Posts: 44
Joined: 11/1/2006 From: Apple Valley, California USA Status: offline
I notice the westernmost oil resource in the Caucasus is named Armavir - after a little checking, that seems reasonable, but I am simply curious why Maikop is not used for the title? Maikop seems to have more historical connection to oil production, and I am more familiar with Maikop from other WWII resources.
Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003 From: Marseilles, France Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: ajds
I notice the westernmost oil resource in the Caucasus is named Armavir - after a little checking, that seems reasonable, but I am simply curious why Maikop is not used for the title? Maikop seems to have more historical connection to oil production, and I am more familiar with Maikop from other WWII resources.
Well, it was be cause of the placement of the OIL resource on the map, and because of this map of the oil exploitation in the Caucasus in 1940. Maikop is better known, so I'll research it better to see if it needs to be changed.
Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003 From: Marseilles, France Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: composer99
Yeah, I sometimes wonder what Patrice does for a living aside from haunting these forums.
I'm a system engineer in computers & network in southern France, currently in mission in a large territorial collectivity where I have some spare time and access to broad band Internet. Hence, I can access the forums and give answers quite often.
The strait should be on both sides of the sea border, but this is not very clear from the graphic. Newbies might be tempted to think the strait near Fredrikshavn is only on the Baltic side... (not very important here, but quite important some other places, Gibraltar is just one...)
Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005 From: Honolulu, Hawaii Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Incy
The strait should be on both sides of the sea border, but this is not very clear from the graphic. Newbies might be tempted to think the strait near Fredrikshavn is only on the Baltic side... (not very important here, but quite important some other places, Gibraltar is just one...)
I think this can be handled ni the tutorials and Rules as Coded (RAC) documentation. By simply stating that the straits arrow indicates two hexes are connected and that to prevent the use of the straits, all sea areas adjacent to the two hexes need to be 'controlled'. If the documentation is clearly written, it shouldn't be that hard for new players to understand.
Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003 From: Marseilles, France Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets Here are the revised straits icons. In the upper left you can see that the sea area boundary and straits icons now have zero overlap.
Well, there is no more overlap, but now that the graphic is offset on one side, it gives the false impression that the strait from Frederikshavn to the southwest hex only crosses the Baltic Sea Area, while it also cross the North Sea. This gives the false impression to the player observing the map that he can cut the supply between both hexes through the strait by cutting the supply throught the Baltic Sea alone, while he will have to also cut it in the North Sea.
Missleading, isn't it ?
I've tried a mock up with a wider centered double arrow for the strait hexside double arrow, but this is not very pretty.
What about putting the present double arrow one time on each side of the sea area boundary ?
What about also, having this double arrow a bit shorter ? Say, 30% shorter, with maybe a head 50% larger ?
Here is an attempt at showing an alternative idea.
I also prefer the looks of Steves revised strait icon, but it should of course be stressed in the turorial how straits work. Personally i think they might look better if the arrow was a tiny bit shorter, but i guess its all matter of taste. (Like Patrices double arrow suggestion, except just with one arrow).
On an unrelated note, I have always wondered why there isnt a strait hexside from hex 0642 to 0743 (SW of Frederikshavn to W of Frederikshavn). I was born in hex 0642 and would say that a strait between these 2 hexes would be just as reasonable as the one from 0642 to 0742. No strait between 0741 and 0742 also seem quite strange. Especially when 0640 to 0540 qualifies as a strait. I know the europe map isnt gonna be changed and im fine with that. But does anyone think ADG had a play balance reason for leaving out these straits? And btw, why are the coastline for western Jutland so badly drawn?
I noticed that the strait's icon is now longer so wouldn't the arrows stick out past the weather boundry if they overlapped unlike the origional at Girbralter that started this discussion?
I agree with Stve to just draw the strait symbol on one side of the sea zone border. But making the strait symbols shorter would make them look better. Patrice's left example in post #99 has a very nice length for the strait symbols.
Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005 From: Honolulu, Hawaii Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: mldtchdog I noticed that the strait's icon is now longer so wouldn't the arrows stick out past the weather boundry if they overlapped unlike the origional at Girbralter that started this discussion?
I am not sure to what you are refering when you mention a weather zone boundary near Gibraltar. Here is a current scrren shot of Gibraltar.
As to shortening the straits arrows, I see no need. The previous screen shot of Denmark was at zoom level 8 (max) and contained a whole lot of straits, which may be why they looked too dominant visually. Usually, straits are few and far between, and I do not want them to 'disappear'. This picture of Gibraltar is more typical for where straits appear on the map, and personally, I find the size of the icon quite fine.
I have units appearing in all the sea boxes now, as you can see here. I am using the Barbaroosa scenario for debugging, so the only 'Allied' units I could scrounge up were the Swedes. It doesn't look good for the Swedish convoys, does it?
I've never thought about what sea zone a straits arrow lies in.
But I do know that the Frogmen will never be placed outside the '0' box of a sea area, so I would suggest maybe not using this screen shot anywhere else to avoid confusion.
I've been thinking about Monte Cassino lately and I think WiF doesn't do a very good job of getting that battle right. That hex just doesn't seem like it should be a blitzable hex to me. I'm not suggesting any changes right now but some day maybe it could be thought about. That battle also makes the rules for the Algiers Free French MTN City-Based Volunteer look really dumb because it can't usually co-operate with CW or US units ('cept in the rare case of Algeria being the Free French Home Country); in reality that corps finally broke the Axis line in the area with the aid of mountaineering skills and mules, after participating in several other attempts alongside and cooperating with Polish and US units. In general I like seeing some more info on the map but that label draws attention to one of WiF's rough spots.
< Message edited by trees -- 4/5/2007 6:08:45 AM >
Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003 From: Marseilles, France Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: trees
I've never thought about what sea zone a straits arrow lies in.
But I do know that the Frogmen will never be placed outside the '0' box of a sea area, so I would suggest maybe not using this screen shot anywhere else to avoid confusion.
Frogmen can't even end a step at sea, can they ? ***************************** 22.4.3 Frogmen (AsA option 24) (...) Frogmen can also make a naval move but it must end in a port, friendly or enemy. Frogmen can end a move in an enemy port only if it started the move in supply. *****************************
Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005 From: Honolulu, Hawaii Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Froonp
quote:
ORIGINAL: trees I've never thought about what sea zone a straits arrow lies in.
But I do know that the Frogmen will never be placed outside the '0' box of a sea area, so I would suggest maybe not using this screen shot anywhere else to avoid confusion.
Frogmen can't even end a step at sea, can they ? ***************************** 22.4.3 Frogmen (AsA option 24) (...) Frogmen can also make a naval move but it must end in a port, friendly or enemy. Frogmen can end a move in an enemy port only if it started the move in supply. *****************************
Yeah, 'frogmen' are the one naval unit type that can never go to sea. Sorry for the misstep, I was just grabbing the most convenient unit at the time. The Italians were up because I was checking some other things about them.
Yes it will. If you as germany are going for a strong 41 barb, this change might make the no-bess-gambit a must do, no matter how much mussolini cries.
With this map change i would like to see the no-bess-gambit removed. That would imo make germanys balkan "policy" more open (when doing a 41 barb), and reduce the chance of russia getting send to the urals. Besides, i doubt the no bess gambit is something that could have happened in reality.
Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003 From: Marseilles, France Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: ptey
Yes it will. If you as germany are going for a strong 41 barb, this change might make the no-bess-gambit a must do, no matter how much mussolini cries.
With this map change i would like to see the no-bess-gambit removed. That would imo make germanys balkan "policy" more open (when doing a 41 barb), and reduce the chance of russia getting send to the urals. Besides, i doubt the no bess gambit is something that could have happened in reality.
For the no Bessarabia gambit to be removed, the game has to allow Russia to claim Bessarabia during their first impulse of the game, that's it ?
Yeah, that would be a good way of removing it i think.
This change is made because of geographical accuracy, but it would also be interesting to know if Harry has thought it through. Perhaps also if the no bess gambit was intended to be possible in the first place. To me atleast it appears as if this change makes what is possibly "the best" balkan strategy even better (when doing a strong 41 barb). This makes the game a bit less open ended, and thus a bit less interesting.
Yes it will. If you as germany are going for a strong 41 barb, this change might make the no-bess-gambit a must do, no matter how much mussolini cries.
With this map change i would like to see the no-bess-gambit removed. That would imo make germanys balkan "policy" more open (when doing a 41 barb), and reduce the chance of russia getting send to the urals. Besides, i doubt the no bess gambit is something that could have happened in reality.
Well this change does not make the no bessarbia gambit any better it just makes all other balkan strategies worse. But I'm for any change that would help Russia in the early stage of the war. As I said many times before my main problem with WIF balance is Russia being to weak and France & CW being to strong.
Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Europe map? 
RE: Europe map? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread