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: map stuff

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: map stuff Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: map stuff - 6/20/2005 3:09:05 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

Hi Andrew,

first of all: Thanks for your amazing map!

I know that many bases were added and maybe adding even more would be too much out of various reasons, but nevertheless I would like to propose some more:

In India:

Poona, located two inland hexes SE of Bombay. Was a big city and major military base during WW2 (and before). Nice (and realistic) fall-back position and airfield location [of limited capacity (1), maximum buildable to (4)] and some industry was located there.

Cuttack, located inland to the south of Jamshedpur. Some industry (capital of Orissa and Bihar), important city at that time [limited capacity AF as Poona]

Btw, I hate that Yanam was choosen as port location by the designers. Never understood this choice (was even a French enclave then and I don't think that it was a location for anything of importance during WW2). Vizagapatam (one hex NE) would have been a more plausible choices because it had a decent port and one of the biggest RAF airbases was build in the vicinity (quite interesting choice, as there had been no AF before).

Another thing: No bases (or beaches) for Picton and Invercargill in NZ?

K


Thanks! Useful info on India. There is definitely cause to add another base or two to the subcontinent. I will make a note of your suggestions for further consideration. As you say, however, bases are being added all the time, slowly eating away at the empty base slots. I sometimes feel like King Canute ordering the tide to stop...



_____________________________

Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website


(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 31
RE: map stuff - 12/6/2005 7:28:13 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline 		Andrew, If you happen to still be taking notes for any future map updates I just realized that the base and major battle of Wau is not on the map. Should be located right behind Lae and Salamaua. I wish I had thought of this during your last update but just thought Id mention it. This base of course was pretty important in UV. This is where the Kanga Force (is this unit in CHS???) gaurded the trail to Port Moresby...

Should be located around the highlighted hex on screenshot behind Lae.

The last Japanese offensive in New Guinea was against the Australian forward base at Wau. It had been used by guerrillas of Kanga Force to harass Japanese forces based at Lae and Salamaua, but by early 1943 was seen as a key to large-scale operations in south-eastern New Guinea.

The attack was undertaken by the Okabe Detachment, led by Major General OKABE Teru. Having pushed the Australians beyond Mubo, the Japanese used a little-known track to go around the Australian defences and launch a surprise attack.

The defence of Wau rested on the airlifting of reinforcements from Port Moresby. Weather over the Wau–Bulolo Valley was notoriously unstable. Cloud closed in at the start of the battle on 28 January, and the Australians feared losing the base. By the time it cleared the following morning, the Japanese were within two miles of the vital airfield. However, that day 1,000 reinforcements were delivered and the Australians held the airfield. Artillery was also delivered and, along with fighter-bombers from Port Moresby, began pounding the Japanese.

The Okabe Detachment suffered over 1,000 battle casualties. Survivors fell into retreat. The Australians had thus secured the base from which to launch the counter-offensive against Lae and Salamaua.

http://ajrp.awm.gov.au/ajrp/remember.nsf/pages/NT000021AE?openDocument




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 12/6/2005 7:32:10 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 32
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 2:43:18 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Regarding Victoria Point: I have seen that railway as well. It is in Thailand, as opposed to Victoria Point itself, which is across the other side of an inlet, and in Burma. I have no idea how Victoria Point was supplied - was that Thai railway, which as Lemurs says stops short, used for supplying Victoria Point? Or was it supplied purely by sea?


Victoria Point was surely supplied by sea. The rail spur in question was not for international trade, but to support local trade with mines and plantations. There is no easy way to get to Victoria point from the end of this spur. If there had been, Japan would not have chosen the route they did - over Three Pagoda's Pass - for the Burma Siam Railroad - which operated for 18 months or so. [I think THAT should be on the map].

There was a second route considered - farther NORTH - not to Victoria point - from a spur line that runs toward the Burmese border. There the problem was mountains. But it might have been better than the route attempted. Both these routes were considered historically by Imperial rail builders - and I have not found a reference to a similar project to Victoria Point. I have two books on these railroads and I can dig if anyone is interested in specifics - but I think the routes that were strongly considered had roads already in place along natural paths made by rivers.


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 33
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 2:50:32 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Regarding the Philippines: I don't have much knowledge of the Philippines, for which I used the same map sources I used for the rest of the map. I will take a closer look at Lamon Bay to see whether the map needs to be revised here. I might actually ask Don Bowen about this - he is the authority on the Philippines.


I collect maps on the Philippines and have visited most of the principle points of interest. The idea there are no roads to Limon Bay is false, but the roads of the period are not exactly highways. A FIRST CLASS road (e.g. the highway North from Manila along Linguyan Gulf to San Fernando)
are classic two lane paved roads 16 feet wide with 10 ton bridges - an actual historic US standard. Good roads - like the Naguilian Road from Buang (on Linguyan Gulf) to Baguio City (the summer capital and principle mining district) is gravel on a good foundation, also 16 feet wide with 10 ton bridges. Almost all other "roads" are only 8 feet wide, intended for one way traffic at a time, and sometimes there are no bridges (you ford, you ferry, or if a military unit you build a temporary bridge which you then pick up when you leave) - but if there are bridges they are rated at 5 tons (these ratings are printed in English on the concrete supports - EVERYTHING official in the Philippines is in English - even today - by law). There were two unpaved roads into Lemon Bay area in 1941 - one from the South and one from the West - and a number of tracks. Japan actually landed here in force - an entire division - and not because it was isolated like an island - but because it mattered.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 34
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 2:57:21 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

I would like to make 1 more observation. A while back, you told me the reasoning behind putting the rail line from Whitehorse to Juneau. I totally agree with your reasoning that inter-island shipping would be about as good for supplying Juneau as a rail line (I think this was the reasoning).


there has never been a road or rail line to Juneau - although sometimes it is proposed today - it is too expensive to actually build! The mountains make invasion impractical. Putting a rail line there is not really historical - or even modern.

There was a rail line to Whitehorse - a narrow gage line - and it mattered too - it was taken over by the US Army and it handled a great deal of freight and traffic. It ran from a point considerably north of Juneau - and I thought it was on your map. There was historically a US fort there - the famous Chilikoot Barracks - and it was still a company post when the war began. Alaska once had another railroad as well - but it was gone before WWII began. It ran up the Copper River to Kennikot - a copper mine. Congress considered running it from there to Fairbanks, but a different route was selected, based on a failed private railroad - from Seward to ANchorage.


(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 35
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:04:40 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

On Victoria Point, the rail spur ends at a dock on the Thai side of the inlet between Thailand and Burma(Victoria Point). The inlet is less than 2 miles wide at its widest point and too shallow for subs.


Very large scale maps indicate this is true - today. And most railroad building was done long ago - so it may well have been true then. Certainly waterborne traffic was possible. But it may not have been very common - it is not today. The economics of the area face different directions. This is also not one of the areas Thailand claimed or occupied. [Thailand occupied northern Malaya - which was really Thai territory probably wrongly occupied by the British - and Western Cambodia - with almost as good a claim - and a good deal of Eastern Burma up north - with NO historical justification whatever. But this rather imperial minded Thailand did NOT claim Victoria Point or any part of the Panhandle of Burma, an area with which it had little commerce or any other interaction.]

(in reply to Lemurs!)
Post #: 36
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:09:02 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

You make a good point that, unimpeded by defensive forces, it would take only a day or so to move along Route 1 to Manila. The problem that I see is the placement of Lamon Bay adjacent to Manila (due to hex size). A good road connection would allow the Japanese to exert a zone of control over Manila immediately after landing - immediately cutting off all American forces to the North.

That's as far as I can take the analysis - anyone else??


It didn't take Japan long to reach Manila - in spite of elements of two division in their path - a lot less time than is possible in the game. So I have problems with this isolation. I am not sure why the zone of control issue is a problem? A ZOC represents something real, like patrols, and surely that was a possibility? But if you have a problem with that, why not make a connection SOUTH from Lemon Bay but NOT West? That is, SW. That way movement is possible to the spine of the island, and somewhat hampered to Manila - you move two hexes vice one - but both by road???

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 37
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:11:23 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

OK. One further question: Did the Japanese use the railway to move to Victoria Point?


The Japanese used A railroad to Victoria Point - but not THAT railroad. And only AFTER they came by sea. They operated up and down the Burma Railroad - to the north - and from its end by a road along the coast.


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 38
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:15:14 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:


First, the City of Whittier is an ice free port located in NW Prince William Sound that was devloped early war as a hedge against the loss of a vulnerable trestle bridge on a section of the Alaska RR from Seward to Anchorage. It should be located in the hex to the east of Anchorage (114/28)with a rail spur (no road) going to Anchorage (they actually dug a 2 mile tunnel to get to the port). Or maybe just run the railroad from Seward into this hex and then west into Anchorage since whittier is leass than 6 air miles from the mainline. Probably a af0/pt2 with a 0/1 to start with would work fine for Whittier.


While a road to Whittier did not then exist - it was just built via the same tunnel expanded - you could ALWAYS drive there! The Alaska RR had a strange open air station with no people at Portage where you could drive up onto flatcars, and they ran to Whittier several times a day - and back. Until the new road was built!


(in reply to akdreemer)
Post #: 39
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:18:53 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

This point is raised every now and again. In the case of Skagway, I decided to just assume that units and supplies would be able to easily travel between Skagway and Juneau using local ferry transport, and that this could be represented by not having a separate base at Skagway and extending the rail line to Juneau. Since units only travel 90 miles per day maximum this did not seem unreasonable, and it allowed me to again save a base slot by not having a separate Skagway base.


IF it is a choice, and IF base slots are an issue, THEN it is better to kill the railroad and isolate Juneau. It is very false to have it on the land communications grid. I like the White Pass and Yukon RR - but not enough to have it run to Juneau - which it could never go to.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 40
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:21:41 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Minor point but I don't think Lahaina (Maui) ever had a significant airfield. There was a military airfield on the other side of the island. Perhaps just call it Maui?


Aviation charts indicate there used to be a major airfield in the flat land in the middle of the island not far from Lahaina - I presume a wartime one.
There is another one farther towards the other side - which I presume you are talking about. But historically I think there was one and it might have been called Lahaina. I know a museum curator in Oahu - I will ask him.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 41
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:30:39 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Where do you find guage and single-double track info? I can find that sort of thing for Europe but not for SEA.


There are wonderful references on railroads.

The Thai rail network is Metric gage. Now Metre gage can be very heavy duty - and the Thai main line is not the same as the spur lines - in terms of weight of rail and other factors. Some metre gage lines are very heavy duty - see South Africa. There is more to a rail line than the width of the track!

Thailand and Malaya and Vietnam ALL use metre gage, and Thailand and Malaya had actual rail connections in that era. So did Thailand and Cambodia, but Viet Nam didn't quite connect to Cambodia - it nearly did at two points - and could easily have done. Japan considered - and should have - built the small connections needed to run rail from the China border above Hanoi to Singapore. IT also considered - but didn't actually do - taking the entire Chinese rail line from Shanghai to Hanoi - by the time it did it did not matter. But this route - Shanghai to Singapore - is one immune to being torpedoed! Investing in it was a sound concept and Japan is a world class builder of railroads. Japan was very proud of "the first under ocean railroad" linking Honshu and Kyushu - (they have the longest tunnel on the planet between Honshu and Hokkaido today) - and the Japanese were very insulted by The Bridge on the River Kwai - because it implied they needed British technical help to build a railroad bridge!

(in reply to Lemurs!)
Post #: 42
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:37:55 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

My apologies Mike, I don't have specific information about the track gauge, but if it was built by the Japanese during the war, then I expect that it was narrow gauge, like the Burma railway was. I can't imagine the Japanese building standard gauge double track lines at that time and place.


Japan did run standard gage in Manchukuo and Korea. A Japanese millionaire and legislator - an odd guy - wanted to build the Shinkoshen during the war! This high speed standard gage line set on Japanese islands mostly has to be in tunnels because it cannot turn sharp enough to avoid the many mountains at high speeds! It was built after the war. So Japan knew all about standard gage, and made rolling stock for it - also for use in China proper. But in Burma, as in the rest of SE Asia, all railroads of note were Metric. So Japan naturally built the Burma-Siam Railroad in the gage it would connect to on both ends. They also did NOT provide ANY rails for this line! Instead, they ripped up the Eastern line in Malaya and relaid the rail! But the Burma-Siam Railroad never was a very good connection. It was bombed too much, and running supplies over it, then down to Victoria point, was too subject to attrition. So they ran a line across the isthmus - well they extended an existing spur across. But until 1943 they could not use it for supplies to Victoria Point.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 43
RE: map stuff - 12/7/2005 3:40:14 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Vizagapatam (one hex NE) would have been a more plausible choices because it had a decent port and one of the biggest RAF airbases was build in the vicinity (quite interesting choice, as there had been no AF before).


Also it was the only really significant shipbuilding facility in India.


(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 44
RE: map stuff - 12/8/2005 2:48:04 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

This point is raised every now and again. In the case of Skagway, I decided to just assume that units and supplies would be able to easily travel between Skagway and Juneau using local ferry transport, and that this could be represented by not having a separate base at Skagway and extending the rail line to Juneau. Since units only travel 90 miles per day maximum this did not seem unreasonable, and it allowed me to again save a base slot by not having a separate Skagway base.


IF it is a choice, and IF base slots are an issue, THEN it is better to kill the railroad and isolate Juneau. It is very false to have it on the land communications grid. I like the White Pass and Yukon RR - but not enough to have it run to Juneau - which it could never go to.


There is no need to be concerned about this, since in version 4 of my map Skagway and Juneau are represented as separate bases.

Andrew

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 45
RE: map stuff - 12/8/2005 10:47:34 AM   
Gen.Hoepner


Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/4/2001
From: italy
Status: offline 		Andrew...i don't remember...but have you fixed that problem about Daily Waters- Alice spring in you map?

_____________________________

[image]http://yfrog.com/2m70331348022314716641664j [/image]

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 46
RE: map stuff - 12/8/2005 1:39:57 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner

Andrew...i don't remember...but have you fixed that problem about Daily Waters- Alice spring in you map?


If you mean the fact that they are so far apart, I don't think that there is much I can do about it without sacrificing the accuracy of the map.

Is that what you meant?

(in reply to Gen.Hoepner)
Post #: 47
RE: map stuff - 12/8/2005 5:45:02 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The Thai rail network is Metric gage. Now Metre gage can be very heavy duty - and the Thai main line is not the same as the spur lines - in terms of weight of rail and other factors. Some metre gage lines are very heavy duty - see South Africa. There is more to a rail line than the width of the track!


It has much more to do with the "weight" of the rails. How heavy is it per foot or yard or meter? That and the roadbed determine the "Axile Load". Most Asian Rails were pretty light weight compared to European of American Rails..., often less than half. Which meant the rolling stock had to be smaller and lighter, and also the engines.


_____________________________


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 48
RE: map stuff - 12/9/2005 4:45:26 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

It has much more to do with the "weight" of the rails. How heavy is it per foot or yard or meter? That and the roadbed determine the "Axile Load". Most Asian Rails were pretty light weight compared to European of American Rails..., often less than half. Which meant the rolling stock had to be smaller and lighter, and also the engines.


This is quite true. And Janes lists the weight of rail for every line in the world - including the secondary spur lines and tirtiary lines. The main lines get more. Japan itself uses a narrow gage - but there is a vast difference between a primary and a secondary line. I don't carry this around in my head - but I can give you both the weight of rail and the weight of loads as measured by rolling stock if you wish. The point is that saying "narrow gage" does not mean it has a low loading. And the main lines used here were of British and French origin, not Japanese. Even the lines laid by Japan in SE Asia during WWII used Malay track.

Malaya: Main Lines: 40 kg and 60 kg per meter. Rails 40 feet long (12.2 meters). Max curve 12.25 degrees. Ruling gradent 1% slope except Taiping Pass 1.25%. Max axilload 16 tons.

Thailand: Heaviest line: 40 kg per meter. Lightest line 25 kg per meter. Many variations between these values for spurs depending on requirements (30, 35, 37, even 42 - 2 different 35s!). Max axelload 15 tons.

Vietnam: uniform 43 kg per meter. Max axelload 14 tons.

Burma: Main line 75 pound/yard rail (= 31 kg/meter). Secondary lines 60 pound/yard (25 kg/meter). Max axelload 12 tons.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/10/2005 12:41:03 AM >

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 49
RE: map stuff - 12/9/2005 8:54:41 AM   
Gen.Hoepner


Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/4/2001
From: italy
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner

Andrew...i don't remember...but have you fixed that problem about Daily Waters- Alice spring in you map?


If you mean the fact that they are so far apart, I don't think that there is much I can do about it without sacrificing the accuracy of the map.

Is that what you meant?



Yes, we need another base between Daily and Alice...it's a major issue for any Australian Campaign....i think it's something that should be addressed....

_____________________________

[image]http://yfrog.com/2m70331348022314716641664j [/image]

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 50
RE: map stuff - 12/15/2005 2:15:59 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Andrew, If you happen to still be taking notes for any future map updates I just realized that the base and major battle of Wau is not on the map. Should be located right behind Lae and Salamaua. I wish I had thought of this during your last update but just thought Id mention it. This base of course was pretty important in UV. This is where the Kanga Force (is this unit in CHS???) gaurded the trail to Port Moresby...

Should be located around the highlighted hex on screenshot behind Lae.


You will be happy to hear that Wau has been added, along with a modification to the trails in that area.

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 51
RE: map stuff - 12/15/2005 2:20:24 PM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner
Yes, we need another base between Daily and Alice...it's a major issue for any Australian Campaign....i think it's something that should be addressed....


I actually think that adding such a base won't help much. LCUs approaching Daly Waters from that direction would still only be able to move one hex off the road before moving outside the supply radius. The real killer is that each hex that doesn't contain a trail/road/railway, even a clear hex, adds 50 to the supply length, out of 100. Personally I think that this should be changed - 50 is OK for jungle or swamp, but clear hexes should be 25, the same as trail.

Nevertheless I am going to add a base halfway between Daly Waters and Alice Springs - Tennant Creek - to see what effect it has on the game. Normally I wouldn't bother, but invading Northern Australia seems to be a popular Japanese passtime in WitP, so that area does warrant some attention.

Andrew

(in reply to Gen.Hoepner)
Post #: 52
RE: map stuff - 12/16/2005 2:43:04 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Andrew, If you happen to still be taking notes for any future map updates I just realized that the base and major battle of Wau is not on the map. Should be located right behind Lae and Salamaua. I wish I had thought of this during your last update but just thought Id mention it. This base of course was pretty important in UV. This is where the Kanga Force (is this unit in CHS???) gaurded the trail to Port Moresby...

Should be located around the highlighted hex on screenshot behind Lae.


You will be happy to hear that Wau has been added, along with a modification to the trails in that area.


Hurrah! Thanks Andrew! Looking forward to the next map!

_____________________________


(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 53
RE: map stuff - 12/16/2005 3:00:21 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

This is where the Kanga Force (is this unit in CHS???) gaurded the trail to Port Moresby...



Yes, Kanga Force is in CHS but as it's separate components. Kanga Force was formed from the New Guinea Volunteer Rifles (NGVR) Battalion, 2/5 Independent Company (Commandos), a reinforcement platoon from 2/1 Independent Company (originally intended for Kavieng), mortars from the Port Moresby Garrision, and some medical and supply detachments.

The attached map is from my personal scenario and not from CHS, but I suspect CHS will look about the same.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 54
RE: map stuff - 12/16/2005 3:59:49 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
The attached map is from my personal scenario and not from CHS, but I suspect CHS will look about the same.





About the same. The only difference being that I also added a trail between Lae and Salamaua, and the trail from PM still extends one hex along the coast to the NW.

If you don't think the trail between Lae and Salamaua should be there, Don, I can remove it...

Andrew

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 55
RE: map stuff - 12/16/2005 4:55:39 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
The attached map is from my personal scenario and not from CHS, but I suspect CHS will look about the same.





About the same. The only difference being that I also added a trail between Lae and Salamaua, and the trail from PM still extends one hex along the coast to the NW.

If you don't think the trail between Lae and Salamaua should be there, Don, I can remove it...

Andrew



Andrew

I can't seem to find any mention of the condition of the track between Salamaua and Lae in my library. Found one map which shows it as a dotted line running along the coast but no description. I'd say you are correct about the trail and I'll add it to my scenario as well.

I also agree with letting the trail from Port Moresby extend NW one hex. Again I can supply no details except that it most assuredly should go no further: "On the southern coast the Lakekamu River Mouth was 150 miles north-west of Port Moresby, 12 to 15 days journey by land, up to 24 hours' by small lugger or schooner."

Don

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 56
RE: map stuff - 12/16/2005 6:39:10 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
The attached map is from my personal scenario and not from CHS, but I suspect CHS will look about the same.





About the same. The only difference being that I also added a trail between Lae and Salamaua, and the trail from PM still extends one hex along the coast to the NW.

If you don't think the trail between Lae and Salamaua should be there, Don, I can remove it...

Andrew



Andrew

I can't seem to find any mention of the condition of the track between Salamaua and Lae in my library. Found one map which shows it as a dotted line running along the coast but no description. I'd say you are correct about the trail and I'll add it to my scenario as well.

I also agree with letting the trail from Port Moresby extend NW one hex. Again I can supply no details except that it most assuredly should go no further: "On the southern coast the Lakekamu River Mouth was 150 miles north-west of Port Moresby, 12 to 15 days journey by land, up to 24 hours' by small lugger or schooner."

Don


I take it the UV scenario map is not correct either???




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 57
RE: map stuff - 12/16/2005 6:49:02 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline 		Guys do these maps help???

http://www.diggerhistory2.info/army/1944/chapter05.htm

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 12/16/2005 7:20:27 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 58
RE: map stuff - 12/19/2005 7:37:37 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Andrew, are you still taking suggestions/requests for the new map? Mine is a small one. I recall you listing your reasons, but I'm going to request anyway that the central hex of teh Olympic Peninsula west of Seattle be made into a mountainous terrain hex. While the mountains there may not exceed 10,000 feet, they are quite impassable for normal purposes. They also reach up to 8000 feet with a base at or near sea level (whereas many other mountains shown on the map have their bases over 6000'). Mt Olympus has one of the largest glacier systems in the lower 48 United States. I've hiked and climbed extensively in the Olympics, and can assure you that they merit the change.

This requested change will have little to no effect on the game, but it will make my map look more like what I see when I look at the actual location (or any other map of the area).



_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 59
RE: map stuff - 12/20/2005 12:46:44 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Andrew, are you still taking suggestions/requests for the new map? Mine is a small one. I recall you listing your reasons, but I'm going to request anyway that the central hex of teh Olympic Peninsula west of Seattle be made into a mountainous terrain hex. While the mountains there may not exceed 10,000 feet, they are quite impassable for normal purposes. They also reach up to 8000 feet with a base at or near sea level (whereas many other mountains shown on the map have their bases over 6000'). Mt Olympus has one of the largest glacier systems in the lower 48 United States.


OK. I will bow to local knowledge and add it in. Just to make sure I don't make an error, please give me the exact hex number.

quote:

I've hiked and climbed extensively in the Olympics, and can assure you that they merit the change.


NOW I am jealous. I love getting into the mountains, and thre is not much opportunity for that in Australia. I hope to spend more time in the mountains of North America someday...

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RE: map stuff Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.375