MWiF Map Review - America

[Froonp]

And here is the rest of the Gulf of Mexico.
What an Oil density !

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is the Yucatan and the rest of Central America.

The 'B' of 'British Honduras (CW)' is slightly obscured. Same with the final 'A' of 'Nicaragua' and 'Costa Rica'

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Here is the Yucatan and the rest of Central America.

The 'B' of 'British Honduras (CW)' is slightly obscured. Same with the final 'A' of 'Nicaragua' and 'Costa Rica'

Yes Greyshaft.
On these drafts, I not always rewrite the names that are still readable.
On the real map this is not the same thing, names are written on the top of the map, so this problem isn't one.
Thanks anyway [:D].

[Froonp]

Here is Mexico, an important neighbour of the USA, who nearly always sides by them once the war is worldwide, and provide its precious Oil and PP to them, and also their mighty fighter bombers "Mixed" Air Force [:D] that is sometimes the first real tactical bomber unit the USA get in the Pacific War.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

I just read today that Mexican fishermen put iguanas on those islands off Baja California. The idea is the iguanas breed there and get big and fat. Then if a fisherman ever gets ship wrecked on one of the islands, meat is available.

[Froonp]

Still reviewing the MwiF maps and drawing draft coatlines, here are some South American countries to comment.
If you see things blatantly wrong, plese tell me.
Note 1 : Red stars in the sea indicate that the original MWiF map had an land hex in this place, that I deleted.
Note 2 : These are only draft, and rivers are to be redrawn by the graphic artist. Those here are only placeholders.
Note 3 : Redrawn railways are sometimes drawn as black lines.

First is Colombia & Ecuador.

[Froonp]

Here are the Galapagos (southern) owned by Ecuador. Malpelo is Colombian, and Coco is Costa Rican.

[Froonp]

Here are Venezuela and all 3 Guyanas.

[Froonp]

Here is now Peru.

[Froonp]

And now Bolivia, that MWiF had wrong in many places, Cochabamba and Sucre, and the railways around.
I think (hope) it is better now.

[Froonp]

And finaly here is northern Brazil, with the immense Amazonian Forest.
It would be interesting, to see it now, to see how many Amazonian hexes are now Clear terrain [:(].

[Froonp]

About Brazil, WiF FE and MWiF had a city called Para in the mouths of the Amazon.
I searched, and found that in reality this city has always been called (at least since 200 years) Belém, and that Para is the name of the State of which it is th capital. So I renammed it.
Same for Bahia. The city is called Salvador (Salvador de Bahia also) and not Bahia. Bahia is the name of the state of which it is the capital. So I renammed it also.

[Earl Uhtred]

It's a minor point, but Merida in Yucatan isn't on the coast and thus isn't a port. The port of Merida is Progreso.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Earl Uhtred
It's a minor point, but Merida in Yucatan isn't on the coast and thus isn't a port. The port of Merida is Progreso.

I wonder what to do.
Are Merida & Progreso of equal size, or is there one larger that the other ?
WiF FE has it that the port is named Merida, but this is a Pacific Scaled Area, so they took Merida even if it was not really coastal. Maybe it is larger ?

From wikipedia I get that Merida is the capital of Yucatan with 793k inhabitants, 11st Mexican city, 35 km from the coast.
From the same place, I get that Progreso has a 45k population, so while they are in the same hex, the name of Merida must stay.

It is this case with a good number of cities that are near the coast, but that are not coastal. There is Lima also for example, for which the port is Callao. The original WiF FE map has both names written in the same hex, Callao near the port, and Lima near the city. It may also be the case for Boden / Lulea in Sweden too.
But it seems this is never the case in MWiF.

Should 2 names appear for a hex, one for the port, one for the city, when there is a city near the shore, that is not a port, and another much smaller, that is the real port ?

[christo]

Last year I was travelling through Peru/ Equador as was amazed to see just how dry the western coast of south america was. It has not rained in many of the coastal hexes north of Lima for years. The sand dunes were bloody enormous and not even a hint of a plant. I would have though that the clear terrain from Payta to Lima should be desert.

Cheers

Christo

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is now Peru.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: christo
Last year I was travelling through Peru/ Equador as was amazed to see just how dry the western coast of south america was. It has not rained in many of the coastal hexes north of Lima for years. The sand dunes were bloody enormous and not even a hint of a plant. I would have though that the clear terrain from Payta to Lima should be desert.

Do you believe that there is enough desertic terrain to fill the whole coastal hexes ?

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: christo
Last year I was travelling through Peru/ Equador as was amazed to see just how dry the western coast of south america was. It has not rained in many of the coastal hexes north of Lima for years. The sand dunes were bloody enormous and not even a hint of a plant. I would have though that the clear terrain from Payta to Lima should be desert.

Do you believe that there is enough desertic terrain to fill the whole coastal hexes ?

This map seems to support what you say.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Earl Uhtred
It's a minor point, but Merida in Yucatan isn't on the coast and thus isn't a port. The port of Merida is Progreso.

I wonder what to do.
Are Merida & Progreso of equal size, or is there one larger that the other ?
WiF FE has it that the port is named Merida, but this is a Pacific Scaled Area, so they took Merida even if it was not really coastal. Maybe it is larger ?

From wikipedia I get that Merida is the capital of Yucatan with 793k inhabitants, 11st Mexican city, 35 km from the coast.
From the same place, I get that Progreso has a 45k population, so while they are in the same hex, the name of Merida must stay.

It is this case with a good number of cities that are near the coast, but that are not coastal. There is Lima also for example, for which the port is Callao. The original WiF FE map has both names written in the same hex, Callao near the port, and Lima near the city. It may also be the case for Boden / Lulea in Sweden too.
But it seems this is never the case in MWiF.

Should 2 names appear for a hex, one for the port, one for the city, when there is a city near the shore, that is not a port, and another much smaller, that is the real port ?

I see no problem with dual names as we did for Boden/Lulea.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: christo
Last year I was travelling through Peru/ Equador as was amazed to see just how dry the western coast of south america was. It has not rained in many of the coastal hexes north of Lima for years. The sand dunes were bloody enormous and not even a hint of a plant. I would have though that the clear terrain from Payta to Lima should be desert.

Do you believe that there is enough desertic terrain to fill the whole coastal hexes ?

This map seems to support what you say.

From the railfall map, Christo seems to have the right idea.

[christo]

Do you believe that there is enough desertic terrain to fill the whole coastal hexes ?
[/quote]

If memory serves each hex is 60-100 km in depth. The terrain of the region is of streams/ rivers that come down from the Andes and these then supply the small towns that dot the coast. Each river supplies a ? 5 km band and then there is another 50 km to the next town. The road fairly hugs the coast but I think that the sand/ rocks continue up to the Andean foothills.
Bottom line....yes. It is desertic enough for the whole hex.

C