quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I need to see a picture to vote intelligently on the next 3:
Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1a (33,45) (Borger) ?
Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1b (35,45) (Borger) ?
Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 2 (36,45) (Borger) ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
For the Finnish borderlands, I wanted to stress the fact that Nils and I had it this way so that a 4 factor moving leg Finnish unit could not cut the Murmansk Rail between the Ladoga and Onega Lakes in 1 Impulse if the Finnish Borderlands were Russian controlled, when Finland declares war to Russia.
It seems to us that the reason for the Russians to demand this territory was something like that, to help prevent the Fins to cut their Murmansk Railway to easily.

Isn't it possible for Russia to prevent this by placing some units and use the ZOC's. Russia had some units here to protect their borders. And if a lone Finnish unit plunges deep into Russia then it can be put out of supply if there are Russian units south and north of it. Of the 3 changes I proposed for the Karelia territory I think the 1 hex being part of Russia and not Karelia won't have a negative effect.

quote:

I understand this about the 2 Finnish hexes inside Karelia I was talking about. But the
northeasternmost hex inside today's Karelia could easily be placed inside Russia (thus meaning it always remains part of Russia). It makes the Karelia part look a little bit better. Is there a reason why this are needs to be part of Finland BEFORE they cede Karelia to Russia. I don't think Finland ever had territory that far east.

quote:

Maybe Froonp can draw an alternative coast line according to my suggestions? What I meant to be the best solution would be to do the following:

* The hex with the letter M (2x NW + W of Hanko) should become an all sea hex.
* The hex NW+W of Hanko should be less land and more water. Meaning the coast line should be moved to the middle of the NE hex side.
* The hex with the letter N (2x NW of Hanko) should be a land hex with a coast line
drawn from the middle of the SW hex side (to align with the coast line in the hex
mentioned above) to the current NE hex side.

Then the coast line can be maintained northwards towards Vaasa. It will create a
straight vertical line and the "bay" effect south of Vaasa will be removed.

I hope Froonp can create this in a nice way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

quote:

I would like to change the names of the Finnish cities to the Finnish names. There aren’t that many of them and it is similar to what we did in China. I do not want to do this in the rest of the world though! Can you imagine? All the cities of the world with Finnish spellings!

I would object to this, the more internationally accepted names during WWII was the Swedish versions of the names, Finland, Åbo, Helsingfors, Hangö, Tammerfors, Viborg as the dominant force in the administration had been Swedish since the 10th century, people like Mannerheim was swedish for example a decendant from the Swedish king Johan the III.

During the latter part of the 20th century the government became more dominated by the finnish people and the finnishification(?) increased in strength this is why the Finnish version of the names are more common in modern maps.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

I understand this about the 2 Finnish hexes inside Karelia I was talking about. But the
northeasternmost hex inside today's Karelia could easily be placed inside Russia (thus meaning it always remains part of Russia). It makes the Karelia part look a little bit better. Is there a reason why this are needs to be part of Finland BEFORE they cede Karelia to Russia. I don't think Finland ever had territory that far east.

I would agree with that.
I change my vote for this hex.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

Maybe Froonp can draw an alternative coast line according to my suggestions? What I meant to be the best solution would be to do the following:

* The hex with the letter M (2x NW + W of Hanko) should become an all sea hex.
* The hex NW+W of Hanko should be less land and more water. Meaning the coast line should be moved to the middle of the NE hex side.
* The hex with the letter N (2x NW of Hanko) should be a land hex with a coast line
drawn from the middle of the SW hex side (to align with the coast line in the hex
mentioned above) to the current NE hex side.

Then the coast line can be maintained northwards towards Vaasa. It will create a
straight vertical line and the "bay" effect south of Vaasa will be removed.

I hope Froonp can create this in a nice way.

Here is what I came up with.
This illustrate the solution escribed above, which is the second solution Borger proposed.
The first solution globaly had the coastline westward 1 hexcolumn.


[image]local://upfiles/10447/883848FE582E417C80DAA8B10948ADE1.jpg[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is what I came up with.
This illustrate the solution escribed above, which is the second solution Borger proposed.
The first solution globaly had the coastline westward 1 hexcolumn.

[image]local://upfiles/10447/883848FE582E417C80DAA8B10948ADE1.jpg[/image]

quote:

Maybe you can try to make a new coast line for Sognefjorden too? I think a visual map would tell much more than a lot of text.

quote:

Name of modification : Turku (Åbo) (37,46) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 75 % / NO : 25 %
Minor Port / Finland
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Second largest Finnish city.

quote:

Any idea of the population of Tampere in the 40s ?

quote:

Name of modification : Gothenburg (41,38) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
City, Minor Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : it is one of the largest ports in Sweden and the main Swedish West Coast port - definitely a major port.

quote:

Name of modification : Vänern () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Lake / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Outline needs enhancing

quote:

Name of modification : Vättern (40,40 SE) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Lake / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Extended 1 hexside SW.

quote:

Name of modification : Karlskrona (44,42) (lomyrin) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Major Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : it is primarily a Navy base and definitely only a minor port.

quote:

Name of modification : Boden (27,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 %
Minor Port / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Renammed Luleå (Lulea).

quote:

Name of modification : Railroad Gothenburg-Stockholm () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Rail / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Passes between Vänern and Vättern. From Gothenburg the rail would go E;NE;NE;E and join with the other rail.

quote:

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 1 (26,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Resource / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex NW.

quote:

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 2 (24,45) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 50 % / NO : 50 %
Resource / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex SE.

quote:

Name of modification : Strait from Copenhagen to Malmo (45,38 E) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Strait / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Keep

quote:

Name of modification : Strait from Helsingor (NW Copenhagen) to Helsingborg (NW Malmo) (44,38 E) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 %
Strait / Sweden
Modification to make / Reason : Add. Straits are between Dannish Helsingor and Swedish Helsingborg.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp Here's an update about the votes :

Name of modification : Tampere (35,47) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 % City / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Add. Third largest city. NO.

Name of modification : Gothenburg (41,38) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % City, Minor Port / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : it is one of the largest ports in Sweden and the main Swedish West Coast port - definitely a major port. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1a (33,52) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 33 % / NO : 67 % Country / Finland Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands; Become Finnish. No.

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1b (34,52) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 33 % / NO : 67 % Country / Finland Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands; Become Finnish. No.

Name of modification : Finnish Borderlands 1c (33,54) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Country / Finland Modification to make / Reason : No more Finnish borderlands, Become Russian. Acording to my sources the hex is only 20% Finnish. But I still think it's ok to keep it borderland simply to make it more likely that the Russians do make a go for the borderlands. vote : No

Name of modification : Lake Femunden (34,38 E) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 25 % / NO : 75 % Lake / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Removed. No. Keep it.

Name of modification : Lake Mjøsa (Mjosa) (36,38 E, NE) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 % Lake / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Add. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Vänern () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Lake / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Outline needs enhancing No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Vättern (40,40 SE) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Lake / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Extended 1 hexside SW. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Karlskrona (44,42) (lomyrin) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Major Port / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : it is primarily a Navy base and definitely only a minor port. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Boden (27,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 67 % / NO : 33 % Minor Port / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Renammed Luleå (Lulea). Yes.

Name of modification : Bodø (Bodo) (26,41) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Minor Port / Norway Modification to make / Reason : For supply reasons. I completely dismiss this suggestion. Supply reason? Supply to what? The USA campaign in Sweden? Changing the number of ports in Norway may change the game. Also this suggestion have Bodø wrongly placed. Vote: No.

Name of modification : Tromsø (Tromso) (21,46) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Minor Port / Norway Modification to make / Reason : For supply reasons. It is not possible to supply all of Norway without a HQ in WIF FE, adding Tromsø will make it possible in MWIF. Therefore I end up voting No. I can add that adding Tromsø is very likely to change how an invasion of Norway will develop and I don’t think that is right. (see also separate comment in my next post.)

Name of modification : Turku (Åbo) (37,46) (Borger) 4 Voters, YES : 75 % / NO : 25 % Minor Port / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Add. Second largest Finnish city. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I am likely to change my vote)

Name of modification : Railroad Gothenburg-Stockholm () (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Rail / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Add. Passes between Vänern and Vättern. From Gothenburg the rail would go E;NE;NE;E and join with the other rail. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 1 (26,46) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Resource / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex NW. Yes.

Name of modification : Iron ore of Gällivare & Kiruna 2 (24,45) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 50 % / NO : 50 % Resource / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Move 1 hex SE. Indifferent.

Name of modification : Strait from Copenhagen to Malmo (45,38 E) (c92nichj) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Strait / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Keep Yes.

Name of modification : Strait from Helsingor (NW Copenhagen) to Helsingborg (NW Malmo) (44,38 E) (lomyrin) 5 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Strait / Sweden Modification to make / Reason : Add. Straits are between Dannish Helsingor and Swedish Helsingborg. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Clear hex (34,39) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Changed to Mountain. Defenitely No. There isn’t a good definition of mountains in WIF but if you look around you’ll get a good impression that a hex with some forest and the rest is flat mountains _ that is not a mountain hex in WIF. For example the area aound Chung King in China are no less mountains than 34,39 - Røros (Chung King area is lower than the surrounding mountains yes, but it still just as rugged and higher I belive, than Røros.) Another really gross example is the resource hex of Norway. If that resource hex is clear then Røros is just super clear in comparison. So I strongly oppose changing the Røros hex if we don’t change the defenition for the whole map.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1a (33,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 0 % / NO : 100 % Terrain / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Become land hex with most of the hex being sea. Indifferent, but I would add that Vaasa is really placed a bit to far west so the strait line should really go further east and thise hexes should be sea.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 1b (35,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 0 % / NO : 100 % Terrain / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Become land hex with most of the hex being sea. Indifferent, but I would add that Vaasa is really placed a bit to far west so the strait line should really go further east and thise hexes should be sea.

Name of modification : Coast south of Vaasa 2 (36,45) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Finland Modification to make / Reason : Become all Sea. No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

Name of modification : Glacier Svartisen (26,41) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : This glacier is placed close to Swedish border. Move the ice 1 hex SE. Vote no. Someone haven’t counted the distances right. I redid it now just to check. The Svartisen is correctly placed. (Also the given reason “to close to Swedish border” doesn’t make sense, as it is just as close if it’s moved.)

Name of modification : Mountain hex (35,37) (Incy) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Changed to Forest. Yes.

Name of modification : Sognefjord () (Incy) 4 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Drawn too wide. Yes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Johan,

Welcome, and thank you for your input.

I do not know the criteria that ADG used for adding preexisting fortifications to the map. However, it was done very rarely: the Maginot line, Singapore, and Sevastopol are the only ones in all of the world. I thought Gibraltar had them too, but that might have been an earlier version of WIF; it doesn't have any in WIF FE.

On the WIF FE mimimap of Scandinavia, Boden is shown as a port protected by rivers on four sides and the Baltic on a fifth. That provides a fairly substantial combat advantage for defenders. The current version of the Scandinavian map we are working on gives Boden/Luleå river protection only to the west and SW. Still, the Germans only get a few newly constructed fortifications to place along the Rhine at the start of the Global war scenario. At most I would not want to add more than two hexsides of newly constructed fortifications to Boden to the east and NE. That would bring it into line with the Scandinavian minimap as far as defensive combat advantages go.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern
On Bodø I will just restate that someone wrongly said that Bodø was in the ice hex. Bodø is in the Forest hex (25,41). If you count the number of hexes from the ice hex, you will count that Trondheim is 6 hexes away and Narvik is 5 hexes away. If you have a map that doesn’t distort the distances in the north it should be pretty obvious that Svartisen is placed closer to Narvik than to Trondheim, so this is correct placement. And then Bodø is placed north of that again four hexes from Narvik. The actually distances I find is 240 km between Svartisen and Narvik and 370 km between Svartisen and Trondheim (by air).

_ conclusion is that I would rather claim the opposite that Svartisen is placed too far south. But I think it’s fine as it is. It’s also an isue if Svartisen should be an ice hex at all. It’s not that big. But it’s the fun factor! There ain’t many ice hexes in the world and let it be an odd thing...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Toed

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Johan,

Welcome, and thank you for your input.

I do not know the criteria that ADG used for adding preexisting fortifications to the map. However, it was done very rarely: the Maginot line, Singapore, and Sevastopol are the only ones in all of the world. I thought Gibraltar had them too, but that might have been an earlier version of WIF; it doesn't have any in WIF FE.

On the WIF FE mimimap of Scandinavia, Boden is shown as a port protected by rivers on four sides and the Baltic on a fifth. That provides a fairly substantial combat advantage for defenders. The current version of the Scandinavian map we are working on gives Boden/Luleå river protection only to the west and SW. Still, the Germans only get a few newly constructed fortifications to place along the Rhine at the start of the Global war scenario. At most I would not want to add more than two hexsides of newly constructed fortifications to Boden to the east and NE. That would bring it into line with the Scandinavian minimap as far as defensive combat advantages go.

Thanks for the fast reply. All those examples are on hexes on the original two maps and all very famous fortifications from the war for diffrent reasons. Boden Fortress was thankfully never put to the test or it might have been in that group. That said I leave the game blance issues in your capable hands. If you think two hexsides are the way to go I'll bow to your greater WiF knowledge. [&o]

quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern
Name of modification : Clear hex (34,39) (Borger) 3 Voters, YES : 100 % / NO : 0 % Terrain / Norway Modification to make / Reason : Changed to Mountain. Defenitely No. There isn’t a good definition of mountains in WIF but if you look around you’ll get a good impression that a hex with some forest and the rest is flat mountains _ that is not a mountain hex in WIF. For example the area aound Chung King in China are no less mountains than 34,39 - Røros (Chung King area is lower than the surrounding mountains yes, but it still just as rugged and higher I belive, than Røros.) Another really gross example is the resource hex of Norway. If that resource hex is clear then Røros is just super clear in comparison. So I strongly oppose changing the Røros hex if we don’t change the defenition for the whole map.

quote:

No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Nils, on many proposals, you wrote this.

quote:

No. Because I don't want to change anything on the European map unless we generally decide that it is ok. (otherwise I might change my vote)

I for one think that this is OK in these areas because :

1. Sweden, Norway see little to no action during the typical WiF FE game, so modifying slightly the map there does not really modify the game play. I for one never saw any unit in Sweden or Norway in any of my WiF FE played campaigns (15), so having a different map there won't change my perception of campagning there, because I have none.

2. These are countries half represented on the border of the map. So chances are high that the representation is somehow not as perfect as the one of France, Russia or Germany and Poland. We also saw that for Iraq and eastern Turkey and northwestern Persia, where we redrew the whole border area (see Caucasus map Thread).

quote:

Now back to topic. I live in Sweden, Boden, and which might make me a bit partial but I still feel I need to bring this question to you all. Why is the 'Boden-hex' not a fortified hex? In the first half of the 20th century, Bodens fästning "The northern lock" was a effective Fortress. With a system of forts encircling 25 km with the city of Boden inside it. It contains roughly of 5 heavy artillery forts supported by flanking batteries and several infantry housing/storage forts some 1200 structures all in all. This supported by a garrison several mobile artillery divisions and infantry totalling about 15 000 men during the war. Built to protect the port of Luleå and the railway lines intersecting in Boden. So I'd would suggest that this fortress that might have been the strongest in northen europe (without a doubt the strongest in scandinavia) at the time warrants an all around fortress hex. I relise that this suggested change has little impact on the big picture in MWiF but to me it is a relevant historical fact that should be represented on the map.

quote:

I've been all across Norway at work (including Røros) and I know that the terrain here is not very army friendly. It's a 2MP hex (not a 1MP hex).