Interested in opinions about a map experiment - Panama screenshot added

[Captain Cruft]

Why is it not possible to extend the map area?

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Why is it not possible to extend the map area?

Well, to tell you the truth I have never tried it (actually I have - it IS possible to expand the map by one hex in the scenario editor - 150x150 instead of 149x149, but I am not sure if that would have an unexpected effect in-game, so I am not going to do this for any released scenario. It does work, though).

The map data file is simply a set of linear data records that starts at hex 0,0 and finishes at hex 150,150, which corresponds to a 151x151 hex grid. There is nothing in the data file that tells the program that the map is a certain width or height - the 151 value must be embedded in the EXE file, and so cannot be changed. I have never tried enlarging the data file, but I doubt it would work.

[Andrew Brown]

Here is a screenshot (reduced in size and converted to JPEG) of the possible Combined Mod map variant being tested. This shot shows the 'Middle East off map' area. There are two bases: Aden, and a second base which is an invulnerable base that would be the entry point for most British air land and sea reinforcements. This second base is made invulnerable as it more or less represents British Africa.

The TF path shows how the map convolutions are used to make the distance between Aden and India equal to the real life distance. This will cause compromises in other areas, but that can't be helped. The artwork may not impress, but I am no artist, sorry to say.

And thank you for your comments. They are very helpful and greatly appreciated!

[Erik Rutins]

Just my personal opinion as a player, but I don't think it's worth breaking Allied AI play to add this in.

Regards,

- Erik

[michaelm75au]

Will the Victory Points for these bases be low so that AI won't try to invade/defend them?
Michael

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Just my personal opinion as a player, but I don't think it's worth breaking Allied AI play to add this in.

Regards,

- Erik

I guess it will depend on how many people want to play the combined mod as Japanese vs. Allied AI (even assuming that this map addition actually works and is worth adding for PBEM play). I am certainly not suggesting that this map variant be used for other scenarios, that is for sure.

[Ron Saueracker]

The travel distances from Karachi to Aden are pretty much bang on. Personally, as a PBEM only player, this is fabulous. Air Attacks can still be made representing the need to traverse Indian Ocean to reach Gulf of Aden; with no SC TF ability to intercept TFs as they pass through their hex (like subs) the risk of a Japanese player gaming the entrance is still hit or miss, subs can interdict the route but this is not gamey as the benefits of the channel work both ways for ASW and subs; ties up a large volume of merchant traffic where it is supposed to be (supplying India, not offloading combat troops in the Pacific).

I love it![&o] I believe this base will be invulnerable to attack for the most part? Lots of immovable CD and troops.

[steveh11Matrix]

I'm in support of the innovation, but wouldn't play this one personally. I feel the basic map, as amended perhaps, is plenty good enough and it's not worth breaking the ai for either side over relatively minor things. OTOH I'm fully in support of player choice in such matters.

Steve.

[Grotius]

Very interesting. I assume the brown area just south of the "channel" is now impassable? Is that to prevent IJN CVs from staking out the route? If so, can't IJN CVs blockade the east edge of the passage anyway?

I'm also worried about IJN subs lining the channel like sardines. I guess the Allied player can respond by filling the channel with ASW TFs too.

Do you plan to make this feature a required component of the Combined mod, or an optional one? Many players do like to play against the Allied AI...

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Very interesting. I assume the brown area just south of the "channel" is now impassable? Is that to prevent IJN CVs from staking out the route? If so, can't IJN CVs blockade the east edge of the passage anyway?

I'm also worried about IJN subs lining the channel like sardines. I guess the Allied player can respond by filling the channel with ASW TFs too.

Do you plan to make this feature a required component of the Combined mod, or an optional one? Many players do like to play against the Allied AI...

I see this as PBEM only.

[m10bob]

Clarification of my opinion on this matter.
I am strongly for anything that is historically correct.
I do not feel allied "entry positions" would be anymore vulnarable to blockade than Karachi or San Francisco are now,and in fact would increase the number of spots to be "blockaded".A "capture" of Panama or Aden is something that should be a possibility,(as it might have been in real life.Obviously it was on the allies mind in early '42 since they expected an invasion of California!).This would force the allies to consider guarding these points as the Japanese player is forced to keep troops on the Soviet border.
Besides,(as already pointed out),a capture of Panama itself would only delay east coast shipping by 10-14 days,or so..With all the Brit BB's at Ceylon,I just don't see Aden really being threatened,realistically.
I *do* want the AI to be aware and affected by these new points..

[Captain Cruft]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
Why is it not possible to extend the map area?

Well, to tell you the truth I have never tried it (actually I have - it IS possible to expand the map by one hex in the scenario editor - 150x150 instead of 149x149, but I am not sure if that would have an unexpected effect in-game, so I am not going to do this for any released scenario. It does work, though).

The map data file is simply a set of linear data records that starts at hex 0,0 and finishes at hex 150,150, which corresponds to a 151x151 hex grid. There is nothing in the data file that tells the program that the map is a certain width or height - the 151 value must be embedded in the EXE file, and so cannot be changed. I have never tried enlarging the data file, but I doubt it would work.

Ah I see. It's the usual fixed length array thing, I was thinking a bit more high level like maybe a checksum or something. I suppose that even if you were to binary patch the scenario file for a bigger value than 151x151 then the .EXE would probably barf or just not seek past that point ...

Shame. Still, I can't wait for the whole CHS to be finished. Great work by everyone involved

[Captain Cruft]

Yes, this is definitely a PBEM only feature IMHO. Surely people will use house rules about not going within certain distances of the impassable areas or something?

Not wishing to be rude but why are people worried about "breaking the AI"? It already is. Just open up the other side of a game and have a look at the convoys it makes ...

[Don Bowen]

I am 100% in favor of this mod (as you well know, Andrew) and am already working on converting our scenario to it. We will test the map mod and our scenario to see how it works.

I personally play as allied against the AI, so I expect it will work just fine for me. I understand the possible problems with an Allied AI but we'll just have to test and see.

The "maze" route is used to adjust distance - it forces ships to travel the approximately correct number of hexes to travel from Aden to India. If this becomes a problem with players or the AI "blocking" the path we could always omit it and accept an incorrect distance.

Once implemented - all British (but not Indian) reinforcements will arrive at Aden. Also Australian and US forces being transferred from the Mediterranean Theatre. US Forces that moved from the East Coast and transited the Panama Canal will arrive at the Canal (Atlantic Side). Also, some US airgroups that flew from the East Coast to the West are being changed to arrive at the “United States” base (base 330).

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Yes, this is definitely a PBEM only feature IMHO. Surely people will use house rules about not going within certain distances of the impassable areas or something?

Not wishing to be rude but why are people worried about "breaking the AI"? It already is. Just open up the other side of a game and have a look at the convoys it makes ...

Agreed. Not concerned about it at all. Don Bowen is, though, as he dislikes PBEM for whatever reason.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Very interesting. I assume the brown area just south of the "channel" is now impassable? Is that to prevent IJN CVs from staking out the route? If so, can't IJN CVs blockade the east edge of the passage anyway?

Yes, the greyed out area is intended to make it harder for IJN carriers to attack the bases without travelling a fair distance, as they would have to have done in real life. They could still loiter anywhere along the route, but if the IJN had clear naval superiority in the Arabian Gulf they would have been able to do so anyway. Also, the channel limitation works two ways - if the Japanese player moves ships in or near the channel their whereabouts will be much easier to guess, which may help the Allied player.

I'm also worried about IJN subs lining the channel like sardines. I guess the Allied player can respond by filling the channel with ASW TFs too.

I am concerned by this as well, so we will have to see how it works out in a test game.

Do you plan to make this feature a required component of the Combined mod, or an optional one? Many players do like to play against the Allied AI...

It will be definitely be possible to make a version of the combined mod without it. When that gets done probably depends on how the map variant it goes in tests, and the number of people who are or are not interested in using it.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Yes, this is definitely a PBEM only feature IMHO. Surely people will use house rules about not going within certain distances of the impassable areas or something?

Not wishing to be rude but why are people worried about "breaking the AI"? It already is. Just open up the other side of a game and have a look at the convoys it makes ...

Agreed. Not concerned about it at all. Don Bowen is, though, as he dislikes PBEM for whatever reason.

I'd ignore Bowen - he's wierd in all kinds of ways.

[Halsey]

It looks interesting. I think I'll have to pass on this one. In practice games I use the AI to beat up on. This might confuse it. In a PBEM I already see where some TF's could be parked with a replenishment group.

Good luck with it though!

[byron13]

I'm halfway surprised that the game was able to select a path from Aden to Karachi on your screen shot! Since it can do that, I'm all for the mod. As everyone says, purely a PBEM or AI as Japanese game. For PBEM, house rules should prevent problems with gaming the "chute" between Aden and Karachi.

The only problem I see is that this will make for a strange game if the Japanese try and overrun India as PzB is doing. That's a large chunk of the Indian Ocean you've taken off the map, and house rules won't be able to cover what happens when the Japanese are legitimately invading the west coast of India. But that's probably rare anyway. So go for it.

So, is the plan for most supplies and all British units to have to come from Aden?

Switching to the Canal, I can't be sure if the plan is to take the map only to the Canal in a short chute, or whether it is to go all the way through the Canal and to the east coast with a long chute. It wouldn't matter for reinforcements, since their arrival date would just be adjusted accordingly. What would be interesting to know is the extent to which supplies of various kinds and especially fuel and oil was shipped to California or Oz via the Canal. I'm betting (knowing less than nothing) that most refineries had access only to the Gulf or Atlantic coasts, so that a considerable amount may have been shipped via the Canal. Of course, there may have been some pipelines to the West coast or substantial use of tanker cars on trains. The point is that having units appear in Panama at the Canal is kind of a max nix issue; they can sit in Panama waiting for a ride just as easily as they can sit in California (though there may be a longer transiting distance). Supply is max nix since most will probably be produced or delivered to the West Coast, so the addition of the Canal places no more stress on the logistics system. Fuel and oil is the only thing that I can see would make a difference, i.e., long transit times for TKs trying to hump fuel and oil to the Pacific. Otherwise, what real difference does putting the Canal in have?

A "capture" of Panama or Aden is something that should be a possibility,(as it might have been in real life.Obviously it was on the allies mind in early '42 since they expected an invasion of California!).This would force the allies to consider guarding these points as the Japanese player is forced to keep troops on the Soviet border.

I don't think this should be an issue. Guarding would have been assigned to units not present in the game. House rules to me dictate that the Japanese cannot attack or capture either Aden or the Canal - they're there for logistical reasons and not for tactical reasons. Aden is present in part to give the Brits a place to regroup and act as a springboard if kicked out of India. If Aden can be captured, then you need an Alexandria, then a Gibraltar, then a London. Pretty soon you've got the Japanese trying to capture England. Leave Aden alone.

[stubby331]

Personally, I'm not for this particular addition to your fine map.