RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

akbrown -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/12/2004 10:51:46 AM)

Hi all,

Please keep in mind that my first go at a revised Australian map is quite rough. The rail lines are still only approximate as I hand drew them (quickly). I need to make up a new version with more accurate terrain, rail routes etc.

In reply to some comments:

Regarding the justification for adding a rail/highway line to the northern bases to simplify the supply of those bases, I don't agree. I think that if they were primarily supplied by sea (and I don't actually know if this is the case although others above say so), then that should be the way it is in the game as well. After all, there are a LOT of other bases on the map that need to be supplied by sea, why make an exception for just a few bases in Northern Australia?

Regarding the Darling river - it is long but only has a small flow, especially when compared to the great rivers of Asia. I have only put in a few Australian rivers, and only big ones, although again I have mainly based this on guesswork!



DrewMatrix -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/18/2004 6:22:45 AM)

Shouldn't we first ask the Australians to tidy things up a bit? Then we can deal with the map . . .



Cmdrcain -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/18/2004 7:30:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

It's port size 8 to get torps, 9 to get mines.

Unless you have a tender (AS or MLE) that is ...


So, Make it a smaller port but have a AS or MLE ship in port at start up, Manuel updated with a Note that the base starts out as a sub base if don't remove tender.

Or simply create the base and leave it up to gamers to pit a tender there to make it useable as a sub base..



akbrown -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/19/2004 2:14:08 AM)

I have started to make a second map with some more accurate terrain and rail placement.

I noticed while doing this that some of the towns/bases are innacurately placed. Sydney, for example, is too far North on the East coast, and some other places are also in the wrong spot by 1-3 hexes, including Alice Springs. Hopefully I will soon have the second version of the map done, so I can put it here for comment.

Regarding extra bases, we now have the following new bases suggested:

- Albany in WA (good port)
- Coen in the York peninsula (air base)
- Exmouth Gulf in WA (sub base)

Do we have a knowledgable person here who can provide some evidence that these bases were large and important enough to add to the map? Are there any others that should be added? I believe that there were a number of northern bases set up during the war that could be added as dot bases at the start of the campaign game, for possible buildup later. But we don't want to add too many of course.

Anyone still willing to help with the research, especially for Australian bases?

Also, I think that it would be a goode idea to add some production capacity to New Zealand. They seem to have nothing there, and so are wholly dependent on supply convoys. I am sure that NZ could at least partly supply its home forces during the war, or am I wrong? Any Kiwis on this board?



Cmdrcain -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/19/2004 6:28:27 AM)

On the Bit about Darwin:

In my game vs Japanese AI, I've evac malayan units and some dutch units down to Darwin... which Boasts now a 290 Air Support capability.

Now thats quite alot of air support in what seems a plsce of limited ways to transport into..

I don't through Plan to keep it that way, some will be passed on to Pt Moresby, But just mentioning it in the context of that some say Rails to darwin allowing ( I guess) over land supplies/support movement isn't realistic..

Oh yeah I have 190 Planes, refugees from Malaya and some of Dutch Up near fallen Singapoer bases... KB comes down near darwin It will be fun!

[:D]



jrcar -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/19/2004 3:07:27 PM)

akbrown apart from Albany the other bases weren't much... and still aren't. I think Exmouth had a single jetty at the time, and its not a great anchorage (but thats not a problem except in cyclone season). I visted the military facilities at Exmouth about 15 years ago, its still used for submarine communications, and there is a bare base there, but not much of a port.

But having them as hexes that you could build (in Northern Australia most places can be turned into decent airfields if you expend enough effort, its mostly flat) is a resonable compromise. i wouldn't suggest any others.


Cmdrcain Darwin did have a rail/road (well dirt track) link to the south, but only for 2/3rds of the way. The middle third was a dirt track only. A lot of effort was spent keeping it open. But it was able to support the big build up in Darwin, but still alot of heavy stuff came from sea. if PM had of been taken then I don't think Darwin would have been viable supported just by that rail line. As an example until Sept 1943 fuel could only be transported on the railway line in drums, as the northen segment (into Darwin) didn't have any tank cars (although seven tank cars were improvised on ballast hoppers in late 1942). Therefore most bulk fuel had to go via sea.


Cheers

Rob



Cmdrcain -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/20/2004 5:10:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

akbrown apart from Albany the other bases weren't much... and still aren't. I think Exmouth had a single jetty at the time, and its not a great anchorage (but thats not a problem except in cyclone season). I visted the military facilities at Exmouth about 15 years ago, its still used for submarine communications, and there is a bare base there, but not much of a port.

But having them as hexes that you could build (in Northern Australia most places can be turned into decent airfields if you expend enough effort, its mostly flat) is a resonable compromise. i wouldn't suggest any others.


Cmdrcain Darwin did have a rail/road (well dirt track) link to the south, but only for 2/3rds of the way. The middle third was a dirt track only. A lot of effort was spent keeping it open. But it was able to support the big build up in Darwin, but still alot of heavy stuff came from sea. if PM had of been taken then I don't think Darwin would have been viable supported just by that rail line. As an example until Sept 1943 fuel could only be transported on the railway line in drums, as the northen segment (into Darwin) didn't have any tank cars (although seven tank cars were improvised on ballast hoppers in late 1942). Therefore most bulk fuel had to go via sea.


Cheers

Rob




Heh...

That 290 Aviation is now a 492 Aviation Support...

Means I could Spot 400-close to 500 Planes at Darwin I suppose....

Realistic?

I only salvaged about 170 planes from Malaya and got The p-40's and b17's out of phillipines...

B17's at Darwin could strike whole DEI I think and surpress
Japanese use... If i move 300-400 planes there any TF of Japanese will be sunk..

Where did i get aviation support? I think some have overlooked malaya and DEI have quite a bit, if you can get it out you have Support



stubby331 -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/21/2004 9:18:31 AM)

Had a bit of a poke round on the web. Came up with a great interactive Map website.

This particular page shows an Admiralty map of Albany's Princess Royal Harbour and King George Sound - with Depths! Great Thanks to the National Libary of Australia.

http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-t36-e-cd



Raverdave -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/21/2004 12:00:23 PM)

Ok, one of the best sites to got to on the web for this kind of info is http://home.st.net.au/~dunn.

[image]local://upfiles/5619/Yw666033918.jpg[/image]



akbrown -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/21/2004 1:40:30 PM)

Here is an updated version of my proposed Australia map for WitP. I have made the following changes from the first version:

- Modified some of the terrain placement, and drawn the rail routes a bit more accurately.

- I also noticed, while redrawing the rail ines, that some of the Cities/towns on the current map are innacurately placed. Sydney, for example, on the current map is about three hexes "North" from where it is supposed to be. All of the other bases on the East coast are also misplaced, so I moved them all to a more accurate position.

- Some adjustments have been made to the terrain. I have drawn in "cultivated" terrain in areas that look like they have good road/rail infrastructure that is not represented by the main rail routes already.

- I have added a dot base for Coen, in the York peninsula. I want to do some more research into the northern Australian bases, but this is an example of what I think could represent the bases that were built during the war. There should only be a few of these bases added.

- I have added Albany, in Western Australia.

As before, all comments are welcome, especially from anyone who has some information about Australian bases during the war.

[image]local://upfiles/1070/Mk254348737.jpg[/image]



stubby331 -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/22/2004 3:51:31 AM)

looking good [:)]



stubby331 -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/22/2004 5:55:53 AM)

On Railway infrastructure in Western Australia...

Found a great article on the Australian Association of Timetable collectors website! [:D]

Written in 2000, it provides scanned copies of the Western Australian Government Railways Timetables for 1937 and notes to go with it. Interesting reading.

http://www.aattc.org.au/Times%20June%202000W.pdf



Top Cat -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/22/2004 10:57:57 AM)

Found the following site that has interesting info regarding the Adelaide - Alice Springs - Darwin roads.

http://www.anzacday.org.au/history/ww2/bfa/dusty_track.html

Sounds like even the unsealed road wasn't completed until July 1942 and was prone to being washed away. The Army also had to build farms in N.T. because there was no way to get enough fresh produce to Darwin.

As I'm playing the Allies in WITP and the Japanese are advancing through the SRA I've become increasingly aware that they could land somewhere like Broome and simply drive all the way to the
East, South coast or West and have a nice supply line.

Northern & Southern Australia were as isolated from each other as say India and Burma.

This barrier of remoteness aided the British defence of India quite nicely. The same should also be true for the Top End of Oz.

Cheers
Top Cat



moses -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/22/2004 5:29:31 PM)

I'm more concerned about an allied counteroffensive using Darwin as its base. It seems like you can dispence with the whole Solomons capaign and just base tons of planes, subs, ships and troops in Darwin and blast straight north. Even if you don't take this route the JP player is going to forced to commit lots of forces to defend a route of attack that was entirely implausable.

Not being from the region I'm not all that concerned about the lower part of the Austrailan map since I really don't expect a lot to be happening there. But getting the rail/road situation correct in N Austrailia seems to be critical



Cmdrcain -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/22/2004 7:34:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: moses

I'm more concerned about an allied counteroffensive using Darwin as its base. It seems like you can dispence with the whole Solomons capaign and just base tons of planes, subs, ships and troops in Darwin and blast straight north. Even if you don't take this route the JP player is going to forced to commit lots of forces to defend a route of attack that was entirely implausable.

Not being from the region I'm not all that concerned about the lower part of the Austrailan map since I really don't expect a lot to be happening there. But getting the rail/road situation correct in N Austrailia seems to be critical



Yup...

I have now 520 aviation support at Darwin and nearing 200 Planes all salvaged from Malaya, Phillipines, DEI area, Plus Usaffe, asiatic Fleet, ABDA, Malaya Army and I think 224th Hqtrs are at Darwin..

Troops saved from the areas trickling in..

At the Least if I bring in B17's and other LR bombers I could make it hard for Japanese shipping in the Lower DEI and I'll probably be able
make it hard, costly or impossiable For timor to be taken with the Darwin Air cover...

The question of supplies to support the Mass through is going be interesting..

[:D]



moses -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/22/2004 11:56:53 PM)

Using the editor I placed 2014 assault points of troops and transfered about 150 aircraft mostly heavy bombers to Darwin. At start Darwin had 7283 supply points with a requirement of 15000. After the first day it had 14368 supply points. After day 2 it had 44684 supply points!! Here it stabalized. At this point I started loading supplies onto tranports and loaded 27000 points in five days. This caused a dip in supply on hand to a low of 29953supply points before rising again.

It certainly seems as if major offensive operations can be launched from Darwin.



pompack -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/23/2004 12:26:49 AM)

I agree with Moses. The number and size of bases on the northern coast is only a minor point compared with the existence of a substantial communications infrastructure that just did not exist. I also found it to be very easy to suck very large amounts of supply to Darwin and Derby.


Also the post by Top Cat really exposes the historical state of this infrastructure. With a Northern Territory population of only 8000 in 1940, there was no prewar requirement for anything substantial. Just basing a single brigade in NT will DOUBLE the basic supply requirement of the entire NT.

Leaving the current WitP NT rail/road net in place totally distorts the strategic possibilities.



Cmdrcain -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/23/2004 10:05:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: moses

Using the editor I placed 2014 assault points of troops and transfered about 150 aircraft mostly heavy bombers to Darwin. At start Darwin had 7283 supply points with a requirement of 15000. After the first day it had 14368 supply points. After day 2 it had 44684 supply points!! Here it stabalized. At this point I started loading supplies onto tranports and loaded 27000 points in five days. This caused a dip in supply on hand to a low of 29953supply points before rising again.

It certainly seems as if major offensive operations can be launched from Darwin.



Hummm... That Supply had to come from somewhere, don't tell me Australia itself generated the supply, if It didn't I'd guess it sucked up all the supply from other linked Australia bases so it can deplete those bases supply..

Darwin however shouldn't be made so as to be totally undefensiable
but Sea supply probably is needed, with no rail link, just a road link I'd guess.

The Actual Allied build up as I recall was on east coast, Cooktown south.

The Northern Bases were more I think Sub ports for maintaining subs that prowled the DEI harrassing japanese shipping



moses -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/23/2004 4:56:52 PM)

The supply to Darwin comes from Townsville. Strangly charter towers, on the rail between Darwin and Townsville, was not touched and maintained a suuply level of EXACTLY 54380 throughout the test. I've run about 12 days and reached what looks like a steady state. Townsville is sitting at about 13000 and Darwin has 38513. Townsville draws from points south where there are tons of supply.



Cmdrcain -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/23/2004 7:32:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: moses

The supply to Darwin comes from Townsville. Strangly charter towers, on the rail between Darwin and Townsville, was not touched and maintained a suuply level of EXACTLY 54380 throughout the test. I've run about 12 days and reached what looks like a steady state. Townsville is sitting at about 13000 and Darwin has 38513. Townsville draws from points south where there are tons of supply.



Humm I have now 692 Aviation support at Darwin and 300 Planes

I have yet through to build up the troops to the amount of
assault points you mentioned, however I'm seeing Darwins supplies get into the orange and I'm not seeing vast amounts of supplies drawn up to Darwin.

I have 5 Hqtrs there too, USAFE, Asiaic Fleet, Malaya army (moving it over to Derby) ABDA.. 224th Hqtrs..


I have 92 Aviation and 54 aviation support at Wndyham/Derby too..

Way it is Going, North Australia could have between the 3 Bases 900-1000 Plane support... its ridiculous

[:D][:D][:D]



Top Cat -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/23/2004 8:23:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pompacl

I agree with Moses. The number and size of bases on the northern coast is only a minor point compared with the existence of a substantial communications infrastructure that just did not exist. I also found it to be very easy to suck very large amounts of supply to Darwin and Derby.


Also the post by Top Cat really exposes the historical state of this infrastructure. With a Northern Territory population of only 8000 in 1940, there was no prewar requirement for anything substantial. Just basing a single brigade in NT will DOUBLE the basic supply requirement of the entire NT.

Leaving the current WitP NT rail/road net in place totally distorts the strategic possibilities.


Yep I agree with these sentiments. Darwin is only a few hexes from Timor and from there you can interdict quite a few oil producing areas with heavy bombers. Restricting Japanese oil flow in mid 1942 could be on the cards.

The fact that the Allies didn't take this direct path is all tied to the logistical nightmare they would have faced.

Cheers
Top Cat



esteban -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/24/2004 10:34:29 PM)

Yes, this doesn't look good for the Japs. It seriously damages the importance of the Solomons and New Guinea, ingame. As the allies, you can even evacuate Port Moresby, and concentrate on an island hopping thrust north from Darwin to Timor, and then from there, to wherever you want to go.

The only way to head this off would be more house rules, or a major Japanese invasion of North Aussie to eliminate the bases before they can threaten your vital supplies. Even if that worked, with the highways, that would turn Oz into a giant version of North Africa, with mobile warfare running possibly into the end of the war.

So, an alternate allied strategy for victory would look like:

A) Holding pattern only in India/North Burma/Aluetians

B) Thrust through Central Pacific to the Marianas for B-29 bases.

C) Major Brit/Aussie/Yank thrust north from Darwin and Perth into the NEI, to eviscerate the Japanese resource base by the end of 1944.

D) Combo of these two thrusts "pincers" everything west of Sansapor/Morotai and south of the Marshalls/Marianas

E) seizure of high VP sites in Saigon/Manila/Singapore to cut off Burmese oil flow and ensure the victory.



Cmdrcain -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/25/2004 9:43:39 AM)

Would simply changing the Darwin Rail to a road or Trail reduce ability for Darwin to draw up supplies?

At 692 Aviation at Darwin and 100+ at another base and 50+ at a Third, b29's could later interdict whole of DEI.. bombing out the airfields etc..

At best as I recall, Darwin was basically a Sub port, for subs operating into DEI/Malaya area.

I originally salvaged all I did and sent to Darwin with Intention to move to Port Moresby and East Australia, with a bit left for some north defense..

But the talk here and the way I quickly built up Aviation support from DEI/Malaya and some Phillipine units has had me thinking..



esteban -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/25/2004 10:57:25 AM)

I would think that the B-29s would still be more effectively used against Japan proper. But in reality, you wouldn't need them in the DEI anyway. You don't get B-29s until Fall of 1944, and by then the Allies would either be in possesion or in B-17/24 range of all the big oil production facilities in DEI.

Another problem with Darwin itself is that there is now a 600 resource plant there. Thats 600 supply per turn. Aside from the ahistorical transOz railway, that resource center seems pretty ahistorical for province that supposedly only had a population of 8000 people before the war. God forbid that the other 7 million Aussies buckled down as effectively as the game leads you to believe the people of the Darwin did. If they had, they would have probably won the war in 1943 by building a suspension bridge from Perth to Tokyo, starting at the Japanese end!



Raverdave -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/25/2004 12:25:50 PM)

Darwin had the capacity to become a size 9 airfield.......in point of fact there were a large number of satellite airfilelds in and around Darwin by the wars end, much like those at PM. Apart from the rail link and the raods into Darwin, I don't subscribe to the view that Darwin should be hobbled to prevent an Island hopping campaign view Timor and beyond. The reason why this axis was not undertaken lies with dug-out doug, and the fact that the Japanese were already in PNG.



moonraker65 -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/25/2004 1:16:31 PM)

I believe that the Australia Map should be as accurate as possible. Historical accuracy ought to be a part of this wonderful simulation. I also think that one of the Australian Ports should be included in the Auto-Convoy system. I don't think that this would detract too much from gameplay and would most probably reflect what took place in reality. The reason I would like this implemented is because the present system takes a long time to get supplies from PH to PNG or the Solomons and if you want to supply PM more quickly then you have to make your own convoys in say Brisbane or Sydney which takes up valuable AK/AP resources. Perhaps something for Matrix,2x3 to look into ?



jrcar -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/25/2004 2:45:40 PM)

As Raver says Darwin Airfield is a good one (the same site happily lands B-52's :) ) and there were a number of other nice flat locations.... just about everywhere in fact :)

The issue is supply, the rail line was never fully relied upon, coastal shipping was still used to carry a lot of stuff (mostly via the Torres Strait... hence the importance of holding PM).

Without the shipping offensive ops from Darwin would not be possible. The rail/road link was enough for Defensive support though.

Cheers

Rob



doomonyou -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/25/2004 5:08:27 PM)

one of the problems with changing that railroad is that you can't built rail in this game. Lets say I wanted to upgrade the rail line. Can't do it. So while under war emergency it would probably not take altogether very long to complete the Darwin rail line, you can't. Imagine if the varoius commander in theatre had decided that the fate of the pacific rested in Darwin and made clear thier desire to evacuate teh whole of thier air ans sea arms from DEI, PI and even singapore to darwin, over the period of time it would take to do that, it certainly should be with the aussies power to set up the land route to complement that decision.

In that regard I see the Darwin route as the representation of potential to support a decision as opposed to a litteraly reality since you are unable to build the Alaskan highway or super darwin three rail line etc. in game. It has to be there day one so to simulate the ability for it to be there in Feburary of 1942 if you really needed it.



Blackhorse -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/25/2004 6:32:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: doomonyou

Imagine if the varoius commander in theatre had decided that the fate of the pacific rested in Darwin . . . it certainly should be with the aussies power to set up the land route to complement that decision.

In that regard I see the Darwin route as the representation of potential to support a decision as opposed to a litteraly reality since you are unable to build the Alaskan highway or super darwin three rail line etc. in game. It has to be there day one so to simulate the ability for it to be there in Feburary of 1942 if you really needed it.


Doom,

I understand your point, but I respectfully disagree. Severing the rail link to Darwin makes for both better history, and a better game.

In order to overcome a limitation in the game -- the inability to build new roads/rails -- you would allow for the hypothetical possibility that the Australians could choose to complete the rail to Darwin; but IMHO that choice sacrifices too much historical accuracy and gameplay: eliminating the very real threat of Japanese attacks in the extremely isolated Australian northwest that troubled Allied commanders throughout 1942; and making it much too easy for the Allies to build Darwin into a base for offensive operations.

Besides, if rail/highways were meant to represent some hypothetical potential, why not put a rail/highway in every hex in India, Australia, New Zealand and the US West Coast?

And even 'hypothetical potential' does not explain the game's mythical rail/highway route along the West Coast from Seattle to Nome. No highway was, or could have been, built along the Alaskan / Canadian coast or to Nome. Far inland, ten thousand US Engineers and contractors took two years to hack a one-lane dirt road ( best represented in game by a trail or a road, but certainly not a highway/rail) to Fairbanks, and make it serviceable for all-weather truck traffic.

During WWII the US Army stationed 150,000 soldiers in Alaska to prevent the Japanese from invading -- because if the Japanese took the ports, there would be no way to reinforce/supply the state, except by air. In the game, the US only needs a 'tripwire' force, because limitless reinforcements can be railed north from the 'Lower 48'.



esteban -> RE: Can the map of Australia be improved? (7/25/2004 7:26:42 PM)

I have to disagree with the idea that the railroads should stay because hypothetically the Aussie government might have decided that a rail line up to Darwin was a good idea. The Aussie government had a lot of other priorities. A lot of Aussie troops were chewed up fighting their way up the New Guinea coast, and I think the public would have taken a dim view of that sacrifice if it could have been largely obviated by building a railroad to Darwin.

Having a railway that runs the circuit of Oz is just not realistic. Even if it were, do you realize that communications between Townsville and Rockhampton are more difficult ingame, than communications between Townsville and Darwin?

Also, I think the 600 resource center should be reviewed. I have no issues with the ability to build big bases in North Oz, but supplying them should require convoys.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.875