RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (Full Version)

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



Message

c92nichj -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/8/2006 1:02:45 PM)

We now have been having topics about
- China
- Caucasus
- Eastern russia

Could we also have a look at the scandinavian area? I know that it is being reworked.

Other areas of interest might be, Manchuria, East Africa, India, The islands in pacific ocean.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/8/2006 1:36:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

We now have been having topics about
- China
- Caucasus
- Eastern russia

Could we also have a look at the scandinavian area? I know that it is being reworked.

If Steve authorizes me (I'm sure he will), I'll post a global shot of Scandinavia before & after the mods, and close up on the various sections.

quote:

Other areas of interest might be, Manchuria, East Africa, India, The islands in pacific ocean.

I intended to review those.
If you (and Steve) agree for me to do this, I'll post shots of how it is done now. If I find blattant errors, I'll signal them too.
I intended to review Easter Siberia & MAnchuria & Korea in the next pass, then East Africa or India, I had not decided. The Pacific Island could be too, but they are right from my first pass at them (and my first global games).
Steve told to me that he found that the Hawaiian Islands were "completely off", but I think I demonstrated to him the contrary. It is awkward to post shots from the game to the forums without first creating the coastlines, because if the coastlines aren't done, the picture of the map is difficult to read weather it is right or wrong. Just look at the northern part of the Philippines Islands that I posted in the China map thread both with & without the coastlines, and you'll see what I mean.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/A73FB96691F341D79C000B14CEE5AF36.jpg[/image]



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 11:55:06 AM)

I wanted to live up a little this thread, to help making the decisions.

In WiF FE, a unit with a 2 movement factor can walk from a home city to the next in clear weather, without loosing supply (so without having to disrupt and stop and becoming helpless), if the cities are 10 European hexes apart (5 Pacific hexes).

Distances between neighboring cities in the Penza - Krasnoyarsk area are as follow (See on the maps on posts #1, #22, #23, #24) :
A1. Penza - Kazan = 6 European hexes (WiF FE), 10 hexes (MWiF).
A2. Penza - Kuibyshev = 7 European hexes (WiF FE), 10 hexes (MWiF).
B1. Chelyabinsk - Omsk = 8 European hexes (WiF FE), 12 hexes (MWiF).
B2. Magnitogorsk - Karaganda = 10 European hexes (WiF FE), 18 hexes (MWiF).
C1. Omsk - Novosibirsk = 8 European hexes (WiF FE), 10 hexes (MWiF).
C2. Omsk - Semipalatinsk = 6 European hexes (WiF FE), 10 hexes (MWiF).
D. Novosibirsk - Krasnoyarsk = 8 European hexes (WiF FE), 11 hexes (MWiF).
E. Semipalatinsk - Alma Ata = 10 European hexes (WiF FE), 12 hexes (MWiF).
F. Krasnoyarsk - Irkursk = 12 European hexes (WiF FE), 15 hexes (MWiF).

Thus, in the advent of a German success pushing the Russians east of Penza in MWiF, the retreating Russian units (I consider they do not have an HQ in that case) can suffer from supply problems, be obliged to stop moving or disrupt to move while out of supply, and be dead meat for the Germans, things they do not have to face using the WiF FE maps.

Hence, my proposal is to add a couple of cities, about 1 in each dangerous interval.


Interval A :
Penza - Kazan & Penza - Kuibyshev. Larger in MWiF than in WiF, but not lethal (does not exceed 10 European hexes).

Primary Proposal (shown on post #22) :
- Add Ulyanovsk (between Kazan and Kuybyshev, hex 44,78, 620.000 inhabitants). Along the west bank of Volga halfway between Kazan and Kuybyshev. Ulyanovsk is the city Lenin was born in, and got the name from Simbirsk in 1924 (Borger).


Interval B :
Chelyabinsk - Omsk & Magnitogorsk - Karaganda. Far larger in MWiF than in WiF, and lethal (exceeds 10 European hexes).

Primary Proposal (shown on post #23) :
- Add Petropavlovsk (west of Omsk, hex 43,97, 200.000 inhabitants).
- Add Tyumen (west of Omsk, hex 38,94).
- Add Akmolinsk (Astana) (Rail intersection hex north of Karaganda, hex 50,99, 350.000 inhabitants). It's the capital of Kazakstan. This city has changed it's name many times and at the times of Stalin it had the name Akmolinsk.

Secondary Proposal :
- Add Kurgan (west of Petropavlovsk, 335.000 inhabitants) (Borger). I prefer Petropavlovsk, and I'm not sure we can add 2 new cities (Froonp).


Interval C :
Omsk - Novosibirsk & Omsk - Semipalatinsk. Large but not lethal.

Primary Proposal :
- Add no cities. It is a very sparsely inhabited area (Borger's wife), so adding no city is OK from my point of view. Moreover, the addition of Akmolinsk may help the travel from Omsk to Semipalatinsk.

Secondary Proposal :
- Add Pavlodar (Northeastern Kazakstan, alongside Irtysh south of Omsk, 4 hexes south east of Omsk, hex 47,103, 300.000 inhabitants) (Borger).


Interval D : Novosibirsk - Krasnoyarsk.
Far larger in MWiF than in WiF, and lethal (exceeds 10 European hexes). However, this is so far from the most eastwards German advance ever seen.

Primary Proposal (shown on post #24) :
- Add Tomsk (west of Krasnoyarsk, hex 37,114).
Secondary Proposal :
- None.


Interval E : Semipalatinsk - Alma Ata.
Large but not lethal.

Primary Proposal :
- Add no cities. It is desertic area, so adding no city is OK from my point of view.
Secondary Proposal :
- None.


Interval F : Krasnoyarsk - Irkursk.
Already lethal in WiF FE, larger in MWiF.

Primary Proposal :
- Add no cities. It is desertic area, so adding no city is OK from my point of view.

Secondary Proposal :
- None.


Opinions anyone ?



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 12:39:52 PM)

I propse that we go with the following:

A - Ulyanovsk
B - Tyumen (though I would like to know exactly which hex it is in first) & Akmolinsk
C - No new cities
D - Tomsk (reluctantly)
E - No new cities
F - No new cities

My preference for minimal changes should be obvious here. I prefer Tyumen because it is 50% larger than Petropavlovsk. If I were playing the USSR I would want Petro., because of its better geography for the defense. But then I would not expect to ever be defending this deep in Siberia!



c92nichj -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 12:52:55 PM)

I agree with Steve here as few new cities as possible.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 1:08:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I propse that we go with the following:

A - Ulyanovsk
B - Tyumen (though I would like to know exactly which hex it is in first) & Akmolinsk
C - No new cities
D - Tomsk (reluctantly)
E - No new cities
F - No new cities
My preference for minimal changes should be obvious here. I prefer Tyumen because it is 50% larger than Petropavlovsk. If I were playing the USSR I would want Petro., because of its better geography for the defense. But then I would not expect to ever be defending this deep in Siberia!

Tyumen : hex 38,94, look at post #23, it is on the top left corner.



Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 3:27:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I propse that we go with the following:

A - Ulyanovsk
B - Tyumen (though I would like to know exactly which hex it is in first) & Akmolinsk
C - No new cities
D - Tomsk (reluctantly)
E - No new cities
F - No new cities

My preference for minimal changes should be obvious here. I prefer Tyumen because it is 50% larger than Petropavlovsk. If I were playing the USSR I would want Petro., because of its better geography for the defense. But then I would not expect to ever be defending this deep in Siberia!


Here is some info about Tyumen and Tomsk:

Tyumen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyumen

As you can see the city has today about 500.000 inhabitants so it's quite significant in the region.

Tomsk: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomsk

Tomsk also has about 500.000 inhabitants today.

I propose the following new cities:

A - Ulyanovsk
B - Tyumen and Akmolinsk. Maybe also Kurgan (OR Petropavlovsk) (if necessary to travel from Chelyabinsk to
Omsk without losing supply). I prefer Kurgan to Petropavlovsk because it's bigger. But maybe Tyumen
takes care of the supply issues and then Kurgan or Petropavlovsk is not really needed?
C - Maybe add Pavlodar (if necessary to travel from Omsk to Semipalatinsk without losing supply)
D - Tomsk
E - No new cities
F - No new cities



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 3:40:23 PM)

quote:

I propose the following new cities:
A - Ulyanovsk
B - Tyumen and Akmolinsk. Maybe also Kurgan (OR Petropavlovsk) (if necessary to travel from Chelyabinsk to
Omsk without losing supply). I prefer Kurgan to Petropavlovsk because it's bigger. But maybe Tyumen
takes care of the supply issues and then Kurgan or Petropavlovsk is not really needed?
C - Maybe add Pavlodar (if necessary to travel from Omsk to Semipalatinsk without losing supply)
D - Tomsk
E - No new cities
F - No new cities

For interval B, if Tyumen and Akmolinsk are added, Petropavlovsk or Kurgan are less usefull, and if we're going the minimalistic way (which I support fully), there is no need for them.

For Interval C, Pavlodar is not needed as there is 10 hexes between Omsk and Semipalatinsk, so a 2 moving unit can walk there.

I think we will go with the addition of Ulyanovsk, Tyumen, Akmolinsk and Tomsk.



Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 5:31:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
For interval B, if Tyumen and Akmolinsk are added, Petropavlovsk or Kurgan are less usefull, and if we're going the minimalistic way (which I support fully), there is no need for them.

For Interval C, Pavlodar is not needed as there is 10 hexes between Omsk and Semipalatinsk, so a 2 moving unit can walk there.

I think we will go with the addition of Ulyanovsk, Tyumen, Akmolinsk and Tomsk.


I noticed that the distance between Omsk and Semipalatinsk is only 10 hexes if you count directly and not
along the rail line. So Pavlodar is not needed.

I agree with only adding Ulyanovsk, Tyumen, Akmolinsk and Tomsk. These will serve the purpose of keeping
supply everywhere in Russia around the different rail lines. Remember the main purpose for looking at the map
inside Russia was to maintain supply similar to the WIFFE Asian scale map did in this region. The above
changes fulfill that purpose after changing to the WIFFE European scale. Mission accomplished. [;)]



lomyrin -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 6:22:34 PM)

Minimizing the number of new cities seems the right idea. The four or five cities mentioned in the preceeding posts ought to be quite enough.

As in CWiF any German advances in Siberia wil tend to be along the rail lines and suffer some from supply problems just as much has the retreating Russians. In my experience the Russians in this situation will have one or two HQ's helping their own supply paths.

Lars



trees trees -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 7:33:39 PM)

I wouldn't add any cities at all. That's what your HQ units are for. The problem is in the WiF rules...probably most any unit could draw supply when it's marching along a railroad without help from being part of an official Army Group HQ. But because of the reinforcement rules in WiF where new units can magically appear in surrounded cities, none should be added.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/31/2006 7:55:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees
I wouldn't add any cities at all. That's what your HQ units are for. The problem is in the WiF rules...probably most any unit could draw supply when it's marching along a railroad without help from being part of an official Army Group HQ. But because of the reinforcement rules in WiF where new units can magically appear in surrounded cities, none should be added.


A valid concern, certainly. But so is the USSR units being out of supply. Without the addition of the extra cities, MWIF will play differently from WIF FE because of the USSR supply differences in Siberia.

Stepping back and looking at both these concerns as they might arise during a game, the conditions would have to be the Germans advancing deep into Siberia and the USSR struggling to hold on. While the USSR could place reinforcements in these cities they will have to still hold the cities and have reinforcement to place there. So, the Germans merely need to march over the cities to prevent that. The USSR won't be producing a lot of units and those that do arrive as reinforcements have to come in somewhere. The extra Siberian cities are on the rail line for the most part, so having them arrive there seems reasonable.

Alternatively, if we were adding cities in the Ukraine, for example, then I would be jumping up and down with you saying that No, No, No. I suspect so would all the other forum members. For a last stand, desperate defense in Siberia, the cities are important for supply (to keep MWIF true to WIF FE) but not so crucial a change for bringing reinforcements. At least that's my judgment.



trees trees -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/2/2006 7:24:48 AM)

sounds good. sorry I know far too little about Siberia or pushing WiF counters around there to comment on Froonp's excellent ideas.



c92nichj -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/2/2006 7:30:55 AM)

Can we see the scandinavian map?
That is an area which is likely to see some units moving around, and a little bit more interesting to review than Siberia



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/2/2006 8:20:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj
Can we see the scandinavian map?
That is an area which is likely to see some units moving around, and a little bit more interesting to review than Siberia


And perhaps of special interest to players who live there?

I just sent Patrice an email asking him to post screen shots from MWIF using the new map data he has entered. It all looks ok to me, but there is a lot to look at and it is easy to miss things.

I am having Patrice do the posts (instead of me) just in case there is something he wants to tweak first.

Those screen shots should cover: Scandinavia, Caucasus, eastern USSR, and China.



Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/2/2006 11:07:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
And perhaps of special interest to players who live there?


Definitely. [:D] I live in Oslo, Norway and would love to see how the Scandinavian map looks like.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/2/2006 12:40:47 PM)

quote:

I am having Patrice do the posts (instead of me) just in case there is something he wants to tweak first.
Those screen shots should cover: Scandinavia, Caucasus, eastern USSR, and China.

Yes, I prefer correcting a few errors, and applying coastlines so that the map looks more like a map, and so that it is easier to recognise the area on real maps. This should be ready soon.



Neilster -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/2/2006 12:43:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
And perhaps of special interest to players who live there?


Definitely. [:D] I live in Oslo, Norway and would love to see how the Scandinavian map looks like.



Say hello to my friend Stian. He should be easy to spot...a tall, blonde, good-looking guy who loves football. [:D]

I've been to your wonderful country and would like to return. Oslo airport cracked me up. Exactly what one would expect. All Baltic pine and polished steel, with robots cleaning the floor etc. Got to love the Scandinavians. Literally, when it comes to the women. [;)]

Cheers, Neilster



Ballista -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/3/2006 12:13:17 AM)

I like the changes- I just can't wait to actually scroll across the map from Warsaw to Vladivostok.... :D



composer99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/5/2006 8:20:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I wouldn't add any cities at all. That's what your HQ units are for. The problem is in the WiF rules...probably most any unit could draw supply when it's marching along a railroad without help from being part of an official Army Group HQ. But because of the reinforcement rules in WiF where new units can magically appear in surrounded cities, none should be added.


If the Russians are at the stage where they're putting reinforcements in parts of Siberia east of the Urals, then they've probably already lost. I rather doubt it makes much of a difference under those circumstances.



Zorachus99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/6/2006 9:12:02 PM)

I'm in agreement of Shannons reluctance to add cities. I think his choices have both historical as well as significance during Barbarossa. Hey, I've read a few books too.

Patrice, my confusion is this - the lethal zone you refer to.

Now unless I've been reading supply rules wrong for a long time, supply in a nutshell is this:

During the reorganization phase if a unit can trace a path of unlimited range to a primary supply source, they can be reorganized. I wouldn't describe this capability as a death zone. It's only a death zone if you are surrounded. IMO if you are surrounded, supply becomes a moot point, you obviously have none.

My guess is:

Patrices worry is the capability for russian forces to retreat. If russia is fighting a war in the Urals, which I've seen twice, the defense is mainly city based, just trying to hold on to cities. The german army tends to get exhausted at this point, rail distance is great and any attrition is doubled in rough value. I've seen this war to simply be a race to grab undefended cities, marching armor OOS regularly simply to prevent russian reinforcements.

Those of you who haven't seen the Urals in Flame (hehe), just consider that luck can do crazy things. I've marched the germans, italians, and japanese in a concerted effort to destroy russia, gotten 13 out of 14 clear weather impulses in summer, with added clear weather impulses into Nov/Dec. Add a very short break, where all ties to the allies are lost, and Russia's on the ropes. Ironically in that game Russia was conquered, and the Germans had 1 Me-262 flying over the sea of Japan with the entire japanese navy and air force in a futile attempt to prevent conquest of Japan; which of course failed. Fun game none-the less. A small german army had railed into japanese territory to take over holding back the chinese, as japan was wiped off the asian continent. Attempting to support a war in Chinese siberia is a losing battle. The germans cannot handle replacing losses strategically by rail that far away. Honestly the U.S. is far more able to fight a 2 front war at the end of the game. The axis lost the war regardless of conquest of russia.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/6/2006 9:37:01 PM)

quote:

During the reorganization phase if a unit can trace a path of unlimited range to a primary supply source, they can be reorganized. I wouldn't describe this capability as a death zone. It's only a death zone if you are surrounded. IMO if you are surrounded, supply becomes a moot point, you obviously have none.

My point is the following :
Using the WiF FE Pacific scaled maps, a unit with 2 MP in clear weather can walk from any of the cities I talked about without loosing supply, so without having to disrupt to keep advancing.
Using the MWiF map as it is without the 4 added cities, a unit with 2 MP in clear weather cannot walk from any of the cities I talked about without loosing supply, so without having to disrupt to keep advancing.

I prefer if both maps give the same results, as far as it is possible. Adding 4 cities in Siberia is completely possible, as it does not changes or break the game in any way. It only restores the Pacific scaled behavior.



trees trees -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/7/2006 7:22:40 PM)

I have fought in the Urals as the Russians, and indeed come back from there all the way to the scheduled meeting on the Elbe. What saved the Russians was a rail link to China, won from the Japanese in 1940 (a very fun war for the Russians, once their 'Backfire' errrrr TB-7 long-range bombers sank a Japanese fleet CV in the Persian Gulf the Empire of the Sun got a bit demoralized and weakened their lines in Manchuria enough for more fun with Paratroopers and LND-4s). (It also helped to still hold Sevastopol and Leningrad). It sure was nice of the WiF Chiang Kai-Shek to ship all his production to the Russians, not to mention Mao bringing his best three armies to the Urals. The first Korean mountain war was also fought in 43 or so when the Japanese attempted to sever this lifeline with an O-chit but failed.

In WiF:FE the Axis have a big incentive to push onto the Pacific scaled Asian map as their line shortens dramatically, this is the major change from 'Pacific scaled behaviour'. Without that change it will be hard for them to decide how far to chase the Russians (I think I would go for the oil around Perm and any remaining access to the Caspian Sea and call it a campaign?). The Russians should be in big big trouble if they have to start fighting in this area. But as noted, the Germans can enter the Asian map and still not win the game. I don't buy this idea that a unit should be in supply everywhere in it's home country. Russia is a very big, very wilderness like place, inhabited in some cases by somewhat recently conquered non-Russians, very different from Mother Russia areas. What is a bit out of realism is the idea of a unit on the Trans-Siberian railway being out of supply, but without an HQ this is indeed the case given WiF rules. Four or even two euro-hexes away from this raliroad in Siberia logistics would quickly become a nightmare.

I guess some cities could be added with care to take care of the railroad problem, but I don't think anything ever has to be added to WiF to help the Allies. If the Russians are being pushed around in Siberia they should hold on to their HQs to cover the continuing retreat, and to organize the eventual counter-offensive. Just giving them more cities here keeps things easy for them. Can't the Axis have some fun somewhere in the world?



composer99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/29/2006 6:17:08 AM)

I might just add here that the reconfiguring of the Asia-Pacific maps to the European scale, and the resulting elimination of the grey and blue lines of communication between them and the European maps will eliminate a lot of gaminess that can occur around Perm (I saw some in my most recent game). In particular, if the USSR leaves Perm empty the Germans can waltz right in, probably bypassing the Russian defensive line along the Volga. The MWiF map eliminates that possibility.



Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/29/2006 11:32:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

I might just add here that the reconfiguring of the Asia-Pacific maps to the European scale, and the resulting elimination of the grey and blue lines of communication between them and the European maps will eliminate a lot of gaminess that can occur around Perm (I saw some in my most recent game). In particular, if the USSR leaves Perm empty the Germans can waltz right in, probably bypassing the Russian defensive line along the Volga. The MWiF map eliminates that possibility.

I need to correct you here, even if you are right on the idea.
The line that links Perm to the European maps IS NOT a grey communication line, and so CANNOT in WiF FE be "walked over" from one end to the other end. This is a RAIL LINE. You need to control both extremities to make a RAIL MOVE over it.



composer99 -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/29/2006 6:40:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I need to correct you here, even if you are right on the idea.
The line that links Perm to the European maps IS NOT a grey communication line, and so CANNOT in WiF FE be "walked over" from one end to the other end. This is a RAIL LINE. You need to control both extremities to make a RAIL MOVE over it.


Hmm... you are probably correct, if only because the Perm - 0148 connection doesn't involve an off-map hex. The fact that it's a rail line does not automatically mean it is not a grey communication line: "Some grey communication lines are shown as railways. You can move along these lines normally as well as by rail." (RAW 2.1.3)



Jeff Gilbert -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (8/29/2006 11:21:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
Urals in Flames ...

[:D] Love the term, haven't had the opportunity to play it yet.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/5/2008 11:26:30 PM)

Maybe this is the best thread for this, but it is referenced in the "links to all maps" thread, so it can't be too bad a choice.

Here are up-to-date screen shots of the USSR. Starting in Karelia,..

[image]local://upfiles/16701/7DEE42536598478AB5605C1A1FA79ED0.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/5/2008 11:29:34 PM)

This is directly south of the previous post: from East Prussia to Leningrad and Moscow.

This is part of my continuing series of updated screen shots of the world map. I did Canada and the USA a month or two ago.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/19974FFFC2EE454B97C491472FB11758.jpg[/image]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Russia (Urals & East) Map portion (7/5/2008 11:32:15 PM)

3rd in a series of 18. The southern offensive through the Ukraine, from Warsaw to Voronezh.

These are all at zoom level 5 (range is from 1 to 8).

[image]local://upfiles/16701/38BB85929538439F913501D311FCC783.jpg[/image]



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.25