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 (6/15/2006 12:23:00 AM)

quote:

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"?

I just added them to this map for my own mapping pleasure, and also to help me follow the advices given by learned ones like Wosung who often speak using province names in their comments. It also helps when reading China WWII history, because the Province names are used a lot too.

I agree it add a lot of clutter to the map, for example the 1939 start line (that I also moved to make it right to September 1939 after seeing the maps on the Axis History Forum) is nearly not visible now !!! But when it will be time to give it to Steve, I'll make sure he does not miss it by removing unnecessary layers.

This map I'm toying with, and that I post here, is not the one of MWiF, and you Steve will decide finaly what appears on the MWiF map, not me.

You remember that I asked you to have the possibility to add a layer to the MWiF map showing the provinces boundaries in Russia especially (because I thought it would help to develop a future partisan system based on provinces), and it would be great if the game had this layer, but I would understand completely if it is not.



trees trees -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 12:37:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

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"?


Nice work on the provinces Froonp!

I say leave them in there. Heck, make them an easter egg for the history/geography geeks if you have to. Although it does open comparisons to other countries without such regional definitions, I don't think that would be a big concern. But definitely leave them turned 'off' as a default until there is some use for them beyond educational.

There is a lot of potential to enhance the design of MWiF, especially in conjunction with Days of Decision some day, in the China theater using the provinces. The Japanese conquered a few by simply buying the local warlord's allegiance I think. If you want to update/add to the WarLord counters in WiF, it might make more sense to restrict them to their home provinces rather than a certain hex range limit. You could create more WiF headaches for the Nationalists by making parts of their army be Warlord forces based on a province...and make the province an aligned minor, with all the Co-operation rules that could entail. This is in part what the Nationalist army was like in history. So some day those province lines could be very useful.



Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 1:10:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I am undecided about the province boundaries.

So, are they a distraction or an enhancement"?


I think that the province boundaries aren't really needed for actual MWIF
game play, but interesting for some players to look sometimes. So if
province borders are added they should be possible to turn off and on
by a separate toggle button.

It would be a little strange to me if province borders are added in China only.
I think other major countries like Australia, Japan, USA, Brazil, Russia etc.
should have province borders too if any. If I notice province borders in China
then I would start looking for them elsewhere too and then become a little
bit disappointed if I can't find them except in China. I would then ask myself,
why MWIF added these borders in China when they were not present on the
WIFFE map. What purpose do these borders serve etc. since they were specifically
added for China, but omitted in the rest of the world map.

I wonder how much work is needed to add province borders with names.
I guess Steve is very focused on other parts of MWIF development and will
probably not give the nice to have, but not truly needed province borders high
priority.

But if the beta MWIF is made is such a way that playtesters can alter the
map without involving Steve then it can maybe be considered to add these
province borders. Then all Steve needs to do is to program the toggle to
turn these borders on and off.

But if this work has to be done by Steve then I guess his valuable time
for MWIF development is better spent elsewhere. This is, of course, only
my humble opinion. [:)]



Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 1:31:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
I agree it add a lot of clutter to the map, for example the 1939 start line (that I also moved to make it right to September 1939 after seeing the maps on the Axis History Forum) is nearly not visible now !!! But when it will be time to give it to Steve, I'll make sure he does not miss it by removing unnecessary layers.


I agree with you with all you write. These border lines do clutter the map so other map
information is not easily visible. But on the other hand it's nice info to have when needed.
Being able to turn on and off such info with a separare toggle button would be good
(default for toggle is to be turned off). And the benefit you spoke about using such
borders for identifying areas is partisans is a great one. But it all comes down to how
much work Steve needs to do in order to implement it. As I wrote in the other answer I
said that these border lines may be added if the playtesters (like you) can actually alter
the map features yourselves and send the updated version to Steve (after he has
created the new layer definition). Then it won't take up much of his valuable MWIF
development time.

I also wonder about the start line 1939 border in China. As you can see from the
map I provided from the Axis History Forum and also the map you posted yourself
then you will see a Japanese spearhead going towards Sian (being northwest of
Tungkwan). Your latest 1939 start line does not show this spearhead. Is
this intended? Such as not making it too difficult in the beginning for China to
defend by creating an extra thin bulge in the front line. I can understand this
due to the reality that China has so few units to defend her front line. But your
changes of the start line in the south (near Wuhan and Nanchang) have created
extra hexsides along the front line for the Chinese player to defend. So maybe
this is not the reason why the Japanese spearhead towards Sian is not shown in
the 1939 start line.

I wonder if you could change the 1939 start line to make the following 2 hexes
change from being on the Chinese side to the Japanese side:
* Clear hex NW1 of Tungkwan (north and east sides of rivers)
* Clear hex NW1+NE1 of Tungkwan (east side of river)

Looking at the MWIF map layout in this area it seems normal these 2 clear
hexes are on the Japanese side. They were captured during the Japanese offensive
who created this spearhead. The offensive seems to have halted when they reached
the river.





YohanTM2 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 4:41:47 AM)

keep them as off for default view please. Don't care if you want them able to be toggled on.



Zorachus99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 4:44:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yohan

keep them as off for default view please. Don't care if you want them able to be toggled on.


I agree, the start lines are not useful outside of initial setup for almost all purposes.



Manic Inertia -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 5:16:29 AM)

Yea .. just about anything can be toggled on and off, and I guess most players would like to be able to see the map naked from time to time, ie without politics, units and start lines. I would.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 6:07:30 AM)

Start lines will never be shown. Instead each hex has a small flag at the bottom that indicates which country currently controls the hex. Those are used in lieu of start lines, and they can be toggled on and off at any time during the game.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 5:29:05 PM)

While provinces appearing on the MWiF map seems very good to me, I think this should (if it is ever implemented) only be done for large countries.

Here is a try I did with France.
Quite cluttered, and IMO not very interesting.

I also did it with England, and it is worse, unless you only put Scotland & Wales.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/589CE6C44D804054B0D654769B3C5A17.jpg[/image]



mlees -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 5:33:32 PM)

Hehe. In "Empire in Arms", there is a whole diplomatic aspect to the game were you can DOW, find a season, then enforce a peace, and claim/exchange provinces/territories.

Your map of French provinces reminds me of their use for that. Cant wait for Steve to get cracking on Matrix Days of Decision (MaDD). [;)]



CBoehm -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/15/2006 9:54:22 PM)

I kind of like seing the provinces ...perhaps if they were marked with only a thin grey line and names written in light grey print ...so not to be too obtrusive on the eyes ...?

ofcause this WOULD be more interesting if the provinces actually had a meaning in the game ...ei. such as partisan activity or establishing control in case of surrender or Vichy installment ...but I guess then it would not be WIF (or atleast RAW)



Neilster -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/16/2006 7:32:28 AM)

My vote, default off. Clutter and only confuse newbies even more.

Cheers, Neilster



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/16/2006 7:43:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster
My vote, default off. Clutter and only confuse newbies even more.

Cheers, Neilster


Having thought this over for a couple of days, I am coming down on the side of No. They would be nice to include, but so would a long list of other things. This goes onto the list of items for MWIF product 2.

Part of the reason is that the way MWIF handles boundaries is by having each hex belong to a geographic region. Then geographic regions are clumped together to form larger regions and so on. This lets Rumania, for example, have 4 parts: Bessarabia, Dobruja, Transylvania, and Rumania proper. The first 3 are 'governed areas' within Rumania. To use this system in China, France, the USA, et al would require redfining the hexes in all of those countries. That's straightforward to do, but tedious and time consuming. No real benefit at this time other than glitz.



Anendrue -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (6/16/2006 3:55:23 PM)

Way too cluttered. The map is busy and it becomes hard enough with counters everywhere.

However on the side of the AI, small mini fronts to defend might be more workable than long strings of connected hexes. Maybe define provinces in a CSV file with levels of criticalness to hold so that Objectives can be held more tenaciously.



wosung -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 4:23:26 PM)

Back from holidays in France (north of La Rochelle). Great country for holidays.

And, Patrice: Chapeau les bleus! (Yesterday French football/soccer team knocked out Brazil)

Wow, Yennan is still on map! I like that.

On-map Representation of Nanyang and Hankiang-Yangtze area seems to be ok:

1. In WW2 Nanyang wasn't rail station (only air traffic). I missed that one. It should be open to the East.

2. The Wuhan /Ichang area should be in a huge valley, surrounded by bad terrain.

3. Placement of the Changchow - Wuhan Railway seems much better.

4. According to my maps Kweiyang is in about 1.000-1.500 m. altitude. South of it 50% same altitude, 50% valleys (500-1.000 m.)


Other points:

1. What about the bizarre Paotow-Peking railway? Paotow was to be omitted as final station, because of logistic considerations. Will this railway appendix still be on-map?

2. Personally I like the representation of provincial borders, because apart from a few big cities like Peking and Shanghai, provinces really were/are more important geographical/historical units, esp. when playing with warlords. There were "Kwangsi-warlords", not "Nanning-warlords". So for WIF Chinese provinces do have more meaning than, say the French ones.
But Steve has decided the matter. And I wouldn't like to have delays on this one, like all the others of you.


Historical frontlines in China
I checked out different maps: No maps in Chinese encyclopedias (even in multivolumed ones on military matters). None about Nationalist areas. Only on partisan areas.

With the Western ones, problem is, that Sept. 39 isn't exactly an important date for frontline in China. Best Western ones I found were:

1. Cambridge history of China, Fairbank/Feuerwerker (Eds.), Vol. 13.2., p. 149.

At least a July/Dec 1941 start line. Plus Dec 41-Aug 45. And: It shows the huge parts of unoccupied areas behind the Japanese frontline (not only partisan areas): Fukien (minus treaty ports) was practically never occupied. Of Kwangsi, Kwangtung, Kiangsi and Chekiang provinces only about 33-50% ever were Japanese occupied (mainly the important railway corridors.) I think, unfortunately, I can't post a photo of that map, because of copyright.

2. Oxford companion to the Second World War, Dear (ed.) p. 230.

Start lines 1939, 1944. But not as accurate as Cambridge History, because some Provinces are entirely marked as Japanese occupied, even if only railways were occupied.

So perhaps unoccupied/partisan areas plus the new treaty ports could be represented with the various start lines?

Patrice, which book did you order?

Regards




Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 5:28:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung
Back from holidays in France (north of La Rochelle). Great country for holidays.
And, Patrice: Chapeau les bleus! (Yesterday French football/soccer team knocked out Brazil)

Thanks !!! I looked that match. I'm not a football fan, but when the French team plays the world cup, or when the Marseilles team playes European match, I usually watch it. France played very well, and I'm happy we bet those Brazilians. The players from both camps really seems to have enjoyed the game, it was great !

quote:

Wow, Yennan is still on map! I like that.
On-map Representation of Nanyang and Hankiang-Yangtze area seems to be ok:
1. In WW2 Nanyang wasn't rail station (only air traffic). I missed that one. It should be open to the East.
2. The Wuhan /Ichang area should be in a huge valley, surrounded by bad terrain.
3. Placement of the Changchow - Wuhan Railway seems much better.
4. According to my maps Kweiyang is in about 1.000-1.500 m. altitude. South of it 50% same altitude, 50% valleys (500-1.000 m.)

I'm happy those are OK for you.

quote:

Other points:

1. What about the bizarre Paotow-Peking railway? Paotow was to be omitted as final station, because of logistic considerations. Will this railway appendix still be on-map?

Sure. It is like that on the WiF FE paper maps, no reasons it's not like that in the MWiF map. It's no problem having the rail ending with no cities.

quote:

2. Personally I like the representation of provincial borders, because apart from a few big cities like Peking and Shanghai, provinces really were/are more important geographical/historical units, esp. when playing with warlords. There were "Kwangsi-warlords", not "Nanning-warlords". So for WIF Chinese provinces do have more meaning than, say the French ones.

I agree

quote:

Patrice, which book did you order?

This one : Oxford companion to the Second World War
I have it now.

I'm happy you came back and you somehow reviewed the latest changes to the map.
Its latest incarnation (version 6e) was sent to Steve, who will beging making it into MWiF sometime soon. Here is what it looks.
He said there will be 3 versions to choose from for the players.
- One as it is.
- One with a few cities added (dark blue cities & ports added).
- One with a lot cities added (dark blue AND violet cities & ports added).

Playtest will soon be able to start on this.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/C83F0A4F33124377827E7B2AB4579105.jpg[/image]



Zorachus99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 7:12:15 PM)

Wow Froonp, (what is a Froonp anyway?),

GREAT WORK!

It intuitively looks MUCH better than the printed pacific map. WOW! Weather zone, terrain, cities, the start line. Awesome job!

Just imagine I have been completely against changing the maps because of map bloat. The work here proves that something better can be done, and is worthwhile.

Let the play test begin, I'll be interested in turn-by-turn results if anyone is willing to post them; love to try it myself no less.



Ullern -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 7:28:43 PM)

And a good map it is. [8D]

Patrice, Mountains around Kweiyang? You decided no?

Steve, which map version will be "standard" - with regards to AI and tournament play? - or will play testing decide that.
Also I think that those who have already played CWIF or MWIF are fairly unanimous that the as is version makes it too easy for Japan?

Nils



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 7:30:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
Wow Froonp, (what is a Froonp anyway?),

Nothing, just a screen name, anagram of my real Italian sourced name, that I'm using since years in games & online things & the like.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 7:32:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern
Patrice, Mountains around Kweiyang? You decided no?

I think I'm leaving it as is.
This Kweiyang area makes me think a little to the Chungking area, which is high, but not very rugged, not enough to warrant mountain hexes.
I've added enough forests in the whole south, so I think this may be better to leave it as is.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 7:36:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
Wow Froonp, (what is a Froonp anyway?),

GREAT WORK!

It intuitively looks MUCH better than the printed pacific map. WOW! Weather zone, terrain, cities, the start line. Awesome job!

Just imagine I have been completely against changing the maps because of map bloat. The work here proves that something better can be done, and is worthwhile.

Let the play test begin, I'll be interested in turn-by-turn results if anyone is willing to post them; love to try it myself no less.


I agree. A couple of stray points.

- Patrice did the bulk of the work, and he did it extremely well. But others made important contributions, even those who merely voted were of significant help [as Patrice would be sure to acknowledge I am certain].

- The rail lines that go nowhere can actually be used when playing by placing an HQ on them to act as a temporary rail head.

- "Problems are opportunities." Take something that is messy or doesn't work right, and use the fact that it is different to make it better than everything else around it. This transformation of China is a good case example.

- Restraining Warlords to operate within provinces instead of within a radius of a city sounds real good to me (as a player) and is the best argument I have heard for including the Chinese provinces as part of the map. Yes, it is a change from WIFFE, but it relates to a rather recent WIF rule, is self contained (only affects the Warlord's range), and since no code has been written for the Warlords yet (CWIF did not have them at all) ... this is open to discussion. I would have the capital of the province, or a single city within the province, act as the Warlords 'capital' which means that whoever controls the Warlords capital, controls the Warlords (with 'Control' as defined by WIFFE).



Ullern -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 7:56:12 PM)

I realise that my question to Steve in the previous post 467 would be partially answered had I read the June summary first, which I didn't. But in the June summary I did ge the impression there should be only two map versions, not three. Did I read it too fast, or what is correct?

And Patrice does a great job still [:)]

Nils



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 8:10:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern

I realise that my question to Steve in the previous post 467 would be partially answered had I read the June summary first, which I didn't. But in the June summary I did ge the impression there should be only two map versions, not three. Did I read it too fast, or what is correct?

And Patrice does a great job still [:)]

Nils


I would like to end up with only two choices on the optional rules menu. The players could modify the data files if they want to tailor the system more.

For beta test, we will start by adding fewer cities and then see if more are needed.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 8:13:35 PM)

quote:

- Patrice did the bulk of the work, and he did it extremely well. But others made important contributions, even those who merely voted were of significant help [as Patrice would be sure to acknowledge I am certain].

Sure.
If you want to see the first try I achieve, alone, on the China map, you'll see how important contributions from WiF learned or Geography learned people are to me for modyfying the map.

quote:

- Restraining Warlords to operate within provinces instead of within a radius of a city sounds real good to me (as a player) and is the best argument I have heard for including the Chinese provinces as part of the map. Yes, it is a change from WIFFE, but it relates to a rather recent WIF rule, is self contained (only affects the Warlord's range), and since no code has been written for the Warlords yet (CWIF did not have them at all) ... this is open to discussion. I would have the capital of the province, or a single city within the province, act as the Warlords 'capital' which means that whoever controls the Warlords capital, controls the Warlords (with 'Control' as defined by WIFFE).

Yes that's a good idea to restrain Warlords to Provinces. I'm 100% sure that if the Provinces were drawn on the map, Harry would have made the Warlord rule this way.
As for the Warlord "capital", we need to take the present city that is written on the present counter first, and then for new warlords we will have to decide.



Zorachus99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 8:19:19 PM)

Are Japanese owned warlords going to have the lend-lease stripe on them to differentiate the units?



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 8:22:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Are Japanese owned warlords going to have the lend-lease stripe on them to differentiate the units?

Maybe they could simply become Red.

The same goes for the Territorials. For example if Russia Conquers Manchuria, Russia can build the Manchu TERR. How will the color of those TERR be handled here too ? I don't remember how it was handled in CWiF, I don't remember if it was handled at all.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/2/2006 10:18:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Are Japanese owned warlords going to have the lend-lease stripe on them to differentiate the units?

Maybe they could simply become Red.

The same goes for the Territorials. For example if Russia Conquers Manchuria, Russia can build the Manchu TERR. How will the color of those TERR be handled here too ? I don't remember how it was handled in CWiF, I don't remember if it was handled at all.

Territorials have the color of the controlling major power - however, each nationality has a different interior color for the NATO icon. Since these are land units, and therefore do not have bitmapped images, it is easy to revise the background color whenever needed.

On a related point, for captured naval units (e.g., when Vichy is declared), MWIF will place a stripe across the top of the counter - it will extend through all the numbers at the top.



composer99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/6/2006 8:05:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Are Japanese owned warlords going to have the lend-lease stripe on them to differentiate the units?

Maybe they could simply become Red.

The same goes for the Territorials. For example if Russia Conquers Manchuria, Russia can build the Manchu TERR. How will the color of those TERR be handled here too ? I don't remember how it was handled in CWiF, I don't remember if it was handled at all.


CWiF changed the colour of the TERR.



wosung -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (7/6/2006 12:03:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
- Restraining Warlords to operate within provinces instead of within a radius of a city sounds real good to me (as a player) and is the best argument I have heard for including the Chinese provinces as part of the map. Yes, it is a change from WIFFE, but it relates to a rather recent WIF rule, is self contained (only affects the Warlord's range), and since no code has been written for the Warlords yet (CWIF did not have them at all) ... this is open to discussion. I would have the capital of the province, or a single city within the province, act as the Warlords 'capital' which means that whoever controls the Warlords capital, controls the Warlords (with 'Control' as defined by WIFFE).


I would vote for restraining Warlords to operate within provinces instead of within a fixed radius of a city.

1. It will substitute artificial geometrical homogenity ("within 2 hexes") with a more interesting historical setting: Some warlords just will have bigger or strategically better situated provinces and the corresponding movement allowance. Players will have to deal with that.

2. It will also help communication between players. Easier to talk about one province with a complicated name, than to talk about 3 cities with complicated names.

Small corrections for the 1939 start-line:
1. In the Taiyuan-Yennan-Kaifeng area it should follow directly the Hwangho (Yellow river), except the 2 clear hexes NW of Chengchow.

2. There should be a (1-2 hexed) Japanese pincer from Wuhan to Ichang. There was a Japanese offensive in that direction already 1938/39.

Sources:
Cambridge History of China, Vol.13.2, (ed.) Fairbank/Feuerwerker, p.549.
Oxford compangion to WW2, (ed.) Bear, p. 230. (although not clear on the Ichang pincer).

We'll also have to check out the start lines in China for the other scenarios. Unfortunately most maps just show a 1941/44 frontline and no partisans or unoccupied areas behind Japanese front.



Fishbed -> RE: Modifications to MWiF China Map portion (10/2/2006 5:49:26 PM)

From what I can say being where I am right now, nice work [:D]

Merci Froonp, je vois que tout cela est entre de bonnes mains [8D]



Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.71875