RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion

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

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

Message

Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/9/2006 10:41:04 PM)
quote: Maybe Australia and New Zealand? Maybe India, Burma, Malaya etc.? Burma and Malaya are already dealt with in the "MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands" thread. I've also already done Northeastern Australia. But I now realize that I only posted abstracts of these maps, and that Burma & Malaya were not shown [&:]. I'll post them to this thread then ! India is for some time in the future, as would be more Pacific Islands (South East pacific was not yet reviewed), as well as Manchuria and Siberia. I would also like to review Central America. Well we'll see.

Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/9/2006 10:42:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Toed quote: ORIGINAL: c92nichj I believe the hex east of Oslo should belong to Sweden. The Swedish-norweigian border is in the middle of the norweigian west coast and stockholm. on the map it is 10 hexes so 5 hexes should be swedish and 5 Norweigian, now 6 are Norweigain and 4 Swedish. But maybe that's for game purposes. I agree. I'd say that most of Norway south of Trondheim is to wide compared to Sweden or Sweden to narrow. However to fix this within the hexgrid available seems hard and not necessary in my opinion. And we do need to let our sad Norwegian brothers feel big for once. [:'(] We'll keep the border where it is then. Anyway, it would put it much near from Oslo, maybe too near ?

Incy -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/9/2006 10:43:12 PM)
You might want to place Tromsų on the island rather than on the mainland. Tromsų is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island: http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp I had time at my job this morning, so I redid the northern coastlines to have a better place for Tromso. This was not 100% accurate previously. Now it is better.

Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/9/2006 11:11:24 PM)
quote: You might want to place Tromsų on the island rather than on the mainland. Tromsų is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island: http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg Well, looking at it from Google Earth from 11,24 km high reveals that Tromso sits in a 10 km x 3 km island, separated from the mainland by a 700 to 1800 m wide arm of sea. Should this really count as an island ? What are the other's opinions ?

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/9/2006 11:59:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp quote: You might want to place Tromsų on the island rather than on the mainland. Tromsų is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island: http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg Well, looking at it from Google Earth from 11,24 km high reveals that Tromso sits in a 10 km x 3 km island, separated from the mainland by a 700 to 1800 m wide arm of sea. Should this really count as an island ? What are the other's opinions ? I assume this is similar to Singapore, where the hex is bigger than the island where the city actually is. That's always a messy situation to translate to a hex grid. We could either just ignore the interveneing water or place Tromso on an island with a straits connectnig it to the mainland. We just had a similar problem with Stockholm, where the hex in which the city is located has a lot of other terrain features. Deciding which features are important enough to warrant appearing on the MWIF map is a judgment call. In this case it is best made by people who know the area best.

Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/10/2006 12:04:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp quote: You might want to place Tromsų on the island rather than on the mainland. Tromsų is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island: http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg Well, looking at it from Google Earth from 11,24 km high reveals that Tromso sits in a 10 km x 3 km island, separated from the mainland by a 700 to 1800 m wide arm of sea. Should this really count as an island ? What are the other's opinions ? I think it's good enough as it is. You can't have every little detail on a map. Such a small island can be considered to be integrated into the mainland close to it. I like the way Scandinavia looks right now and don't think we should try to improve it indefinitely. Sometimes we have to say good enough is good enough and move on to more important areas. [:)] I feel that focus could now be shifted to Burma, Malaya, New Guinea etc. Our time can be better spent there now. We have all contributed a lot to improve the Scandinavian part of the MWIF map. So lets be content with what be already managed and move on. It's impossible to make the map in a way that everybody would be 100% satisfied with every hex. Our voting shows there are different opinions, but I think the end result is going to be great even though some of my suggestions were voted down. [;)] Time to move on and get the last 4 items on our voting list settled. I guess Steve could by maybe the end of this week make a decision of yes and no for the remaining items based upon the votes at that time. When we have split votes (like for Tampere) then I believe he has to make his choice and we should support his decision. There are pros and cons for every suggestion and we can live with the result regardless of a yes or no.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/10/2006 2:19:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp quote: You might want to place Tromsų on the island rather than on the mainland. Tromsų is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island: http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg Well, looking at it from Google Earth from 11,24 km high reveals that Tromso sits in a 10 km x 3 km island, separated from the mainland by a 700 to 1800 m wide arm of sea. Should this really count as an island ? What are the other's opinions ? I think it's good enough as it is. You can't have every little detail on a map. Such a small island can be considered to be integrated into the mainland close to it. I like the way Scandinavia looks right now and don't think we should try to improve it indefinitely. Sometimes we have to say good enough is good enough and move on to more important areas. [:)] I feel that focus could now be shifted to Burma, Malaya, New Guinea etc. Our time can be better spent there now. We have all contributed a lot to improve the Scandinavian part of the MWIF map. So lets be content with what be already managed and move on. It's impossible to make the map in a way that everybody would be 100% satisfied with every hex. Our voting shows there are different opinions, but I think the end result is going to be great even though some of my suggestions were voted down. [;)] Time to move on and get the last 4 items on our voting list settled. I guess Steve could by maybe the end of this week make a decision of yes and no for the remaining items based upon the votes at that time. When we have split votes (like for Tampere) then I believe he has to make his choice and we should support his decision. There are pros and cons for every suggestion and we can live with the result regardless of a yes or no. Yeah, I'll do that. I might add that for people who are really upset by what I decide, most of these decisions concern map data which will be available in the comma separated values files (CSVs) and can be edited by the players who feel an overwhelming need to do so.

trees trees -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/10/2006 4:50:06 PM)
just curious why Bergen is now five hexes away from Oslo, rather than the four on WiF:FE paper maps? Note that without using the Scandinavian map at all, Trondheim is in supply from Oslo and the Germans gain a SUB base in supply in clear weather on the Norwegian Sea. But now that Narvik no longer figures in for moving the Swedish Iron Ore, Norway is more generally a potential Allied theater in the mid-game than any other outcome.

Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/10/2006 5:00:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: trees trees But now that Narvik no longer figures in for moving the Swedish Iron Ore, Norway is more generally a potential Allied theater in the mid-game than any other outcome. You're wrong (see previous post #174)

Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/10/2006 5:05:45 PM)
quote: Note that without using the Scandinavian map at all, Trondheim is in supply from Oslo and the Germans gain a SUB base in supply in clear weather on the Norwegian Sea. It is true if playing without the Scandinavia map. Playing without the scandinavia map leads to gross simplifications. Playing MWiF will be different than playing with the old off-map boxes, this is sure, but this is a blessing too.

trees trees -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/11/2006 5:23:20 AM)
wow Thanks Patrice! We are playing a game currently that Norway got pulled into and we wasted at least a half hour trying to figure out what the rule on Narvik was. Since Narvik is not in the index, we had no luck deciphering where the rule had gone to in the rule book. We thought it must have been dropped from the rules (we are using 7m). Iced-in ports, the not obvious place to figure out resource transport rules... Then I missed post #174, this thread has been rolling along pretty fast some days! Perhaps I'll see 25% of my heritage on the WiF map much more often once again. One sentence of WiF rule and the grand strategies change. One of my favorite O-chit plays once was to use a Super-Combined as the Germans to take every Norwegian port simultaneously, Japanese style. (Before we were using the Ski Divisions). The Allies were so surprised...

Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/11/2006 10:29:48 AM)
quote: wow Thanks Patrice! We are playing a game currently that Norway got pulled into and we wasted at least a half hour trying to figure out what the rule on Narvik was. Since Narvik is not in the index, we had no luck deciphering where the rule had gone to in the rule book. We thought it must have been dropped from the rules (we are using 7m). Iced-in ports, the not obvious place to figure out resource transport rules... Then I missed post #174, this thread has been rolling along pretty fast some days! That's what electronic format rules are all about. CTRL+F, type Narvik, and you're done in 10 seconds [:D]. An alternate solution is to ask me [8D].

are -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/11/2006 2:27:40 PM)
I think you should add Bodų and the railroad going to it. During WW2 the germans used prisoners of war from Yugoslavia to construct a railroad from Bodų to Narvik. It was never finished.

Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/11/2006 2:49:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: are I think you should add Bodų and the railroad going to it. During WW2 the germans used prisoners of war from Yugoslavia to construct a railroad from Bodų to Narvik. It was never finished. When the war started the railroad northwards from Trondheim ended in Grong (not very close to Bodų). Grong is a small town maybe 1/3 of the way between Trondheim and Bodų. So the current MWIF map is correct stopping the rail line where it stops. During the war the Germans used prisoners of war to extend the rail line from Grong to Bodų. This rail line was finished as late as 1962. A long time later than when the war ended so the rail line part from Grong to Bodų does not belong on the MWIF map. The Germans extended the rail line northwards and reached Mo i Rana in 1942. After 1942 they went further north and there are many stories about the sufferings of the prisoners of war in Saltfjellet between Mo i Rana and Fauske (just east of Bodų). After the war the Norwegian railway company (NSB) was so depleted of resources (old or destroyed trains) and Norway as a country had a lot of rebuilding to do. Only in 1952 did the Government agree to make major investments in the rail net and complete the rail line all the way to Bodų. In 1962 the rail line all the way to Bodų was officially opened. In the 1980's and 1990's the was considerate political pressure from the politicians in the north to extend the rail line from Fauske via Narvik all the way to Tromsų. But these plans were later abandoned and efforts were put to upgrade the road standard in northern Norway instead. Another interesting matter to read is that the Germans linked the rail line near Stavanger to the rail line from Oslo to Kristiansand. In 1944 it was possible to travel all the way from Oslo to Stavanger by train. Before this time there was a gap south east of Stavanger without rail connection (I think the hex where Ullern wanted to change the terrain from clear to mountain). The Germans had plans to extend the rail line all the way to Kirkenes, but they were defeated before they came that far. They used a lot of prisoners of war to build infrastructure in Norway. So I think it's wrong to add the rail line all the way to Bodų since it was only opened as late as 1962. The map is supposed to show the situation in 1939 (start of the war) and then the end station of Grong is correct (the current one). But if you want to place rail lines in all the terrain that was built during the war it's possible to extend it as far north as Mo i Rana. Mo i Rana is just south of Svartisen glacier. It could be correct to do so because it's done for the rail line between Oslo and Stavanger and also Archangel to Murmansk. This rail line was also built during the war because the Russians feared the rail line between Leningrad and Murmansk could be cut.

Froonp -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/11/2006 3:47:56 PM)
MWiF would need a rail construction rule. WiF FE never had (though there are numerous house rules about rail constructing), because of counter constraints, but MWiF is only limited by our imagination. What about starting a thread about what could be (realisticaly) added to MWiF (even if only version 2.0) ? I see many : - Rail building and destroying - Localized production, especially of ships, with the possibility of dealing damage to ships in building. - Localized repairs on ships, with the possibility of dealing damage to ships in repair. - Sub Pens. - Carrier Pilots. - Area linked Partisans. - Line of Communication's Vichy (LoC Vichy)

c92nichj -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/11/2006 3:57:04 PM)
I know steves answer allready and I fully support it. First implement MWIF, keep focussed on the task.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/11/2006 8:07:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: are I think you should add Bodų and the railroad going to it. During WW2 the germans used prisoners of war from Yugoslavia to construct a railroad from Bodų to Narvik. It was never finished. Are, welcome. The final product of MWIF gets stronger the more people we have examining this work in progress and making suggestions. Most ideas do not pan out and even those that do are often combined with other ideas so much that the original one can be hard to recognize. As an outstanding example of this, take Nils original revision of the Scandinavian portion of the map. Occasionally someone suggests something that is immediately useful just as it is. On those occasions the usual response is "Why didn't I think of that?" or "I thought that was already included?". So, please keep thinking, questioning, and suggesting. And as Patrice and c92nichj said, many improvements to WIF would be nice - with the more complex ones destined to having to wait for later MWIF release/products.

gbirkeli -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/12/2006 9:36:36 AM)
I think it is sufficient to map the glaciers in Norway as alpine hexsides, rather than inventing a new hex type. They are not as large as a full hex, and it is possible for people to cross them if they are lightly equipped and properly trained. As for Svartisen, ordinary units should be allowed to pass from north to south on both the east and the west side of the glacier. Bodų should not have a port. Even today it doesn't really have a port, but more a large harbor. I believe Mo i Rana (for iron ore) and perhaps even Fauske (for copper ore) had larger port/harbor facilities back then. Gaute

Hortlund -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/12/2006 11:26:28 AM)
Excellent map. I have just one suggestion. The river on the NW hexside of Stockholm (Dalälven) should extend 4-5 hexsides west/northwest.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/12/2006 1:07:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund Excellent map. I have just one suggestion. The river on the NW hexside of Stockholm (Dalälven) should extend 4-5 hexsides west/northwest. This is something to consider. Perhaps Toed could give us his opinion, since in post #176 of this thread he drew in the river from Lake Siljan - which seems to be the one you are talking about. The question is not whether there is a river there or not, but rather if the river poses a difficult enough obstacle for troop movement - comparable to the othe rivers on the European map (for instance).

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/14/2006 3:48:12 AM)
Here is a screen shot of the newly constructed forts (1/2 not 1/3 combat effect) for Lulea/Boden. The coastal bitmaps still have to be done, but all the terrain changes from the Scandinavian discussion are in place. I am using the Commonwealth color for the forts, even though they are Swedish (the colors are a close match. You can tell that they only have a 1/2 combat effect because the stars are white instead of black. [image]local://upfiles/16701/944187E48DB54308BCB806CF3D73430E.jpg[/image]

c92nichj -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/14/2006 7:45:46 AM)
Dalälven is one of Swedens largest rivers. This picture is taken in the middle between Siljan and the baltic. The river actually starts in Norway close to femunden but it is obviously not as wide up north. [image]local://upfiles/15172/93A53E4D8D66419EAE11A46EDFC68CEB.jpg[/image]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/14/2006 7:59:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: c92nichj Dalälven is one of Swedens largest rivers. This picture is taken in the middle between Siljan and the baltic. The river actually starts in Norway close to femunden but it is obviously not as wide up north. [image]local://upfiles/15172/93A53E4D8D66419EAE11A46EDFC68CEB.jpg[/image] Sounds like it should be on the map then. Which hexsides would be best for it to run along?

Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/14/2006 12:09:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: trees trees just curious why Bergen is now five hexes away from Oslo, rather than the four on WiF:FE paper maps? It's because Bergen was placed in the wrong hex on the WIFFE map. We decided to correct map errors in the border areas on the WIFFE map (like Iran, Norway, Sweden, Finland etc.) because these corrections have few implications on game play and makes it easier to link the European scaled WIFFE map to the MWIF map European scaled maps that were earlier Asian scaled.

Hortlund -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/15/2006 8:32:43 PM)
My suggestion for where the Dalälven should be on the map. Any comments? [image]local://upfiles/1562/06AFEC1E43C145FB86DCD84FB69BDC41.jpg[/image]

Toed -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/17/2006 12:34:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund My suggestion for where the Dalälven should be on the map. Any comments? [image]local://upfiles/1562/06AFEC1E43C145FB86DCD84FB69BDC41.jpg[/image] Just one. Dalälven splits roughly halfway (below the D in SWEDEN on the map) between the coast and the Norwegian border into Västerdalälven which has a path similar to your suggestion, and Österdalälven which has a more northerly path. I would suggest that the river is drawn on the north (E, NE, NW) side of the hex containing the letters SWE instead of its south (SE, SW, W) side. This will also better represent the Siljan lake that should have been on the NE hexside of the "SWE" hex if on the map if it was slightly larger. Or both paths can be represented, but I personally feel that one of the two paths is enough to represent their effect in MWiF.

Peter Stauffenberg -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/17/2006 11:06:58 PM)
I'm looking at the map and wonder if maybe the border line between Sweden and Norway should be altered a little. I think especially about the following hexes should maybe become Swedish instead: * Forest hex 2xNE of Oslo * Forest hex 3xNE of Oslo This takes care of the impression of lake Mjųsa being too far away from the Swedish border. Now it will be just one hex away from the border. It also takes care of making the most narrow part of Sweden a little wider (4 hexes instead of just 3). It's strange that the hex line just south of lake Femunden has 6 hexes inside Norway and only 3 hexes inside Sweden. This change will make it better (5 Norwegian and 4 Swedish). I guess these two hex changes will have very little impact on game play because it's not along ay rail lines. The clear hex 1xSE of Oslo and the clear hex 1xE of Oslo are both 50% Swedish, but I think they can stay this way because they are part of the WIFFE European map. The forest hex just east of Lake Femunden is also 50% Swedish, but I think it's better to keep it as is so the lake is not hidden along the border line. What do you think about my proposed minor change to the border line?

Toed -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/18/2006 10:15:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen I'm looking at the map and wonder if maybe the border line between Sweden and Norway should be altered a little. I think especially about the following hexes should maybe become Swedish instead: * Forest hex 2xNE of Oslo * Forest hex 3xNE of Oslo This takes care of the impression of lake Mjųsa being too far away from the Swedish border. Now it will be just one hex away from the border. It also takes care of making the most narrow part of Sweden a little wider (4 hexes instead of just 3). It's strange that the hex line just south of lake Femunden has 6 hexes inside Norway and only 3 hexes inside Sweden. This change will make it better (5 Norwegian and 4 Swedish). I guess these two hex changes will have very little impact on game play because it's not along ay rail lines. The clear hex 1xSE of Oslo and the clear hex 1xE of Oslo are both 50% Swedish, but I think they can stay this way because they are part of the WIFFE European map. The forest hex just east of Lake Femunden is also 50% Swedish, but I think it's better to keep it as is so the lake is not hidden along the border line. What do you think about my proposed minor change to the border line? You are correct. The border are a bit to easterly. I mentioned this in post 209 in this thread and as I wrote then it is very hard get the border in the right place. Since the border seems to enjoy existing in the middle of the hexes. [:)] If we are moving the border I suggest that it is just moved in the forest hex 3xNE of Oslo. Because the border is, with the exeption of a ~60 km * 30 km Norwegian "bite" at Trysil (a bit small to be represented as a whole hex imo), almost a straight line from east of Oslo up to east Trondheim and this one change would make it as straight as a north to south line can get in a hexgrid.

c92nichj -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/18/2006 1:33:07 PM)
I found the following map on the net, not sure who made it, but I think it is pretty good. It have added swamp in the northern sweden just as northern Finalnd which I guess is pretty accurate way of describing the climate up there. [image]http://sealbay.net/WiF/BigScandinavia.jpg[/image]

Hortlund -> RE: Modifications to MWiF Scandinavia Map portion (8/18/2006 2:37:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen I think especially about the following hexes should maybe become Swedish instead: * Forest hex 2xNE of Oslo * Forest hex 3xNE of Oslo ... What do you think about my proposed minor change to the border line? I agree.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.796875