Question on rail lines

[Raverdave]

Are rail lines going to be shown on the map as rail lines and not roads? I was just wondering after reading Kids sticky map post.

[mogami]

Originally posted by Raverdave
Are rail lines going to be shown on the map as rail lines and not roads? I was just wondering after reading Kids sticky map post.

Hi, They are rail lines. (best for supply and movement)

[Rainerle]

I posted this under the Map Comments, but got no answer.
Will I have the chance to build one hex worth of railway in 3-4 yrs of war?

[Fred98]

No

[Raverdave]

Well can we at least build roads????? And I use the example of the great road built from Seatle to Alaska in '42/'43.

[Mike Scholl]

Originally posted by Rainerle
I posted this under the Map Comments, but got no answer.
Will I have the chance to build one hex worth of railway in 3-4 yrs of war?

ANSWER FROM "JOE 98"------ "NO"

Kind of a shame..., what are the Japanese supposed to do
with all those POW's who historically built the Burma RR?

[Yamamoto]

Originally posted by Mike Scholl
Kind of a shame..., what are the Japanese supposed to do
with all those POW's who historically built the Burma RR?

Well, I guess they can still use them for biological weapons testing. It still makes me mad as hell that the US government made a deal with those people and none of them ever stood trial for the atrocities that they committed.

Yamamoto

[Mike Scholl]

Originally posted by Yamamoto
Well, I guess they can still use them for biological weapons testing. It still makes me mad as hell that the US government made a deal with those people and none of them ever stood trial for the atrocities that they committed.

Yamamoto

Sorry, Yamamoto. I really "stepped on my own" with that
offhand and tasteless remark. I meant to point out that some
RR construction did occur during the war on both sides..., and
it was a shame Matrix couldn't make it possible for players to
do the same. But an insensitive and stupid remark is still just
insensitive and stupid. Mea Culpa.

[Yamamoto]

That's OK. I wasn't really upset by what you said. It just reminded me of how the Japanese (army, mostly) mistreated POWs.

Yamamoto

[Fred98]

It is easy to edit your own posts.

Especially if you express yourself poorly in making a point.

[Drongo]

Posted by Joe 98

It is easy to edit your own posts.

Especially if you express yourself poorly in making a point.

Nicely put.

[Mike Scholl]

Originally posted by Joe 98
It is easy to edit your own posts.

Especially if you express yourself poorly in making a point.

.....as to just what this is about? RAINERLE asked a question
about building Railroads. You gave him an answer in the nega-
tive. I commented that that was a shame, as Railroads were
built historically. (YAMAMOTO took me to task, and rightly, for
my flippant comment on WHO the Japanese got to build theirs---
and I appologised to him for any personal affront I may have
given him). The point about Railroads being built was still true.

Your comment makes no sense at all. I haven't "edited my
own anything". And I expressed myself quite clearly. My
appology to him was for flippantly dismissing the loss and
misery of the Allied POW's---not for the actual point about
it being a shame that 2by3 couldn't work RR Construction
into the game.

So again..., what were you trying to say? I assume you were
trying to make some point.

[mogami]

Hi, I am only stating my personal feelings on the subject. I think some of the rivers in China (and elsewhere) will need to be treated as railroads (transportation systems) There are too many port cities in China (India) that do not have ocean hex sides. The Yangtze is a major river and needs to allow for travel.
The problem from a Japanese stand point is they do not need to control the country side as long as they control the transport systems. In China the rivers are the main transport systems so they will need movement rules. Because you can not add to the terrian in a hex during play I have asked for "units" that can be produced, moved and placed in a hex. These "units" will increase movement of units and supply through the hex. (and can be destroyed) Railroad and road "units" serve no purpose unless deployed into a hex and once deployed can not be undeployed (but can change ownership) The owner of the hex also gains use of these units.

[Bulldog61]

Originally posted by Mogami
Hi, I am only stating my personal feelings on the subject. I think some of the rivers in China (and elsewhere) will need to be treated as railroads (transportation systems) There are too many port cities in China (India) that do not have ocean hex sides. The Yangtze is a major river and needs to allow for travel.
The problem from a Japanese stand point is they do not need to control the country side as long as they control the transport systems. In China the rivers are the main transport systems so they will need movement rules. Because you can not add to the terrian in a hex during play I have asked for "units" that can be produced, moved and placed in a hex. These "units" will increase movement of units and supply through the hex. (and can be destroyed) Railroad and road "units" serve no purpose unless deployed into a hex and once deployed can not be undeployed (but can change ownership) The owner of the hex also gains use of these units.

I'm wondering if this doesn't necessitate some sort of an Logistics Transportation Unit LTU. Basically a lot of trucks.

[mogami]

Originally posted by MikeKraemer
I'm wondering if this doesn't necessitate some sort of an Logistics Transportation Unit LTU. Basically a lot of trucks.

Hi, I should also add that each "unit" deployed in a hex only raises movement by one factor. So a hex with no transport value becomes a trail with one of these deployed. A trail becomes a road, and a road becomes a railroad. (Each new "Unit is absorbed by the existing one) They move towards the target hex slowly (to represent building time) and take a while to actually deploy once there. (They deploy based on the number of construction/engineer units present in the hex)

[Piiska]

Originally posted by Mogami
Hi, I should also add that each "unit" deployed in a hex only raises movement by one factor. So a hex with no transport value becomes a trail with one of these deployed. A trail becomes a road, and a road becomes a railroad. (Each new "Unit is absorbed by the existing one) They move towards the target hex slowly (to represent building time) and take a while to actually deploy once there. (They deploy based on the number of construction/engineer units present in the hex)

Hey this is a pretty **** clever idea. I really like it, especially since it allows disruption of the supply lines.

I wish from the bottom of my heart that they implement this.

[Mike Scholl]

Originally posted by Mogami
Hi, I should also add that each "unit" deployed in a hex only raises movement by one factor. So a hex with no transport value becomes a trail with one of these deployed. A trail becomes a road, and a road becomes a railroad. (Each new "Unit is absorbed by the existing one) They move towards the target hex slowly (to represent building time) and take a while to actually deploy once there. (They deploy based on the number of construction/engineer units present in the hex)

Interesting idea. Do you actually need a moving unit to do
this? Or could it be handled by having one or more construction
units in the hex and implementing an "improve transportation"
order which would hold them in place expending large amounts
of supply until the improvement was completed?

Just wondering, as it sounds as if there will me more than
enough units running around the map already.

[Flying fortress]

-------------------------------
Just wondering, as it sounds as if there will me more than
enough units running around the map already.
---------------------------------


The more the better!:D

[Piiska]

Originally posted by Mogami
Hi, I should also add that each "unit" deployed in a hex only raises movement by one factor. So a hex with no transport value becomes a trail with one of these deployed. A trail becomes a road, and a road becomes a railroad. (Each new "Unit is absorbed by the existing one) They move towards the target hex slowly (to represent building time) and take a while to actually deploy once there. (They deploy based on the number of construction/engineer units present in the hex)

While the basic idea I think is great, it occurred to me that disruption of the different 'levels' should be treated differently.

What I mean is that a huge railroad bridge is easier to blow up that a railroad in junge. A road is even more difficult to disrupt than railroad and a jungle trail should be nearly impossible to knock out. It should also obviosly be faster to repair damaged section than build a new one.

[Snigbert]

Well can we at least build roads????? And I use the example of the great road built from Seatle to Alaska in '42/'43.

The ALCAN highway was a myth, it never really existed. Just an attempt to scare the Japanese.

I think the problem will be that the map terrain is not capable of being altered during the game, so you wouldn't be able to see a newly built railroad or bridge...Too bad they couldn't have some kind of 'build infrastructure' command similar to build airfield and build port which you could have engineers work on, with each hex assigned a certain infrastructure maximum that would effect movement and supplies.