Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

The map needs improving, what, another 5 years of waiting??

Having played board games for almost 40 years, I am of the opinion that unless it adds to the game dont add it. As long as the terrain effects table replicates what is on the map it doesnt matter.
In WITP & AE there is immense effort in ship sillouettes and plane tops and sides, they add 0% to playing the game.
Sorry to say, but the effort being put in to provide a history/background on counters by Warspite1 and others doesnt make the game run any better.
BFTB has a unit history on some units, those without it work just as well.

The only time I'd argue for a map change is when it is inaccurate

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

The map needs improving, what, another 5 years of waiting??

Having played board games for almost 40 years, I am of the opinion that unless it adds to the game dont add it. As long as the terrain effects table replicates what is on the map it doesnt matter.
In WITP & AE there is immense effort in ship sillouettes and plane tops and sides, they add 0% to playing the game.
Sorry to say, but the effort being put in to provide a history/background on counters by Warspite1 and others doesnt make the game run any better.
BFTB has a unit history on some units, those without it work just as well.

The only time I'd argue for a map change is when it is inaccurate

quote:

[The hammer and sickle are probably USSR defensive chits. That screen shot in post #30 is over 6 years out-of-date.]

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

quote:

I think they are beautiful... Not much more to be said on the matter, really.

+1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Patton_71

I guess my concern with the maps is of a different nature.

And forgive me if this has been discussed before, but now that the Asian map is full-sized, it seems to me that this has had an unintended effect on game balance. With the lowering of the movement rates to the European level, along with the size increase, the Chinese front is much more a war of maneuver than ever before. With the Chi-coms only having 5 moves at most, and facing a now suddenly much more mobile enemy, with much more area to defend, I am concerned that the Chinese front can only be saved by immobilizing the USSR prior to Barbarossa. Looking at the current AAR example being run by Red Prince, the drain in the capability of Russian deployments are drastic, but still the Chinese are having difficulty matching Japanese maneuverability.

One of my personal life rules is not to raise a complaint without posing a possible solution. My suggestion is this: for every USSR land move allocated to the Chi-coms, they may move 2 units. This still allows an effect upon the Soviets, but since the Chinese front has changed from a WWI style 'hunker down and hang on' game when using the original maps to one of maneuver, I think this to be a fair compromise.

Any thoughts?

Patton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Patton_71

I guess my concern with the maps is of a different nature.

And forgive me if this has been discussed before, but now that the Asian map is full-sized, it seems to me that this has had an unintended effect on game balance. With the lowering of the movement rates to the European level, along with the size increase, the Chinese front is much more a war of maneuver than ever before. With the Chi-coms only having 5 moves at most, and facing a now suddenly much more mobile enemy, with much more area to defend, I am concerned that the Chinese front can only be saved by immobilizing the USSR prior to Barbarossa. Looking at the current AAR example being run by Red Prince, the drain in the capability of Russian deployments are drastic, but still the Chinese are having difficulty matching Japanese maneuverability.

One of my personal life rules is not to raise a complaint without posing a possible solution. My suggestion is this: for every USSR land move allocated to the Chi-coms, they may move 2 units. This still allows an effect upon the Soviets, but since the Chinese front has changed from a WWI style 'hunker down and hang on' game when using the original maps to one of maneuver, I think this to be a fair compromise.

Any thoughts?

Patton

My sincerest apologies to Aaron here. I come from the world of tournament chess where after each game the players sit down and criticize the 'heck' out of each other's play.

---

Aaron wasn't very good at land defense so using his AAR as an indication of the Chinese having a hopeless position regardless of what they do isn't justified by the AAR. Take a look at what happened to France, Spain, Gibraltar, and Egypt. Would you make the claim that all of those countries are doomed to fall to the Axis before the end of 1940?

Yes, the scale has changed the action in China significantly. In fact, there are 6 times as many hexes in China now. But there is excellent defensive terrain, with a series of frontlines possible that are virtually all mountain hexes.

In the AAR:
1 - the Nationalist Chinese set up too far forward without regard to them being cut off. That let Japan penetrate the frontline in several places and destroy most of the Nationalist army with high odds attacks. Then the Japanese had an easy time of advancing into the Chinese interior.
2 - the Chinese did not make good use of the mountain terrain and alpine hexsides when forming their defensive lines.
3 - the Nationalist Chinese gave up hexes by the score rather than let Japan make a single good attack on a hex.
4 - having evacuated the mountain terrain, the Nationalist Chinese ended up making their last stand defending in clear hexes.
5 - Instead of the Communist Chinese retreating back to Lanchow where they could have held a frontline, they defended Sian, letting the Japanese get behind them so that they were surrounded and defended in a circle.
6 - The Chinese placed its only oil point in the frontline, letting it be destroyed (captured?). This made reorganization of the Chinese HQ's impossible, so once Mao became disorganized he remained disorganized and immobile (in clear terrain).
7 - I don't know what happened to the Chinese fighter, but it didn't last very long.
8 - By retreating, the Chinese gave the Japanese maximum mobility for positioning their units for attacking. When the Japanese are locked in enemy ZOCs, their 3 movement units are hard pressed to rearrange themselves to optimize attacks and/or ooze through openings in the lines. As it was, the Japanese needed to commit 3 HQ's to keep their units in supply, even after the Nationalist interior cities fell.
9 - partisans were never a concern here because the Chinese fled from the Japanese, so there were always a lot of Japanese out of enemy ZOCs to 'garrison' against partisans.

China is difficult to play, both in WIF FE and in MWIF. It doesn't take very many mistakes before the Chinese are reeling from the Japanese onslaught. But that is true in WIF FE too. Have you ever tried to hold the coastal hexes as the Chinese?

As for the Communist Chinese having too few land moves available, that wasn't a problem in the AAR game until the Nationalist Chinese had virtually disappeared from the map. Also, Aaron preferred to conduct a mobile defense (which requires a lot of land moves), retreating from the Japanese instead of holding onto mountain hexes and forcing the Japanese to attack strong points.

quote:

3 - the Nationalist Chinese gave up hexes by the score rather than let Japan make a single good attack on a hex.

quote:

5 - Instead of the Communist Chinese retreating back to Lanchow where they could have held a frontline, they defended Sian, letting the Japanese get behind them so that they were surrounded and defended in a circle.

quote:

6 - The Chinese placed its only oil point in the frontline, letting it be destroyed (captured?). This made reorganization of the Chinese HQ's impossible, so once Mao became disorganized he remained disorganized and immobile (in clear terrain).

quote:

7 - I don't know what happened to the Chinese fighter, but it didn't last very long.

quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil

Im sorry, you but you cant my little pony about the place and complain about others graphics at the same time.
Its just one of those things that are not done.

How would you like the terrain to look like, if the current one gives you a headache ?
Obviously its not the pastel colours, or the cleanliness.
Have you talked to your doctor about this ?
Too much yellow yellow and pink can damage the retina, and cause headaches.

quote:

ORIGINAL: krupp_88mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil

Im sorry, you but you cant my little pony about the place and complain about others graphics at the same time.
Its just one of those things that are not done.

How would you like the terrain to look like, if the current one gives you a headache ?
Obviously its not the pastel colours, or the cleanliness.
Have you talked to your doctor about this ?
Too much yellow yellow and pink can damage the retina, and cause headaches.

but i like to horse about

yes i have spoken to my doctor and im on medication

yes there is too much yellow i agree, but its not a map and at least its not repetitious

look at the hex's especially the clear and forest hex's... its spasm inducing and repetitive, not even a single change, it makes the map look cluttered, look at the France area, and the mountain hex's look like they suffered a bad case of over sharpening, just applying some smudging / blurring to the whole map would make it look slightly better, and the rivers are just blue lines, and the rail lines look very non rail like, yellow as you said the segments in them look very strange, i would make them darker and change the segment look, and the unit counters all being squares with all the same bright colors for a country..

here's an idea, apply a dual/triple marker system, enemy markers are diamonds friendly markers are squares, and neutral markers can be triangles or rectangles or hexagonal, switch out the markers depending on which team you are viewing the map from

and finally the lack of a color mask for controlled hexes to replace that ugly flag maker ON EVERY HEX.... it could even be as simple as changing the hex outline color instead of plopping that ugly flag down everywhere, but i would prefer a mask

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: krupp_88mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil

Im sorry, you but you cant my little pony about the place and complain about others graphics at the same time.
Its just one of those things that are not done.

How would you like the terrain to look like, if the current one gives you a headache ?
Obviously its not the pastel colours, or the cleanliness.
Have you talked to your doctor about this ?
Too much yellow yellow and pink can damage the retina, and cause headaches.

but i like to horse about

yes i have spoken to my doctor and im on medication

yes there is too much yellow i agree, but its not a map and at least its not repetitious

look at the hex's especially the clear and forest hex's... its spasm inducing and repetitive, not even a single change, it makes the map look cluttered, look at the France area, and the mountain hex's look like they suffered a bad case of over sharpening, just applying some smudging / blurring to the whole map would make it look slightly better, and the rivers are just blue lines, and the rail lines look very non rail like, yellow as you said the segments in them look very strange, i would make them darker and change the segment look, and the unit counters all being squares with all the same bright colors for a country..

here's an idea, apply a dual/triple marker system, enemy markers are diamonds friendly markers are squares, and neutral markers can be triangles or rectangles or hexagonal, switch out the markers depending on which team you are viewing the map from

and finally the lack of a color mask for controlled hexes to replace that ugly flag maker ON EVERY HEX.... it could even be as simple as changing the hex outline color instead of plopping that ugly flag down everywhere, but i would prefer a mask

Enemy units (not 'markers', those have a different meaning in WIF), depend on which major power you are currently controlling. For example, France may be at war with Germany but not with Italy. Now Italy could still be at war with the Commonwealth. So as you switch from controlling Germany to Italy, the 'enemy' changes. It is even worse when Finland goes to war with the USSR. Finland is controlled by Germany and Germany could be a peace with the USSR.

Decisive Campaigns Case Pony


RRRH-Sr Mod Graphix ed V2: http://www.mediafire.com/?dt2wf7fc273zq5k

quote:

ORIGINAL: krupp_88mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: krupp_88mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil

Im sorry, you but you cant my little pony about the place and complain about others graphics at the same time.
Its just one of those things that are not done.

How would you like the terrain to look like, if the current one gives you a headache ?
Obviously its not the pastel colours, or the cleanliness.
Have you talked to your doctor about this ?
Too much yellow yellow and pink can damage the retina, and cause headaches.

but i like to horse about

yes i have spoken to my doctor and im on medication

yes there is too much yellow i agree, but its not a map and at least its not repetitious

look at the hex's especially the clear and forest hex's... its spasm inducing and repetitive, not even a single change, it makes the map look cluttered, look at the France area, and the mountain hex's look like they suffered a bad case of over sharpening, just applying some smudging / blurring to the whole map would make it look slightly better, and the rivers are just blue lines, and the rail lines look very non rail like, yellow as you said the segments in them look very strange, i would make them darker and change the segment look, and the unit counters all being squares with all the same bright colors for a country..

here's an idea, apply a dual/triple marker system, enemy markers are diamonds friendly markers are squares, and neutral markers can be triangles or rectangles or hexagonal, switch out the markers depending on which team you are viewing the map from

and finally the lack of a color mask for controlled hexes to replace that ugly flag maker ON EVERY HEX.... it could even be as simple as changing the hex outline color instead of plopping that ugly flag down everywhere, but i would prefer a mask

Enemy units (not 'markers', those have a different meaning in WIF), depend on which major power you are currently controlling. For example, France may be at war with Germany but not with Italy. Now Italy could still be at war with the Commonwealth. So as you switch from controlling Germany to Italy, the 'enemy' changes. It is even worse when Finland goes to war with the USSR. Finland is controlled by Germany and Germany could be a peace with the USSR.

thats exactly why it would be so useful, so you can see who is against who each time you switch a country, i dont think you understand what im saying they will change to represent who is against who from the current perspective and it would be very easy to do that, a quick change in the unit tile background and some quick code to link that to allegiance, maybe like 2 days programing and editing at most

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The MWIF world map is 360 hexes wide and 195 hexes high. The game is designed for players who have a monitor 1024w by 768h pixels.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cherryfunk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The MWIF world map is 360 hexes wide and 195 hexes high. The game is designed for players who have a monitor 1024w by 768h pixels.

In other words you're designing the game as if it was still 1999? What percent of your customer base do you think still uses a monitor with native 1024x768 resolution?

The original poster is correct, the textures are garish and unappealing. As a potential purchaser of this game, I won't be buying it simply based on how it looks. And Krupp is right about the flags indicating hex ownership -- ugh, it looks so jumbled and confusing, in exactly the area where you need clarity. Control should be indicated by shading.

Perhaps you should get the Unity of Command guys to redesign all your graphics? (Or maybe the guy who created the War in the East map? That thing is a work of art...)

As a point of comparison, below are screenshots from the Commander: Europe at War Grand Strategy mod, which has a comparable scale, next to shots from MWiF. For me, the map and counters from Commander look much more appealing. Even a little thing like the transitions between terrain from one hex to another has a big impact on the naturalness of the map.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cherryfunk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The MWIF world map is 360 hexes wide and 195 hexes high. The game is designed for players who have a monitor 1024w by 768h pixels.

In other words you're designing the game as if it was still 1999? What percent of your customer base do you think still uses a monitor with native 1024x768 resolution?

The original poster is correct, the textures are garish and unappealing. As a potential purchaser of this game, I won't be buying it simply based on how it looks. And Krupp is right about the flags indicating hex ownership -- ugh, it looks so jumbled and confusing, in exactly the area where you need clarity. Control should be indicated by shading.

Perhaps you should get the Unity of Command guys to redesign all your graphics? (Or maybe the guy who created the War in the East map? That thing is a work of art...)

As a point of comparison, below are screenshots from the Commander: Europe at War Grand Strategy mod, which has a comparable scale, next to shots from MWiF. For me, the map and counters from Commander look much more appealing. Even a little thing like the transitions between terrain from one hex to another has a big impact on the naturalness of the map.

quote:

My point is that MWIF requires presenting a lot more terrain information per hex (but less numeric information per counter). The result is that MWIF units can afford room for a little more art and text. Conversely, the amount of art that cam be packed into a MWIF hex is less. But more importantly, the sheer size of the MWIF map precludes having the terrain in each hex hand drawn.

[I also wonder whether the subtle differences in terrain shading in the other games has been tested by players who have trouble differentiating colors. MWIF terrain and unit colors have been.]

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I have been meaning to ask about that hex in the Qattara Depression, the one in the lower row, three hexes from Cairo ... there is a small wisp of brown in that hex and it is hard to tell if you can thus move into it or not?