RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

Shark7 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/2/2008 6:16:55 PM)
Andrew, does this mean that these large atolls will show up as 2 bases on the map? IE Kwajalein and Roi-Namur. Twice as much to defend, and twice as much to neutralize for an attack if it is the case.

bradfordkay -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/2/2008 8:26:43 PM)
Andrew, are there going to any small air bases between Whyalla and Kalgoorlie to facilitate transferring short ranged fighters between SE Oz and Perth? I find it hard to believe that the RAAF was unable to shift Hurricanes from one coast to the other without placing them aboard ships.

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/3/2008 1:44:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 Andrew, does this mean that these large atolls will show up as 2 bases on the map? IE Kwajalein and Roi-Namur. Twice as much to defend, and twice as much to neutralize for an attack if it is the case. Yes. Two bases in separate, adjacent hexes. Andrew

JeffroK -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/3/2008 5:46:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bradfordkay Andrew, are there going to any small air bases between Whyalla and Kalgoorlie to facilitate transferring short ranged fighters between SE Oz and Perth? I find it hard to believe that the RAAF was unable to shift Hurricanes from one coast to the other without placing them aboard ships. The RAAF only had 1 Hurricane. Put them on a train, they would arrive on the East Coast overnight. Ceduna would be the only base between Kalgoorlie & Whyalla and was an RAAF AOB.

bradfordkay -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/3/2008 7:33:19 AM)
Well, if in reality they only had one more airfield on that route that's all they should get. Oh well...

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/3/2008 1:39:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffK Ceduna would be the only base between Kalgoorlie & Whyalla and was an RAAF AOB. Ceduna is included. So is Esperance. Andrew

pad152 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/7/2008 9:41:28 PM)
Will we see river movement?

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/8/2008 2:22:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pad152 Will we see river movement? There are a few "navigable" rivers that can accommodate ships up to 15,000 tons. Navigation along smaller rivers is not possible (as currently). Andrew

Shark7 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/8/2008 5:03:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: pad152 Will we see river movement? There are a few "navigable" rivers that can accommodate ships up to 15,000 tons. Navigation along smaller rivers is not possible (as currently). Andrew Hmm Littoral Warfare... I assume we're going to have River patrol boats?

pad152 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/8/2008 8:22:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: pad152 Will we see river movement? There are a few "navigable" rivers that can accommodate ships up to 15,000 tons. Navigation along smaller rivers is not possible (as currently). In CHS 2.08 I can send barges from Shanghai to Nanking but, not to Ichang or ChungKing!

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/8/2008 11:59:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: pad152 Will we see river movement? There are a few "navigable" rivers that can accommodate ships up to 15,000 tons. Navigation along smaller rivers is not possible (as currently). Andrew Hmm Littoral Warfare... I assume we're going to have River patrol boats? No river patrol boats. Remember it is only the biggest of rivers that are navigable, and the navigable stretches are only short. The longest of them is the Yangtse, which is navigable all the way to Hankow. Andrew

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/9/2008 12:01:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pad152 In CHS 2.08 I can send barges from Shanghai to Nanking but, not to Ichang or ChungKing! That is as designed - the Yangtse is only navigable as far as Nanking on my current WitP map. Andrew

Buck Beach -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/10/2008 5:02:20 PM)
Does this mean that the Columbia river to Portland, Oregon is closed and that is not a port city? Edit, I may have misinterpreted your post as the Yangtze was the only navigable river.

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/10/2008 11:29:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Buck Beach Does this mean that the Columbia river to Portland, Oregon is closed and that is not a port city? No, Portland is still a port. Andrew

treespider -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/11/2008 4:36:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: Buck Beach Does this mean that the Columbia river to Portland, Oregon is closed and that is not a port city? No, Portland is still a port. Andrew Afterall it is named PORT-land...[;)]

Flying Tiger -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/17/2008 4:02:55 AM)
Is Nadzab included as a seperate base from Lae? Lae itself was never very suitable for airstrips - Nadzab on the other hand is perfect. Both should be included seperately. In 1944 a highway was built connecting Lae to Nadzab, previously only a track - not sure how you work that in game terms. Is Gove included (east of Darwin)? One of the best protected (and biggest) deep water harbours in Australia, but never developed because even today there is no all weather road to it! Was a smallish fighter strip (but could have been much bigger if needed) and large PBY base. Is Goroka included (highlands of PNG). a track (at best!) should connect it to Nadzab. No port (obviously!!) and only size 1 airfield (no heavy bombers). BUT... it should be NON malarial - too high for mosquitoes. It was not a significant base at any point in the war (too difficult to supply), but japs were there until at least 1943, and it could add some interesting options. Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!!

Cavalry Corp -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/17/2008 7:01:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: pad152 Will we see river movement? There are a few "navigable" rivers that can accommodate ships up to 15,000 tons. Navigation along smaller rivers is not possible (as currently). Andrew Hmm Littoral Warfare... I assume we're going to have River patrol boats? No river patrol boats. Remember it is only the biggest of rivers that are navigable, and the navigable stretches are only short. The longest of them is the Yangtse, which is navigable all the way to Hankow. Andrew Please note although the Yangtse is very long and wide its quite shallow and very shallow at times of the year - I know I have been on it all the way to Wuhan then on to Chonqing- barges yes - most others no M

Shark7 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/17/2008 8:20:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cavalry quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: pad152 Will we see river movement? There are a few "navigable" rivers that can accommodate ships up to 15,000 tons. Navigation along smaller rivers is not possible (as currently). Andrew Hmm Littoral Warfare... I assume we're going to have River patrol boats? No river patrol boats. Remember it is only the biggest of rivers that are navigable, and the navigable stretches are only short. The longest of them is the Yangtse, which is navigable all the way to Hankow. Andrew Please note although the Yangtse is very long and wide its quite shallow and very shallow at times of the year - I know I have been on it all the way to Wuhan then on to Chonqing- barges yes - most others no M So basically you're saying that anything with a deeper drought than a flat bottom river boat (IE Panay) would likely bottom out on the Yangtse?

Cavalry Corp -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/17/2008 8:48:53 PM)
Yes from Wuhan up river only shallow drafts allowed - its still a very long way M

Herrbear -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/18/2008 4:11:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger ... Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!! IIRC bases are malaria free if combined air and port = 10.

Gen.Hoepner -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/18/2008 2:15:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Herrbear quote: ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger ... Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!! IIRC bases are malaria free if combined air and port = 10. That rule never worked unfortunately[:-]

herwin -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/18/2008 2:44:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner quote: ORIGINAL: Herrbear quote: ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger ... Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!! IIRC bases are malaria free if combined air and port = 10. That rule never worked unfortunately[:-] I've noticed this, too.

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/18/2008 3:45:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger Is Nadzab included as a seperate base from Lae? Lae itself was never very suitable for airstrips - Nadzab on the other hand is perfect. Both should be included seperately. In 1944 a highway was built connecting Lae to Nadzab, previously only a track - not sure how you work that in game terms. Nadzab is not currently included, but I might change that. quote: Is Gove included (east of Darwin)? One of the best protected (and biggest) deep water harbours in Australia, but never developed because even today there is no all weather road to it! Was a smallish fighter strip (but could have been much bigger if needed) and large PBY base. Gove is included. quote: Is Goroka included (highlands of PNG). a track (at best!) should connect it to Nadzab. No port (obviously!!) and only size 1 airfield (no heavy bombers). BUT... it should be NON malarial - too high for mosquitoes. It was not a significant base at any point in the war (too difficult to supply), but japs were there until at least 1943, and it could add some interesting options. No plans to include Goroka, but Wau is included. quote: Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!! I don't look after the code, just the map graphics and the base list. This would be best posted in the land thread. I basically agree with the reasoning, by the way. Andrew

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/18/2008 3:49:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cavalry Please note although the Yangtse is very long and wide its quite shallow and very shallow at times of the year - I know I have been on it all the way to Wuhan then on to Chonqing- barges yes - most others no M This is how the Yangtse is represented on the AE map: - A series of coastal hexsides links Nanking to the Pacific, so ships of any size can reach Nanking (just as they can on my current WitP map). - Series of navigable river hexsides between Nanking and Hankow. Only ships of 15,000 tons or less can cross navigable river hexsides. - Normal river hexsides, uncrossable by ships, upstream from Hankow. So TFs cannot move past Hankow. Andrew

mlees -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/18/2008 6:42:20 PM)
Andrew, will your map art make clear the differences of the various parts of the Yangtse?

Flying Tiger -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/19/2008 6:30:11 AM)
quote: quote: ORIGINAL: Herrbear quote: ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger ... Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!! IIRC bases are malaria free if combined air and port = 10. That rule never worked unfortunately[:-] 2 problems: 1. the rule does not work!! 2. The rule does not make sense!! Yes, if a unit is IN COMBAT (ie. guys are spending their time crawling through swamps with leeches in their ears and snakes in their boots, getting bitten by a million mosquitoes, etc, etc, etc...) then there needs to be a morale penalty. BUT if the unit is happily living out the war in some small remote base (maybe a port 0, AF 0 - so max of 3 and 3) they should not be penalised - they are sleeping in huts under mosquito nets, spending their days catching waves (and the odd fish), and DDT has killed all the local bugs. Sounds like a holiday to me!! So i think the combined port+AF total of 10 is wrong - 6 should be fine - for NON combat units NOT in combat. any arguments? (and yes, i know i was exaggerating the conditions slightly, but you get the picture...)

treespider -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/19/2008 7:49:10 AM)
So what do you suggest when one side is in a 3 - 3 base and the other guy is in the same hex...but no fighting occurs today ...but it does on Wednesday...but not on thursday and maybe resumes on Saturday?

Andrew Brown -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/19/2008 1:32:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mlees Andrew, will your map art make clear the differences of the various parts of the Yangtse? The different types of river are drawn differently, so hopefully it won't be too confusing. Andrew

mlees -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/19/2008 6:00:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown quote: ORIGINAL: mlees Andrew, will your map art make clear the differences of the various parts of the Yangtse? The different types of river are drawn differently, so hopefully it won't be too confusing. Andrew Thank you, sir.

Flying Tiger -> RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread (3/20/2008 2:01:17 AM)
quote: So what do you suggest when one side is in a 3 - 3 base and the other guy is in the same hex...but no fighting occurs today ...but it does on Wednesday...but not on thursday and maybe resumes on Saturday? Try to picture the reality of the situation.... if opposing units are occupying the same lump of coral then they can be considered 'in combat' even if they are not actively shooting at each other - the guys are forced to spend their days and nights sitting in foxholes or on patrol and a a result getting bitten by mozzies, eaten by scorpions, and generally feeling irritated - thus a morale penalty. If on the other hand the particular lump of coral is secure then the majority of personnel can be assumed to NOT be 'suffering' in this way - thus no penalty. Make sense??

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.921875