Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562
Supply could be a major issue in the western USA. Since highways have been a significant source of moving goods in the us perhaps a highway or two should appear with the same rules as railroads. Hwy 66 comes to mind very quickly due to its extreme importance in the wetward migration during the depression and dustbowl eras. Maybe a few others too. This might eliminate the empty map syndrome without placing insignificant cities.

Well, isn't there already enough east-west rails on this map ? There are a lot !
There are rules for roads in WiF FE, but WiF FE roads are used in WiF FE in places where historicaly there was a transportation mean that was not as good as rail (road, river), but when there are so much rail already, WiF FE roads are useless to me.
Opinions ?

Note, Roads of MWiF already on the map :
- a tiny bit of the Silk Road (China)
- Burma Road (Burma, China)
- Arctic Highway (Finland)
- Kasai River Road (Belgian Congo)
- Amazon River Road (Brazil)

You see, those are all remote locations with a mean of transporting goods, but not as efficient as rail.

quote:

Another option would be to mark cities with significant military installations  even if there was no city of importance there. Especially since there were large bases for armor and air throughout the SW USA during the war.

Well, I'll leave the decision about this to Steve, I for one am happy with the existing cities. A couple of excceptions can be considered too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

quote:

4. The coast between NY City and Boston could almost be filled in with the cities in Massachusetts or Connecticut or thereabouts like Providence RI (249k), Worcester MA (203k), Hartford CT (177k), or Springfield MA (163k).

The coastline from Boston to Washington D. C. is now often referred to as a megametropolis - one continuous stretch of cities + suburbs. So I agree with your suggestion that the hexes from Boston to NYC being all city hexes.

OK, I'll look at adding cities in the empty hexes.

Coastline from Boston to Washington DC.
- hex 63,318 : Boston
- hex 64,318 : ?
- hex 64,317 : Bridgeport minor port for the moment.
- hex 64,316 or 65,316 : ?
- hex 66,316 : New York
- hex 66,315 : Newark
- hex 67,314 : Philadelphia
- hex 67,313 : ?
- hex 68,313 : Baltimore
- hex 69,312 : Washington
I suppose there should be no additionnal cities in lower New Jersey (2 forest hexes south of NYC) and no additional cities in the peninsula south of Philadelphia (what's its name ?).

So that is 3-4 cities to add.
PS : See post #23 or #33 for the graphics of this area.

quote:

As for the Boston to NYC stretch of coastline, I take back what I said earlier and now agree with Patrice about keeping things as they are in WIF FE - unless a specific reason for the change can be proposed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk
I understand the concept of not adding too many cities, but I think the Boston to NYC stretch should be filled in and Ohio should get another city. Moving to another topic, some rivers should show lake status.

1. Cumberland in Tennessee and Kentucky.
2. Colorado in Nevada.
3. Missouri in the Dakotas.
4. I am not sure when Lake Powell in Utah was completed, but this would be another candidate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562
More Rio Grande river changes after i thought about it some more. Add the hex 2 hexes SE of El Paso and raise the river North one more hex where you moved it earlier to include the rough terrain hex. The oil fields could use some adjusting. I included an oil field map of Texas to help on that one. The major fields are named and outlined on the map should give some pretty accurate perspective on the placement. Sorry about the changes; it is my home state and like most Texans I am overly proud and slightly obnoxious about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk
I understand the concept of not adding too many cities, but I think the Boston to NYC stretch should be filled in and Ohio should get another city. Moving to another topic, some rivers should show lake status.

1. Cumberland in Tennessee and Kentucky.
2. Colorado in Nevada.
3. Missouri in the Dakotas.
4. I am not sure when Lake Powell in Utah was completed, but this would be another candidate.

The lake status is because they are impassable, I gather? For instance taking a corps sized unit in combat across the Grand Canyon wouldn't work out very well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

More Rio Grande river changes after i thought about it some more. Add the hex 2 hexes SE of El Paso and raise the river North one more hex where you moved it earlier to include the rough terrain hex. The oil fields could use some adjusting. I included an oil field map of Texas to help on that one. The major fields are named and outlined on the map should give some pretty accurate perspective on the placement. Sorry about the changes; it is my home state and like most Texans I am overly proud and slightly obnoxious about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562
More Rio Grande river changes after i thought about it some more. Add the hex 2 hexes SE of El Paso and raise the river North one more hex where you moved it earlier to include the rough terrain hex. The oil fields could use some adjusting. I included an oil field map of Texas to help on that one. The major fields are named and outlined on the map should give some pretty accurate perspective on the placement. Sorry about the changes; it is my home state and like most Texans I am overly proud and slightly obnoxious about it.

Well, I'm not too keen on moving the border much to the north, not that I am reluctant to cede American territory to Mexico, but the overall USA border wouldn't look good. You see, west of El Paso the border is kind of an horizontal line, and that horizontal line, if prolongated to the east, should pass well north of the Rio Grande Great Bend, which would not be the case anymore if I make the bend push more to the north.

However, I though about another solution, here is a rough sketch of it :
Chihuahua is about 180 km from the USA / Mexican border, and it would fall 1 hex from it with my sketch, but if I place the city in the SE corner of the hex, it would not show very much.

Well, anyway I still prefer it as it is now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: gbirkeli
I have a remark regarding Minneapolis and St. Paul. The two cities are quite close, about 15 km apart (according to Google Earth). That is about the distance between Marseille and Aubagne. It might be better to leave St. Paul out.

Gaute

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: gbirkeli
I have a remark regarding Minneapolis and St. Paul. The two cities are quite close, about 15 km apart (according to Google Earth). That is about the distance between Marseille and Aubagne. It might be better to leave St. Paul out.
Gaute

A good point but I wonder about how to model that they are on different sides of the river. If land combat ever does occur here, the opposing forces are likely to be on opposite sides of the river. In which case, perhaps both hexes should be modelled as city hexes because of the advantages that would provide: easier to defend, increased stacking for air units, and a primary supply source. But I only visited there once, for a half a day, so I will defer to the judgment of others.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: gbirkeli
I have a remark regarding Minneapolis and St. Paul. The two cities are quite close, about 15 km apart (according to Google Earth). That is about the distance between Marseille and Aubagne. It might be better to leave St. Paul out.
Gaute

A good point but I wonder about how to model that they are on different sides of the river. If land combat ever does occur here, the opposing forces are likely to be on opposite sides of the river. In which case, perhaps both hexes should be modelled as city hexes because of the advantages that would provide: easier to defend, increased stacking for air units, and a primary supply source. But I only visited there once, for a half a day, so I will defer to the judgment of others.

Both cities are on the WiF FE maps, so for me they are on the MWiF map.
But I noticed that MWiF added a couple of extra cities already to the USA. Newark and Spokane.

quote:

However, I though about another solution, here is a rough sketch of it :
Chihuahua is about 180 km from the USA / Mexican border, and it would fall 1 hex from it with my sketch, but if I place the city in the SE corner of the hex, it would not show very much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel
I like the flow of the rivers but couldn't help but notice that they seem rather narrow compared to the hexsides. I think that a wider representation would help avoid some confusion and just look better. What do you think?

Also, I am not familiar with the rules but are there any differences between smaller river and large rivers or is it either passible or lake-like? i.e.impassible
Rivers such as the Mississippi and Volga might be different than some of the others due to their size

A variant width hand-drawn river would look GREAT but, would be a huge pain considering the ammount of rivers on the map and probably not worth the time and trouble. Any drawing tool that could do that, make em look unique and realistic?

Just a thought.

Mo reb

quote:

Also, I am not familiar with the rules but are there any differences between smaller river and large rivers or is it either passible or lake-like? i.e.impassible
Rivers such as the Mississippi and Volga might be different than some of the others due to their size

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Unfortunately, WiF FE does not have 2 kinds of rivers. All rivers are the same.
However, some rivers are so wide that some parts of them are represented by lake hexsides. But this is very rare too, there is none of these on the European maps.
I would have liked the Volga to have those, and I added some on the Urals map, but not on the Europe map.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
In post #25 you mentioned that Richmond is on the coast. It is not.

In post #63, you see that the WiF America minimap (at a scale of 6 european hexes to one america hex) that Richmond is lumped together with Norfolk. But at the European scale, I think that Richmond is inland, in a seperate hex from Norfolk:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmond_VA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
In post #25 you mentioned that Richmond is on the coast. It is not.

In post #63, you see that the WiF America minimap (at a scale of 6 european hexes to one america hex) that Richmond is lumped together with Norfolk. But at the European scale, I think that Richmond is inland, in a seperate hex from Norfolk:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmond_VA

Yes, Richmond is separate from Norfolk (a different hex).

I think of Richmond as being like Philadelphia, in that it has access to the sea, though without any beachfront property. That is all I meant by it being on the 'coast'.

quote:

Also, you seems to say that Richmond is on a river named the James River, but I found it was named Roanoke River on the Wif FE maps. Which one is right ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
Is the river it is on deep enough for ocean going vessels?

Do ocean going freighters sail up the James River and dock in Richmond?

I find that surprising. Shows what I know...