RE: MWiF Map Review

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: MWiF Map Review - America

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: MWiF Map Review - America

Page: << < prev 20 21 22 23 [24]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 3/21/2009 5:29:16 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

True as that is, neither are most of the rivers featured as such in MWiF. The question�is - should a military unit attempting to cross the Gila river (bed) in the 1940s encounter additional difficulties when making the crossing under enemy fire (which is the only time rivers have an effect in MWiF, during land combats)?

If the answer is yes, then the river should stay.

My opinion is that if the original CWiF map designer put the Gila River, this is for a reason, so the map is advanced enough for me to say that I prefer to stick to the rivers as we have them now.

quote:

For MWiF2, this brings up the notion of making particularly wide rivers have an effect on movement as well as combat.

THis is already possible by using lake hexsides.
Personaly I'd have made some hexsides of the Volga and the Dniepr Lake hexsides, so they are impassable.
Maybe same for some lengths of the Gange, and the Mississipi.
The Amazon is already made that way.

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 691

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 5/1/2009 10:47:20 PM

fiveof6

Posts: 23
Joined: 9/3/2007
Status: offline

Regarding Tradition...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 692

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 5/2/2009 7:02:49 PM

composer99

Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

The Gila river can't be considered a tradition since it has only appeared with the conversion of the America map to European scale hexes.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to fiveof6)

Post #: 693

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 1:28:54 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Hey, don't be mistaken, Steve and I consider the map done.

But from time to time, when I happen to find improvements that we can make to the map, I make them. Usualy they only are names.

Here I think I found one improvement, and would like opinions from people who know the area better than me to tell me if what I found is correct or incorrect.

This is about the Chesapeake Bay. Believe it or not, the wikipeding I did for the USS Robin in the WWII Quiz thread made me read that she made her shakedown cruise in the Chesapeake Bay, and that is a lot of times I see the Chesapeake Bay mentionned in various readings of mine, so I wanted to know more about it.

Reading about it, I saw that its only crossing points in the north is the bridge at Annapolis, so I wondered about the strait hexside that MWiF have placed from Baltimore to the hex SE of Baltimore (see screenshot below).

Strait hexsides (the double red arrow) represent bridge as well as ferry crossing.

So, I wonder if there was any ferry crossing from the Baltimore area to the hex SE of it during the 40s. Anyone knows ? If no one know, I'll leave it as is, because I usualy trust the original CWiF map designer.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 694

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 1:32:47 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Map of the Bay from the Internet.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 695

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 1:36:37 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Ah, also, would someone know the name of the river north of Richmond on the map below ?

And the name of the Potomac River's tributary shown on the map below ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 696

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 1:46:23 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

While looking after the Chesapeake Bay, I came to read about the San Francisco Bay.
Below you can see how it is represented as of today.
About that bay, I found a map about all the bridge crossings that exist (copied in post below), and discovered that the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (numbered 1 in the map below) opened in 1956 replacing ferry service by the Richmond � San Rafael Ferry Company.

So, if there was a ferry service on this crossing (shown on a map in a future post below), shouldn't a Strait hexside be placed between the Oakland hex and the hex to the west of the Oakland hex ?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 697

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 1:49:21 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

The Bridge crossing of the San Francisco Bay.

1 Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (It opened in 1956 replacing ferry service by the Richmond � San Rafael Ferry Company)
2 Golden Gate Bridge (completed during the year 1937)
3 San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (known locally as the Bay Bridge) (it opened for traffic on November 12, 1936, 6 months before the Golden Gate Bridge)
4 San Mateo Hayward Bridge (commonly called the San Mateo Bridge) (The original bridge, known as the San Francisco Bay Toll-Bridge, was built in 1929)
5 Dumbarton Bridge (The earlier bridge, opened on January 17, 1927, was the first vehicular bridge to cross San Francisco Bay)

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 698

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 1:59:46 PM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

Rivers:

The tributary for the Potamac has to be the Shenandoah river. The only others (e.g. Bull Run) are too narrow and too short to show on the map.

The river north of Richmand would be the Rappahannock. The name would be longer than the river on the map :)

On a side note I'm a little surprised that the Patuxent river (between D.C. & Baltimore) doesn't qualify. Maybe it just isn't wide enough?

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 699

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 2:32:01 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

Rivers:

The tributary for the Potamac has to be the Shenandoah river. The only others (e.g. Bull Run) are too narrow and too short to show on the map.

The river north of Richmand would be the Rappahannock. The name would be longer than the river on the map :)

Looks right.
Thanks for your contribution Taxman !!!

quote:

On a side note I'm a little surprised that the Patuxent river (between D.C. & Baltimore) doesn't qualify. Maybe it just isn't wide enough?

Maybe the designer felt that the area already had enough rivers ?

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 700

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 2:34:37 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

It looks like I found someone who knows river names.
what would be the name of the unamed one between Charleston and Wilmington here ?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 701

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 2:36:27 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

Edit : Deleted, see below.

< Message edited by Froonp -- 8/7/2010 5:04:41 PM >

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 702

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 2:44:33 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

And if I may ask another, what is the name of the Tributary of the Hudson River here ?

Sorry, forget this one, it looks like the Mohawk.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 703

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 3:45:52 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

the one between Charleston and Wilmington should be the Cape Fear.

the Neuse is rather unfortunately drawn, considering it becomes tidal influenced a bit above the city of New Bern. the port at it's mouth could be better labeled Morehead City, still a port of embarkation for the heavier elements of the USMC today, whereas only sail boats dock in New Bern. moving the river to the other side of the hex would solve that nicely.

I'll just leave this idea in this currently active thread:

this gets confusing. the map is 'done' but crossing arrows can be tweaked. I've been fooling around with a print-out of the Caspian area, that could still use work. an entire hex-row or two could be eliminated between Grozny and Baku, easily. Baku and Tiflis are so far apart, either side can be said to suffer from the distortion depending on who you are playing at the time. Reinforcements from Baku take forever to reach the Tiflis front; likewise after the Axis take Tiflis they have a long march to Baku still in front of them. it appears we have plenty of time till release and this could be a good area to work on still. I know you put a lot of time in to it already. one way to approach it might be to do some basic measurements of distances; I know there are several border/geographical features you wished to illustrate, however if including them introduces so much distortion, perhaps some of them should be edited out. I wouldn't worry about the effects on Turkmenistan, but the west side of the Caspian and the entire north/south alignment of it is just wrong. subtracting a row from the Kalmyk Steppes above it wouldn't hurt anything....except of course for the entire structure of the map data files. but I get a little confused as to why small things can still be worked on but bigger things can't.?

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 704

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 4:37:07 PM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

A quick (and probably incomplete) google-foo attempt regarding ferries and other susch crossings of the Chesapeake:

http://www.chesapeakelifemag.com/index.php/cl/features_article/fe_chesapeakebaybridge_ja02/

and

http://www.esva.net/~rwest/ferries.html

Leaving the Baltimore crossing is probably legit in that there appears to have been enough local shipping for just such (non-military) purposes that it could have been used.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 705

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 5:03:25 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66
Leaving the Baltimore crossing is probably legit in that there appears to have been enough local shipping for just such (non-military) purposes that it could have been used.

OK, thanks.

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 706

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/7/2010 5:14:03 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

the one between Charleston and Wilmington should be the Cape Fear.

Looking at maps, I think I agree.

quote:

the Neuse is rather unfortunately drawn, considering it becomes tidal influenced a bit above the city of New Bern. the port at it's mouth could be better labeled Morehead City, still a port of embarkation for the heavier elements of the USMC today, whereas only sail boats dock in New Bern. moving the river to the other side of the hex would solve that nicely.

I agree about the Neuse.... but... ha-hem...

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 707

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/8/2010 2:26:35 PM

sajbalk

Posts: 264
Joined: 7/11/2005
From: Davenport, Iowa
Status: offline

If you are making easy changes, you should delete the rail connection from Norflok to the Delmarva peninsula to the NE.
The crossing arrow is there in 1940, but no bridge until post war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesapeake_Bay_Bridge-Tunnel

_____________________________

Steve Balk
Iowa, USA

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 708

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/8/2010 5:55:43 PM

mlees

Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline

If the Japanese landed in San Fransisco, wouldn't they just get the middle finger from those ferry pilots?

Everyone gets to use those ferries, right?

(in reply to sajbalk)

Post #: 709

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/8/2010 7:03:23 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

If you are making easy changes, you should delete the rail connection from Norflok to the Delmarva peninsula to the NE.
The crossing arrow is there in 1940, but no bridge until post war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesapeake_Bay_Bridge-Tunnel

Right. I do that. That rail is not drawn neither on the AiF America Maps, so we should not have had it on the MWiF maps either.

(in reply to sajbalk)

Post #: 710

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/8/2010 7:15:33 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees

If the Japanese landed in San Fransisco, wouldn't they just get the middle finger from those ferry pilots?

Everyone gets to use those ferries, right?

What does this mean ?

(in reply to mlees)

Post #: 711

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/9/2010 4:20:45 AM

sajbalk

Posts: 264
Joined: 7/11/2005
From: Davenport, Iowa
Status: offline

Thanks for taking off the rail.

As to the ferries, I think he means that the invader would need to bring his own boat and could not use the enemy's boats.

_____________________________

Steve Balk
Iowa, USA

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 712

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/9/2010 9:52:07 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Thanks for taking off the rail.

As to the ferries, I think he means that the invader would need to bring his own boat and could not use the enemy's boats.

Well, wouldn't this be true for any ferry service in any country ?
There is no rule in the game for Strait hexside being disabled and reconstructed when conquered, Strait hexsides become immediately useful for the conqueror.
If the Germans are able to use the Kerch Strait ferry services from the Russians, I believe that the Japanese would be able to use the San Francisco Bay Ferry services from the Americans.

(in reply to sajbalk)

Post #: 713

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/9/2010 7:16:32 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Thanks for taking off the rail.

As to the ferries, I think he means that the invader would need to bring his own boat and could not use the enemy's boats.

Well, wouldn't this be true for any ferry service in any country ?
There is no rule in the game for Strait hexside being disabled and reconstructed when conquered, Strait hexsides become immediately useful for the conqueror.
If the Germans are able to use the Kerch Strait ferry services from the Russians, I believe that the Japanese would be able to use the San Francisco Bay Ferry services from the Americans.

About the ferry boat captains, ... I have always believed that the guy with the gun is in charge. Telling someone who has superior firepower that you won't cooperate tends to shorten your lifespan dramatically.

I am sure the Japanese army had people who could run ferries, so the question is whether all the shipping would be destroyed to the point that it couldn't be restored to a semblance of an operational condition. And as Patrice said, this would apply to every straits hex on the map.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 714

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/9/2010 8:31:50 PM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

For a straits hexside to exist it doesn't have to have been an actual ferry there. It can also be where a military force could cross water with coastal shiping or small boats. Another consideration if there should be a straits hexside or not is if a blue water navy could reasonable hinder a crossing or not. This is as I see it anyway.

Remember that this is a strategic game and such resources as small boats are simplified away.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 715

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/10/2010 4:07:48 AM

Mike Dubost

Posts: 273
Joined: 8/24/2008
From: Sacramento, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

For a straits hexside to exist it doesn't have to have been an actual ferry there. It can also be where a military force could cross water with coastal shiping or small boats. Another consideration if there should be a straits hexside or not is if a blue water navy could reasonable hinder a crossing or not. This is as I see it anyway.

Remember that this is a strategic game and such resources as small boats are simplified away.

If the ability of a blue water navy to hinder the crossing is a controlling consideration, then there should not be a crossing between Oakland and Marin County (the hex west of San Francisco Bay). Nearly a decade ago, I watched one of the decommissioned Iowa Class BBs sail up to join the "mothball fleet" in Benicia, and she went right through that hex. I don't think that part of the bay is dredged or if it is, it was dredged then, since Mare Island Naval Shipyard was north of it in Vallejo. I would leave the other crossings for the bridges, but not add one here.

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 716

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/10/2010 9:51:17 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Dubost

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

For a straits hexside to exist it doesn't have to have been an actual ferry there. It can also be where a military force could cross water with coastal shiping or small boats. Another consideration if there should be a straits hexside or not is if a blue water navy could reasonable hinder a crossing or not. This is as I see it anyway.

Remember that this is a strategic game and such resources as small boats are simplified away.

If the ability of a blue water navy to hinder the crossing is a controlling consideration, then there should not be a crossing between Oakland and Marin County (the hex west of San Francisco Bay). Nearly a decade ago, I watched one of the decommissioned Iowa Class BBs sail up to join the "mothball fleet" in Benicia, and she went right through that hex. I don't think that part of the bay is dredged or if it is, it was dredged then, since Mare Island Naval Shipyard was north of it in Vallejo. I would leave the other crossings for the bridges, but not add one here.

There is a difference to be able to sail somewhere in coastal water and the ability to operate in hostile coastal water. A BB in coastal water would be vulnerable to mines and torpedo boats and so on.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Mike Dubost)

Post #: 717

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/10/2010 8:00:02 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Dubost

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

For a straits hexside to exist it doesn't have to have been an actual ferry there. It can also be where a military force could cross water with coastal shiping or small boats. Another consideration if there should be a straits hexside or not is if a blue water navy could reasonable hinder a crossing or not. This is as I see it anyway.

Remember that this is a strategic game and such resources as small boats are simplified away.

If the ability of a blue water navy to hinder the crossing is a controlling consideration, then there should not be a crossing between Oakland and Marin County (the hex west of San Francisco Bay). Nearly a decade ago, I watched one of the decommissioned Iowa Class BBs sail up to join the "mothball fleet" in Benicia, and she went right through that hex. I don't think that part of the bay is dredged or if it is, it was dredged then, since Mare Island Naval Shipyard was north of it in Vallejo. I would leave the other crossings for the bridges, but not add one here.

There is a difference to be able to sail somewhere in coastal water and the ability to operate in hostile coastal water. A BB in coastal water would be vulnerable to mines and torpedo boats and so on.

There is also the knowledge of the sand bars, reefs, and other natural navigational hazards which might not be known to an invader.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 718

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/11/2010 2:17:00 AM

Mike Dubost

Posts: 273
Joined: 8/24/2008
From: Sacramento, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Dubost

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

For a straits hexside to exist it doesn't have to have been an actual ferry there. It can also be where a military force could cross water with coastal shiping or small boats. Another consideration if there should be a straits hexside or not is if a blue water navy could reasonable hinder a crossing or not. This is as I see it anyway.

Remember that this is a strategic game and such resources as small boats are simplified away.

If the ability of a blue water navy to hinder the crossing is a controlling consideration, then there should not be a crossing between Oakland and Marin County (the hex west of San Francisco Bay). Nearly a decade ago, I watched one of the decommissioned Iowa Class BBs sail up to join the "mothball fleet" in Benicia, and she went right through that hex. I don't think that part of the bay is dredged or if it is, it was dredged then, since Mare Island Naval Shipyard was north of it in Vallejo. I would leave the other crossings for the bridges, but not add one here.

There is a difference to be able to sail somewhere in coastal water and the ability to operate in hostile coastal water. A BB in coastal water would be vulnerable to mines and torpedo boats and so on.

Admitedly that is true up to a point. However, that part of the Bay is pretty wide and deep for inland waters. I think it is not much more constricted than some of the waters around the Solomons, for example.

Given the batteries on the Marin Headlands, it would have been tough for hostile ships to get into the Bay at all. In the end, I suggest that there is enough room for doubt to default to leaving the map as is.

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 719

RE: MWiF Map Review - America - 8/25/2010 5:54:24 PM

mlees

Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

About the ferry boat captains, ... I have always believed that the guy with the gun is in charge. Telling someone who has superior firepower that you won't cooperate tends to shorten your lifespan dramatically.

I am sure the Japanese army had people who could run ferries, so the question is whether all the shipping would be destroyed to the point that it couldn't be restored to a semblance of an operational condition. And as Patrice said, this would apply to every straits hex on the map.

Ok, thanks. I apologize if it seems I was derailing the thread.

I was just thinking "But they can't count on those ferries being there!", in that a lot of the small craft would become victims of a "scorched earth" policy if the various owners were forced to flee the approach of invaders.

You are correct to point out that this would have to apply pretty much anywhere there is a strait crossing, and unduly complicate matters.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 720