Japan Map

[Froonp]

Here is Manchuria's north and east parts. Nomonhan can barely be seen on the west.

Cities that could be added in Manchuria :
- Chilin (Kirin) (pop 100k in 1935, 143k in 1944), 1 hex E of Changchun, on the railway.
- Newchwang (Yingkow) (pop 106k in 1935), 1 hex SW of Mukden, on the coast, as a minor port too.

But they would be of not much help in the north.

Also, I see that Harbin used to put units in supply in the Nomonhan arae too. In MWiF, a unit 4 hexes west of Harbin would only be 4 hexes far from the Mongolian border.

Any comment, or advice here ?

[Froonp]

Here is how the whole lot was in WiF FE, with the pacific scaled hexes.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Cities that could be added in Manchuria :
- Chilin (Kirin) (pop 100k in 1935, 143k in 1944), 1 hex E of Changchun, on the railway.
- Newchwang (Yingkow) (pop 106k in 1935), 1 hex SW of Mukden, on the coast, as a minor port too.

The addition of Kirin would solve the supply problem in northern Korean and in eastern Manchuria, for Manchurian TERR. This would be a good addition in my opinion.

[Incy]

I posted this earlier on the russia thread. QiQihar = Tsitsihar(the resource on the map)

On the Manchurian side, I don't know how we missed Qiqihar in the previous discussion. Yes, it will change game balance somewhat, but it was militarily important historically, and was founded in 1691. It probably had the required size you'd expect for a mWif city? (I didn't find any 1940 population numbers, but current population is 900 000. That might not tell the wholde story, nearby Daqing has more than 2 million people today, but was founded as late as 1959).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qiqihar

I'd also consider one of Yichun/Hegang/Jiamusi/Shuangyashan for inclusion. These are a cluster of 100 000+ cities halfway between Harbin and Kabarovsk.
Thay are outside the rail system but would allow some operations by manchurian territorials. Probably way to small for inclusion, but it would be fun with a few more cities in this area. 10-20 hexes between each city just isn't fun, and there ARE people living in this part of the world. As long as no production is added, a few more cities which glorious capture can be written about in Pravda just can't be bad...

[Incy]

I found this excellent wikipedia article on Manchuckuo:

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

Population of main cities:
Yingkow (119,000 or 180,871 in 1940)
Mukden (339,000 or 1,135,801 in 1940)
Hsinking or Changchung (126,000 or 544,202 in 1940)
Harbin (405,000 or 661,948 in 1940)
Dairen (400,000 or 555,562 in 1939)
Antung (92,000 or 315,242 in 1940)
Kirin (119,000 or 173,624 in 1940)
Tsitsihar (75,000 in 1940)

Based on this map, we missed quite a bit of railroad in manchuria too:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... chukuo.jpg

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Incy
Based on this map, we missed quite a bit of railroad in manchuria too:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... chukuo.jpg

Good map, too bad I do not understand the writings.

Helped with this map, and with another one from 1930 that I have, I've modified some railway lines in Manchuria, and moved Mukden 1 hex E to where it was.

Here is view of southern Manchuria as of today.

ORIGINAL: Incy
I found this excellent wikipedia article on Manchuckuo:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchukuo

Population of main cities:
Yingkow (119,000 or 180,871 in 1940)
Mukden (339,000 or 1,135,801 in 1940)
Hsinking or Changchung (126,000 or 544,202 in 1940)
Harbin (405,000 or 661,948 in 1940)
Dairen (400,000 or 555,562 in 1939)
Antung (92,000 or 315,242 in 1940)
Kirin (119,000 or 173,624 in 1940)
Tsitsihar (75,000 in 1940)

I've looked at all those cities.
Mukden, Changchung (Hsinking), Harbin, Dairen (Port Arthur) are already on the map.
Yingkow is situated on the Southern shore of Manchuria, west of the resource.
Antung is on the Korean border and on the sea shore too.
Only Kirin is situated at a place where it provide some wanted game effect. So I added it, as a try.
Tsitsihar could be added, it would provide a wanted game effect (providing supply to Manchurian troops to the north and to the west). I did not place it yet, as its position is already written on the map (the resource west of Harbin).
So, Opinions about that ?
Do you agree with Kirin addition ?
Would you agree with Tsitsihar addition ?

ORIGINAL: Incy
On the Manchurian side, I don't know how we missed Qiqihar in the previous discussion. Yes, it will change game balance somewhat, but it was militarily important historically, and was founded in 1691. It probably had the required size you'd expect for a mWif city? (I didn't find any 1940 population numbers, but current population is 900 000. That might not tell the wholde story, nearby Daqing has more than 2 million people today, but was founded as late as 1959).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qiqihar

I'd also consider one of Yichun/Hegang/Jiamusi/Shuangyashan for inclusion. These are a cluster of 100 000+ cities halfway between Harbin and Kabarovsk.
Thay are outside the rail system but would allow some operations by manchurian territorials. Probably way to small for inclusion, but it would be fun with a few more cities in this area. 10-20 hexes between each city just isn't fun, and there ARE people living in this part of the world. As long as no production is added, a few more cities which glorious capture can be written about in Pravda just can't be bad...

About thoss cities that you propose to add (Yichun / Hegang / Jiamusi / Shuangyashan) halfway between Harbin and Kabarovsk, I do not find any of them on the Collier 1935 Atlas, nor on the 1930 Manchuria map I have found on the Web. Where would be placed ? Are their population reaching 100k when adding them all ? Where did you found info about them ?

[Froonp]

Here is the north of Manchuria.

Frankly, I think that the addition of Kirin and Tsitsihar should be suffficient. They allow good supply toward the Russian border around Vlad, and fair supply toward the north (Blagovyeshchensk) and the west (Nomonhan).

Adding more cities toward Khabarovsk seems less needed to me, as in WiF FE this area is also far from supply (see post #102). Units walking 4 hexes from Harbin manage to reach the swamps that block the way toward Khabarovsk, as on the WiF FE map.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

I like the Kirin addition, but I am not so sure about Tsitsihar, because of it's smaller population. Are there any larger cities thereabouts?

[Incy]

From wikipedia:

Qiqihar is one of the oldest cities in the northeast of China and was founded in 1691. From 1931 until 1945 it was an important military base for the Japanese control of northeastern China.

A major mustard gas tank leftover from the Second Sino-Japanese War buried underground was accidentally damaged in 2003. It caused major injuries and one death.

The population is about 5.611 million, where 883,550 (January 1, 2005) people live in the city.


http://encarta.msn.com/map_701512132/Manchuria.html
shows qiqihar to be a quite heavily populeted area today. Nearby Daqing (to the SE) has more than a million people, but was founded as late as 1959. There is also Hulan Ergi just across the river (283 000 in 2004).



As for Yichun / Hegang / Jiamusi / Shuangyashan, they lie in the Songhua river valley midway between Harbin and Khabarovsk. The encarta map above shows them well. I have no idea how large they were in 1940.


Some comments for the rail:
-the appendix 5 hexes west of harbin should extend further towards Manchuria?
-The link from the resource 2 N of Peking and eastwards doesn't seem to be historical, should remove 2 central mountain hexes?
-Missing link from hex E of Kirin Nortwards toward Harbin
-Vlad area seems wrongly connected, rail should connect directly to Vlad, then go from Vlad to resource (that maybe should be east, not NW of Vlad?)
-Vlad is actually slightly west of lake Kanka in reality, I think there is a problem with map here?
-missing extension of rail on Manchurian side near Vlad, almost up to lake Khanka

[Froonp]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... chukuo.jpg
Can someone tell me from which date is this map from ? Wosung ?
The railways appearing on this one are slightly longer (for the unfinished bits) than those on my 1930 map.

ORIGINAL: Incy
As for Yichun / Hegang / Jiamusi / Shuangyashan, they lie in the Songhua river valley midway between Harbin and Khabarovsk. The encarta map above shows them well. I have no idea how large they were in 1940.

Frankly, this whole area seems sparsely inhabitated, I think that we should live it as is. As I said in post #107 "Adding more cities toward Khabarovsk seems less needed to me, as in WiF FE this area is also far from supply (see post #102). Units walking 4 hexes from Harbin manage to reach the swamps that block the way toward Khabarovsk, as on the WiF FE map. "

Some comments for the rail:
-the appendix 5 hexes west of harbin should extend further towards Manchuria?

Depends on what date is the map from.

-The link from the resource 2 N of Peking and eastwards doesn't seem to be historical, should remove 2 central mountain hexes?

No, its not, my 1935 China map has it.

-Missing link from hex E of Kirin Nortwards toward Harbin

Added.

-Vlad area seems wrongly connected, rail should connect directly to Vlad, then go from Vlad to resource (that maybe should be east, not NW of Vlad?)

Corrected.

-Vlad is actually slightly west of lake Kanka in reality, I think there is a problem with map here?

If there is one it is very minor.

-missing extension of rail on Manchurian side near Vlad, almost up to lake Khanka

Added.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I like the Kirin addition, but I am not so sure about Tsitsihar, because of it's smaller population. Are there any larger cities thereabouts?

Good you like Kirin.

Seems that Tsitsihar is the greatest settlement in the area.
I think that this is a good place to put an extra city in Manchuria.
Tsitsihar and Kirin would be 2 extra cities, and Komsomolsk & Ulan-Due makes 2 extra cities in Siberia, we can say this would be even.

I would love to hear Wosung comment on this.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ok

[Incy]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

-Vlad is actually slightly west of lake Kanka in reality, I think there is a problem with map here?

If there is one it is very minor.

If you look at this map, I think it's clearer what I intend to say:
http://www.dalintourist.ru/img/map/map-g3.jpg

Compare that to


In real life, Vlad is very near the Manchurian border, and there's not that much defensive terrain in front of the city either.
On the MWif map, Russia has a full 2 hexrows west of Vlad, complete with a very nice mountain line.
(Contrast that with WiFFE, where Japan starts with 2 hexes on Vlad)

Not sure how to best fix this, my best shout would probably be to move Vlad 1 hex west, and make the border hex NW of new into clear. The coastline might also need adjusting (maybe change hexside west of vlad into all-sea).

Btw, I'd also support making Vlad adjacent to fewer hexes (I'ts at the tip of a long, thin peninsula, yet it has 3 hexsides!!) but that would be a deviaion from how things work in WiFFE

[Incy]

Actually, on second thought, another solution (that doesn't reqire bitmaps to be changed!!) would be to move Lake Kanka 1 hex east, plus also move the border 1 hex east (making the 3 noncoastal mountain hexes in russia Manchurain).
Some terrain could also be changed, say making the southernmost swamp hex (that would now be west of lanke Khanka) into mountain.
The hex west of Vlad could also be made mountain

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Incy

Actually, on second thought, another solution (that doesn't reqire bitmaps to be changed!!) would be to move Lake Kanka 1 hex east, plus also move the border 1 hex east (making the 3 noncoastal mountain hexes in russia Manchurain).
Some terrain could also be changed, say making the southernmost swamp hex (that would now be west of lanke Khanka) into mountain.
The hex west of Vlad could also be made mountain

For these questions I always like to go back to general principles/philosophy about what we are doing. What are the criteria we should use to decide which of several different possiblities is best? If we do not have that criteria well defined, then we should do that first. Once that is in place, we can evaluate the different choices rather easily - it also helps prevent the discussion from turning into an argument.

Part of the criteria (as I understand it) are:

1 - true to geology and geography (e,g., terrain type and city placement)
2 - true to history (e.g., political boundaries and rail lines)
3 - true to WIF FE.

Perhaps there are more? Or subdivisions within these? We also need to set a priority order for the list to deal with when they are in conflict.

---
You are right, I do not want to redo the coastlines. Changing the terrain or country borders is easy, but modifying the bitmaps would be unpleasant.
---
Each hex is 90-100 kilometers, so though a city might be at the tip of a peninsula, the hex itself might not be. We had this problem with the terrain around New York City, for example.

[Incy]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Incy

Actually, on second thought, another solution (that doesn't reqire bitmaps to be changed!!) would be to move Lake Kanka 1 hex east, plus also move the border 1 hex east (making the 3 noncoastal mountain hexes in russia Manchurain).
Some terrain could also be changed, say making the southernmost swamp hex (that would now be west of lanke Khanka) into mountain.
The hex west of Vlad could also be made mountain

For these questions I always like to go back to general principles/philosophy about what we are doing. What are the criteria we should use to decide which of several different possiblities is best? If we do not have that criteria well defined, then we should do that first. Once that is in place, we can evaluate the different choices rather easily - it also helps prevent the discussion from turning into an argument.

Part of the criteria (as I understand it) are:

1 - true to geology and geography (e,g., terrain type and city placement)
2 - true to history (e.g., political boundaries and rail lines)
3 - true to WIF FE.

Perhaps there are more? Or subdivisions within these? We also need to set a priority order for the list to deal with when they are in conflict.

---
You are right, I do not want to redo the coastlines. Changing the terrain or country borders is easy, but modifying the bitmaps would be unpleasant.
---
Each hex is 90-100 kilometers, so though a city might be at the tip of a peninsula, the hex itself might not be. We had this problem with the terrain around New York City, for example.

4 - good for game balance/playability (supply considerations, etc)

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Incy

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Incy

Actually, on second thought, another solution (that doesn't reqire bitmaps to be changed!!) would be to move Lake Kanka 1 hex east, plus also move the border 1 hex east (making the 3 noncoastal mountain hexes in russia Manchurain).
Some terrain could also be changed, say making the southernmost swamp hex (that would now be west of lanke Khanka) into mountain.
The hex west of Vlad could also be made mountain

For these questions I always like to go back to general principles/philosophy about what we are doing. What are the criteria we should use to decide which of several different possiblities is best? If we do not have that criteria well defined, then we should do that first. Once that is in place, we can evaluate the different choices rather easily - it also helps prevent the discussion from turning into an argument.

Part of the criteria (as I understand it) are:

1 - true to geology and geography (e,g., terrain type and city placement)
2 - true to history (e.g., political boundaries and rail lines)
3 - true to WIF FE.

Perhaps there are more? Or subdivisions within these? We also need to set a priority order for the list to deal with when they are in conflict.

---
You are right, I do not want to redo the coastlines. Changing the terrain or country borders is easy, but modifying the bitmaps would be unpleasant.
---
Each hex is 90-100 kilometers, so though a city might be at the tip of a peninsula, the hex itself might not be. We had this problem with the terrain around New York City, for example.

4 - good for game balance/playability (supply considerations, etc)

Which is imbedded in point 3 above IMO.

About the map you shown, it's true that there is some shift in the vertical alignement of Vlad & Lake Khanka, but now that the coastlines have been drawn by the graphic artist, it would be hard to change them. But I for one can live with this misalignement of the city and the lake.

On the other hand, you say that Vlad do not have defensive terrain but I do not agree. Your map show a good amount of brown terrain on the Manchu border (where "Vla" is written for instance). This brown terrain cannot be represented by less than 1 hexrow on our map, so I think that our map is pretty well representing the military difficulties of a Japanese agressor trying to enter Russia here. There are a bunch of mountains to cross.

The only thing that I see that could be done would be to change the mountain hex that is on the southern tip of the lake into a clear terrain hex, to represent the "hole" in the brown terrain that you see on the map you shown (around Ussuriysk -- Voroshilov during WW2), but I'd need to chack other maps to be sure that this hole really is a hole of clear terrain. This would also be a way to restore a bit of the original WiF FE situation that had Vlad in a clear hex, without russian mountain hexes to defend it, so it would be a way to go to have the map closer to WiF FE. I think I'll do that. Opinions ?

As for having 2 hexes on Vlad from the start, it's even 3 hexes, and its true that there is a departure from WiF FE, but how do this differently with the scale change ? Vlad is not on the border, so we can't change that. There is a tongue of russian territoty, which seem to be mountain, between Manchuria & Vlad.
But generaly the Vlad area is only defended by a couple of units in Vlad, and advancing to Vlad should not be a great difficulty for the Japanese, for whom all coastal terrain in 1939-1941 is granted.
That's why I summed it all previously in saying that I thought that this issue was not a big worry.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

At this point I would like to see a new picture with the proposed changes. I am uncertain what the current suggestions would look like.

[Froonp]

The only thing that I see that could be done would be to change the mountain hex that is on the southern tip of the lake into a clear terrain hex, to represent the "hole" in the brown terrain that you see on the map you shown (around Ussuriysk -- Voroshilov during WW2), but I'd need to chack other maps to be sure that this hole really is a hole of clear terrain. This would also be a way to restore a bit of the original WiF FE situation that had Vlad in a clear hex, without russian mountain hexes to defend it, so it would be a way to go to have the map closer to WiF FE. I think I'll do that. Opinions ?

At this point I would like to see a new picture with the proposed changes. I am uncertain what the current suggestions would look like.

What I suggested (above), is best shown on this picture.
(with the modified railways -- already done -- around Vlad)

[trees]

maybe an elevation minimum could be set for mountain hexes? I thought in places in China areas of 'hills' were sometimes represented by a forest hex rather than a full mountain?