs SW from Nanyang to Xianfang (by the Hiankiang), but then departs from the river further south and enters Wuhan almost from the north. So maybe change the rail to:
ChengChow->SW->SW(Nanyang)->SE->SE->SE->E->SE(Wuhan)
or maybe:
ChengChow->SE->SW->W(Nanyang)->SE->SE->SE->E->SE(Wuhan)

It's important to get this area right, as it's right on the frontline, and I think it will be common for the nationalists to try to hold the Hankiang

Incy



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 7:17:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Incy
quote:

Incy, I'm thinking about adding 3 forest hexes. 2 where Hankiang is written and a 3rd NW of the Western one. All 3 are on the Western / Southern Hankiang bank.

Would you agree with this placement ?


Yes. More or less exctly what I was hoping for.

quote:

Also, I'm realizing (I seem to remember that someone raised that issue, but am not sure) that Nanyang may be placed at the wrong place. Measuring and looking at Google Earth, I think that it should be in the hex NW from where I placed it (still on the rail).
I would remove the Mountain from this hex too.

What do you think of that ?


Defiantely better, yes. There's still something wrong with the proportions in this area, according to google the distances
Nanyang<->Sian and Nanyang<->Wuhsan should be just about equal. Maybe Nanyang should be placed yet another hex further west (so NW+W fgrom wheree it is now)? This would also place it more correct with respect to Chengchow.

Problem with moving it there is that it moves across the starting line into chinese-held territory. Did Japan hold Nanyang sept 1 '39 ??
Mountains would also have to be rearranged, of course (mountain-> clear in hexes SW and E of new location, clear-> mountain in current nanyang location ?) Also, the railraoad seems wrong here. The rail runs SW from Nanyang to Xianfang (by the Hiankiang), but then departs from the river further south and enters Wuhan almost from the north. So maybe change the rail to:
ChengChow->SW->SW(Nanyang)->SE->SE->SE->E->SE(Wuhan)
or maybe:
ChengChow->SE->SW->W(Nanyang)->SE->SE->SE->E->SE(Wuhan)

It's important to get this area right, as it's right on the frontline, and I think it will be common for the nationalists to try to hold the Hankiang

Incy


About Nanyang, one of the 'real' maps of China that Patrice sent me showed two Nanyangs (I think, the text was hard to read). One of them is where Patrice has it placed, and the other has where you are asking for it to be moved to. I know nothing beyond what I said in the two previous sentences. But if there are two Nanyangs, that could explain a lot.



trees trees -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 4:36:57 PM)

In some ways letting the players design the game can be like letting the inmates running the asylum? [;)]

As I mentioned once, gamers don't like any logistical limits on their pieces. The other side, yes. If you surround my units, ok they're out of supply, but otherwise, I am master of my domain behind my lines and I assign 20,000 men to haul artillery shells over that mountain range without roads and across that unbridged river to launch my attack on you. It is the Chinese 'Home Country' but at the time that was not an organized country akin to the other countries on the map. But then the Chinese army wasn't the same either, so maybe this is an unmoveable object/irresistable force thing.?

So I hope one way the game is also tested is with none or a very, very few cities added. And without the divisions. Japan can afford to make them far more than the Chinese can at start. If the Chinese attempt to do it the Japanese will continue flanking and gleefully assault the weakened Chinese lines. Without the extra cities and without the Japanese ooze divisions I think I could hold China fine on this map by not playing aggressively and keeping HQs safe to cover the loss of an important city. Perhaps it really is impossible, I'm looking forward to the results. With all the extra cities I don't think Japan can hold on to any gains later in the game, and I think they already will with up to three Chinese cavalry divisions (rather than one) sneaking up on them while they have to prioritize manuevering the IJN instead. But maybe that is what the partisans should be doing, except for that freaky year where they just don't appear because of the dice.

I don't want to see MWiF get the China theater to the point where Japan feels it must attack China hard to have any chance to hold on to some economic base on the mainland later in the game. This is already the case amongst most players, I don't want to see that accentuated. WiF should never force historical outcomes, but when history never happens across scores of games, you have to wonder about the historical modeling.



CBoehm -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 8:16:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I don't want to see MWiF get the China theater to the point where Japan feels it must attack China hard to have any chance to hold on to some economic base on the mainland later in the game. This is already the case amongst most players, I don't want to see that accentuated. WiF should never force historical outcomes, but when history never happens across scores of games, you have to wonder about the historical modeling.


I agree completely ...



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 9:22:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CBoehm


quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I don't want to see MWiF get the China theater to the point where Japan feels it must attack China hard to have any chance to hold on to some economic base on the mainland later in the game. This is already the case amongst most players, I don't want to see that accentuated. WiF should never force historical outcomes, but when history never happens across scores of games, you have to wonder about the historical modeling.


I agree completely ...


Usually what a WIF player means when he says he doesn't want to "attack China hard", he is talking about doing nothing in China - giving it minimal resources while he persues adventures elsewhere. In other words, he wants to be able to hold his front lines in China with the same set of units is starts with and take almost no casualties over a period of 3 years or so.

While historically that might have happened, it requires an enormous quiescence/acquiescence on the part of the Chinese. Should the game force the Chinese into passivity despite this long interlude in which they can build up their strength? Other parts of WIF impose restrictions on the players (US Entry comes to mind), but generally it is at the level of whether a major power can declare war or not - or an imposed peace. Once the armies are engaged, it is primarily logistical constraints that are modeled, not a country's will to fight.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 11:20:29 PM)

Incy hinted in a previous post that Nanyang was not placed to the right place. He is right, looking at the Google Earth view, or at maps whith Nanyang on it leaves no doubt for me now.
This put Nanyang into Chinese territory, but this is right too.
In fact, Nanyang is not on the railway on WWII maps I have, so I was wrong about this too from the start by wanting to place it on the rail.

Also, about the 1939 start lines, at first I only put on the map a faithful transcription of what they are now in MWiF.
Now, I made a new layer where I'm showing where this line should be from the WWII maps I have in 1939.

Here is the China map as it looks now, could you please, Incy, Wosung, or anyother person with good maps of China or good habit with Google Earth, tell ma what you think of the Nanyang and Hankiang-Yangtzee area as it is now ?

I realize that it is another iteration for a process that has already been long, but I think that it should be made now, or it will never be made.

Here is the map :

[image]local://upfiles/10447/8C406111A4764A2AB186E3C9950CA1F8.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/12/2006 11:46:26 PM)

For the start line, do you have a month in 1939 associated with it? Best would be having something around the end of the summer, September 1st, 1939.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/13/2006 12:34:58 AM)

This may seem too much, but I did some work on the Chengchow-Wuhan railway that was a little too westwards.
I also slightly modified the 1939 start line.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/BC207B6E47754F69AFF39A1A35A2F7C5.jpg[/image]



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/13/2006 12:41:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

For the start line, do you have a month in 1939 associated with it? Best would be having something around the end of the summer, September 1st, 1939.

I used this.

Seems that the only gain made during 1939 is the area around Nanchang and a little west of Wuhan, as well as the Treaty ports & Nanning.

Nanning should obviously not be given, but I do not know for Nanchang. For the treaty ports, Wosung seemed to say that they were Japanese controlled at the start of WWII.

I will soon receive the book that Wosung used as a source a lot, so I'll look into it.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/B716A0F06E9F47779E6BF6361F52C3EF.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/13/2006 2:14:05 AM)

Unless someone comes up with better information, I'll make an executive decision here and say that the Japanese do not get Nanchang at the start of the Global War scenario.

I have another half dozen scenarios that are gonig to need start lines in China at different times of the war. If someone has access to information to help make those decisions, I would be most appreciative.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/13/2006 9:54:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Unless someone comes up with better information, I'll make an executive decision here and say that the Japanese do not get Nanchang at the start of the Global War scenario.

See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Nanchang
Bottom line :
Nanchang Campaign (Mid Feb. - Early May 1939) 300.000 Chinese and 60.000 Japanese involved Japanese occupied Nanchang.
From the map of China in the Times Atlas of WWII, Nanchang is Jap conquered on the 27 March 1939.

quote:

I have another half dozen scenarios that are gonig to need start lines in China at different times of the war. If someone has access to information to help make those decisions, I would be most appreciative.

The frontlines didn't move a lot from 40-44. I guess that all start lines can be guessed at from the 1939 ones.
I'll see if there is something more precise in the book I'm about to receive that Wosuing used so much as a source (Oxford Companion to World War II).



composer99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/13/2006 10:40:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj
Strategy might be crazy but will it be effective?

It doesn't really matter if USSR production reaches 10, it will gain a bit with manchurian factory and two japaneese resources, including lendlease from China. How many VP cities are lost by abandoning European Russia? More than will be gained by an early kill of Japan?

I don't think this startegy could be effective in WIFFE? I have rolled the german armour all the way to Sverdlovsk and outside Tashkent in CWIF, before my opponent gave up, it is much further away than in WIFFE, and just to march there will take you a long time.

It is also harder to actually kick japan of the mainland in WIFFE as manchuria has some quite decent terrain and you can keep a continous frontline of 6-7 hexes.
With the new map you can just walk around any defenders.


How much of England are you willing to lose? How much of the Med? If Germany doesn't have to fight the USSR it might find something else to do with all those build points. I certainly would. If the USA entry is being delayed because the Japanese are not taking any Chinese cities, etc., then the CW justs has to hold on by its lonesome I guess. And China is doing lend lease to the USSR?

I agree with Patrice. Your strategy would be a nightmare for the Japanese but a wonderful bonanza for the Germans and therefore a nightmare for the CW and therefore a bonanza for the Italians. Without the USSR to put pressure on from the east, all of Europe becomes Axis.


I concur. For all the objectives on the Asia-Pacific maps, Japan is still a secondary power in the Axis. The war against Germany will make or break the Allied game, and the Red Army is the principal engine of that war. Throw it away to cripple Japan while simultaneously letting the Germans run over as much of Russia as they please, and Germany and Italy will be impossible to defeat, and, for shame, Italy will outproduce the Soviet Union.



Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/13/2006 11:56:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

For the start line, do you have a month in 1939 associated with it? Best would be having something around the end of the summer, September 1st, 1939.


I searched the Internet and found the following forum thread with lots of info about the
Sino-Japanese war:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=94112&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

From this forum thread I copied a map image from 15 November 1939. That is pretty
close to September 1939. The graphical quality is not very high, but the front lines
should be easy to spot.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Unless someone comes up with better information, I'll make an executive decision here and say that the Japanese do not get Nanchang at the start of the Global War scenario.


As you see from this map Nanchang was already captured by the Japanese. From this
forum I read the following:

On 29 March 1939, the Japanese made a swift surprise attack against the Chinese
defenders of Nanchang and took possession of the capital of Kiangsi Province, keypoint
on the Chekiang-Hunan railway, which had been a major air base in Central China since
the beginning of the war. This was the last operation of any importance.

So maybe Nanchang should be on the Japanese side of the frontline for the Global
Campaign?




[image]local://upfiles/19891/E5AAEDF2C99A4EB4BC3F70CE285DC7F6.gif[/image]



c92nichj -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/13/2006 7:34:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj
Strategy might be crazy but will it be effective?

It doesn't really matter if USSR production reaches 10, it will gain a bit with manchurian factory and two japaneese resources, including lendlease from China. How many VP cities are lost by abandoning European Russia? More than will be gained by an early kill of Japan?

I don't think this startegy could be effective in WIFFE? I have rolled the german armour all the way to Sverdlovsk and outside Tashkent in CWIF, before my opponent gave up, it is much further away than in WIFFE, and just to march there will take you a long time.

It is also harder to actually kick japan of the mainland in WIFFE as manchuria has some quite decent terrain and you can keep a continous frontline of 6-7 hexes.
With the new map you can just walk around any defenders.


How much of England are you willing to lose? How much of the Med? If Germany doesn't have to fight the USSR it might find something else to do with all those build points. I certainly would. If the USA entry is being delayed because the Japanese are not taking any Chinese cities, etc., then the CW justs has to hold on by its lonesome I guess. And China is doing lend lease to the USSR?

I agree with Patrice. Your strategy would be a nightmare for the Japanese but a wonderful bonanza for the Germans and therefore a nightmare for the CW and therefore a bonanza for the Italians. Without the USSR to put pressure on from the east, all of Europe becomes Axis.


I concur. For all the objectives on the Asia-Pacific maps, Japan is still a secondary power in the Axis. The war against Germany will make or break the Allied game, and the Red Army is the principal engine of that war. Throw it away to cripple Japan while simultaneously letting the Germans run over as much of Russia as they please, and Germany and Italy will be impossible to defeat, and, for shame, Italy will outproduce the Soviet Union.



If the game is about holding objective cities, Japan is as important as Germany and Italy combined.
I don't think that USSR are dead if they abandon all European USSR (it is quite possible to come back in normal WIF if you have been kicked back to the Caucasus and Volga, cannot see why it should be harder if you had manchuria as an extra roduction base), and I don't think it would be that much easier to go for a Sealion, unless you do it '42 and then the CW has quite some time to prepare, she will not be facing japan, so all effort can be spent on defending England and the rock.

To win thegame you don't have to defeat Germany Italy you only need to reduce them to 15 objective cities(+- whatever they bid), so if the axis are bidding agressively this might be quite a decent approach, probably not the best one, but an alternative.




composer99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/13/2006 10:31:30 PM)

quote:

If the game is about holding objective cities, Japan is as important as Germany and Italy combined.
I don't think that USSR are dead if they abandon all European USSR (it is quite possible to come back in normal WIF if you have been kicked back to the Caucasus and Volga, cannot see why it should be harder if you had manchuria as an extra roduction base), and I don't think it would be that much easier to go for a Sealion, unless you do it '42 and then the CW has quite some time to prepare, she will not be facing japan, so all effort can be spent on defending England and the rock.

To win thegame you don't have to defeat Germany Italy you only need to reduce them to 15 objective cities(+- whatever they bid), so if the axis are bidding agressively this might be quite a decent approach, probably not the best one, but an alternative.


Italy is one of the most important Axis powers when it comes to objectives for a few reasons. First, its final objective total is expected to be 0, which means that if Italy survives to the end of the game it will probably have 5 or 6 - if not more in the event that the Italians got to make hay in the Middle East. Second, in a typical five-player game Italy and Japan are usually bundled together, which means that a positive Italian total will probably outweigh a negative Japanese total unless the Japanese have been completely conquered. Finally, while an Axis player might bid aggressively for Germany (and maybe even for Japan on its own), he or she probably won't bid aggressively for Italy (case in point: when I went to WiFCon last year, I got Japan/Italy as the last bid for a bid total of -14 and despite the Axis being defeated in toto by July/August 1945 I still ended up scoring surprisingly high in the Con).

And the problem isn't the USSR being blown back to the Volga & the Caucasus, which is a pretty common occurence in a well-planned, well-executed Barbarossa in a normal game. The problem is when the USSR gets blasted past the Urals and loses the oil in and around Baku. The extra Manchurian production won't do them much good. Not to mention the Western Allies will have a hard time coping with the monstrous production that Germany would accrue in such a situaiton.

The Allies have to balance out their attacks against the Axis. They ultimately have the advantage in production and action limits to do this. The USSR doesn't need to get involved much in a war with Japan except to save China from certain destruction or to pick up some easy objectives in the end-game. Otherwise the Red Army must be available to fight the Wehrmacht. The CW and USA simply don't have the land force pools to do it on their own.



Minority Report -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/14/2006 10:41:46 PM)

Hello,

I have been following the development MWIF for quite a while, but I have not participated much. Here is a suggestion for the Chinese map.

I think that the city of Ichang should be added as it was the objective of a significant Japanese operation in May/June 1940. This city is an important port on the Yangtze, and receives ocean going vessels. Hence, it is an important supply point. Also, once taken, the Japanese made it one of their key bases for bombing Chungking. The city is in gorge, so I propose to put it on the mountain hex left to the clear hex with the word Yangtze (or 1 hex southwest of Wuhan, then 3 hexes westward).

Congratulations for the good work!!!




Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/14/2006 11:19:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Minority Report
I think that the city of Ichang should be added as it was the objective of a significant Japanese operation in May/June 1940. This city is an important port on the Yangtze, and receives ocean going vessels. Hence, it is an important supply point. Also, once taken, the Japanese made it one of their key bases for bombing Chungking. The city is in gorge, so I propose to put it on the mountain hex left to the clear hex with the word Yangtze (or 1 hex southwest of Wuhan, then 3 hexes westward).

Thanks for the comment.
With your vote, Ichang gets 4 YES and 4 NO, so it is now present on the Map 2, the one with lots of new cities.
However, I do not agree with your placement. It is on the north side of the river, and the area around is much less broken than the area to the south and the area to the west, so I thin a clear hex is not bad. Also, it is about 280 km west from Wuhan (3 hexes) and 280 km south of Nanyang (3 hexes), so it's right position for me would be 3 hexes W of Wuhan (as it was propoed by Wosung at the start when he proposed that city).

I added the provinces boundaries on the map, for fun [:D] (separate layer, can be toggled off easily as the rest), and edited the rail around Nanchang after seeing the posts of the Axis History Forum (http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=94112&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0) thanks a lot for the link, it is full of informations.

Lately, I redid the Nanyang area (moved the city and moved the mountains & forest around), I posted the result in post #438, and I'd like comments about the Nanyang position and also about the terrain in this area (Han-Yangtzee area).

I'd also like comments about the Kweiyang area, as it is not really OK. Previous comments asked to add a lors of mountains there, but I would like the Kweiyang hex at least to stay in a clear hex (as in WiF FE) and as much hexes around as possible, so I'm looking for some middle ground between the all clear and all mountains variants.
Looking from above with Google Earth (new version 4 available) seem to show a lot of broken terrain, but in China not all broken terrain is translated in moutnains, some of the lower mountains can be translated as clear of forest hexes (if they are forested).



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/14/2006 11:24:45 PM)

Here is what it looks like.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/07D439CBBF0D47E5826E73CB960CBFA6.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/14/2006 11:59:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
quote:

ORIGINAL: Minority Report
I think that the city of Ichang should be added as it was the objective of a significant Japanese operation in May/June 1940. This city is an important port on the Yangtze, and receives ocean going vessels. Hence, it is an important supply point. Also, once taken, the Japanese made it one of their key bases for bombing Chungking. The city is in gorge, so I propose to put it on the mountain hex left to the clear hex with the word Yangtze (or 1 hex southwest of Wuhan, then 3 hexes westward).

Thanks for the comment.
With your vote, Ichang gets 4 YES and 4 NO, so it is now present on the Map 2, the one with lots of new cities.
However, I do not agree with your placement. It is on the north side of the river, and the area around is much less broken than the area to the south and the area to the west, so I thin a clear hex is not bad. Also, it is about 280 km west from Wuhan (3 hexes) and 280 km south of Nanyang (3 hexes), so it's right position for me would be 3 hexes W of Wuhan (as it was propoed by Wosung at the start when he proposed that city).

I added the provinces boundaries on the map, for fun [:D] (separate layer, can be toggled off easily as the rest), and edited the rail around Nanchang after seeing the posts of the Axis History Forum (http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=94112&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0) thanks a lot for the link, it is full of informations.

Lately, I redid the Nanyang area (moved the city and moved the mountains & forest around), I posted the result in post #438, and I'd like comments about the Nanyang position and also about the terrain in this area (Han-Yangtzee area).

I'd also like comments about the Kweiyang area, as it is not really OK. Previous comments asked to add a lors of mountains there, but I would like the Kweiyang hex at least to stay in a clear hex (as in WiF FE) and as much hexes around as possible, so I'm looking for some middle ground between the all clear and all mountains variants.
Looking from above with Google Earth (new version 4 available) seem to show a lot of broken terrain, but in China not all broken terrain is translated in moutnains, some of the lower mountains can be translated as clear of forest hexes (if they are forested).

I have no particular knowledge concerning China, so I am reluctant to weigh in on most of these matters.

I am undecided about the province boundaries.

On the minus side, they add clutter that is not relevant to game play. Also, such divisions are absent from other portions of the map: USA States, French Provences, Scotland & Wales, to name just a few similar divisions that are not shown.

On the plus side, they add flavor to an area of the world with which most WIF players have very little experience - "the mysterious orient". They also give players the ability to think and communicate in geographical terms other than cities (e.g., "drive on Sian and Lanchow" now becomes "occupy Shensi and Kansu"). It opens up the possibility of making them game play elements for future versions of MWIF - such as, for partisans and hex control.

So, are they a distraction or an enhancement"?



Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.90625