New map revision, Request For Comments. UPDATE 05-08-16 Base data

[n818af]

Btw, can we add the air assets in Hong Kong for historic accuracy?
Note: They are wiped out by air raid on the first day, most likely from Canton. I did not verify the losses and number of Jap planes based in Canton on Dec 8th.

RAF Communications Flight
Hong Kong Station
- Hong Kong Flight Kai Tek, Kowloon
4x Vickers Vildebeest
3x Short Singapore Mk II
- Hong Kong Volunteer Defence Force Kai Tek, Kowloon
2x De Havilland Hornet Moth
2x Avro Cadet
1x Avro Tutor
- 715th Fleet Air Arm Squadron Kai Tek, Kowloon Lieutenant P.J.Milner-Barry
7x Supermarine Walrus Mk I

Source: http://www.go2war2.nl/nld_print.asp?paginaid=358

[n818af]

[[/quote]

I think the intent here is to strike a balance btw the game engine and history.

There are hundreds of rivers that were used as obstacles IRL that are not represented on the map.

[/quote]

I partially agree. That is really up to the designer; just my two cents.
Curious, can anyone tell me what is the reason of removing the river?

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: n818af

I partially agree. That is really up to the designer; just my two cents.
Curious, can anyone tell me what is the reason of removing the river?

Andrew did not say. I suspect that now that the terrain is Urban (4x defense) that will provide for a longer lasting Hong Kong than the river which IRL didn't provide much in the way of stopping the Japanese.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: n818af
I partially agree. That is really up to the designer; just my two cents.
Curious, can anyone tell me what is the reason of removing the river?

I do not currently intend to remove the river at HK. I am going to playtest the way I have HK set up now to see how tough it is. I want to see it fall at roughly the historical time in AI vs AI play. At the moment it falls much more quigkly, even with the river. If I have now made it too tough then I can either remove the river, change the terrain again (to mountain perhaps), or both, and try it again.

Regarding the way railwways are drawn. I considered cros-hatching but I thought that it would not be as visible on this map, especially in forest and cultivated hexes. Thick and thin black lines might be OK, but making the lines thicker may look odd. Or perhaps making the low capacity rail lines lighter (but not as light as roads), or a combination. To be honest I don't want to spend the time doing any of those right now. Maybe later (oe maybe someone else?).

Andrew

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
Regarding the way railwways are drawn. I considered cros-hatching but I thought that it would not be as visible on this map, especially in forest and cultivated hexes. Thick and thin black lines might be OK, but making the lines thicker may look odd. Or perhaps making the low capacity rail lines lighter (but not as light as roads), or a combination. To be honest I don't want to spend the time doing any of those right now. Maybe later (oe maybe someone else?).

Andrew

I am now thinking that I might redo the "low capacity" railways after all.

I am attaching a screenshot showing a "thin" style of low capacity railway symbol.

For those who are interested, please give me your opinion for which style to use: thicker black with white stripes (see example above) or thin black? (I won't do them as roads as I want them to be distinguishable). Place your votes in this thread...

Andrew

[captskillet]

thin black for me Andrew.......as usual you are doing yeoman's work [&o] !

[treespider]

Thin black looks good!

[Cap Mandrake]

On the basis of eye fatigue..I kinda like the dashed rail for low capacity. It is also somehow more exotic and has a period feel (even if not quite accurate [;)])

[Lord_Calidor]

Although both look very good, just for visibility purposes (in jungle/forest hexes it could be tough to distinguish thick from thin) I'm voting for dashed rail.

[Andrew Brown]

50/50 so far. *sigh*...

[CobraAus]

dashed rail gets my vote

Cobra Aus

[treespider]

50/50 so far. *sigh*...

Either is good for me....if I were you I would make a command decision....which ever will be easiest...they both look good....dashed may be easier to pick out at a glance.

[bradfordkay]

I'm in favour of the lighter line/heavier line (I know, you're back to 50/50 now, sorry). Thanks for asking, though.

[Jaws_slith]

I like it[:)] Thx for hard work.

[Herrbear]

Thin black lines, but whatever you decide will be fine with me. I just appreciate they work you have done on the map. You cannot be thanked enough for doing it.

[drw61]

I vote for the thick/thin rail lines, they provide the information and don't distract from the overall look of the map.
Thanks for all the hard work!

[treespider]

Not that I'm partial either way ...but for those proclaimed map afficinados out there I would suspect this is where AB got the idea for the dashed lines....

It is taken from a 1930's era map of Transportation Assets in China

[Jaws_slith]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Not that I'm partial either way ...but for those proclaimed map afficinados out there I would suspect this is where AB got the idea for the dashed lines....

It is taken from a 1930's era map of Transportation Assets in China

Wow look at the scale of the map [:)]

B.t.w. if you want to use parts of a original maps than the whole map should be redrawn. At this moment the map is a sort of satellite view of the complete pacific area and have no link with a map at all.


But if someone has spare time[;)]

[treespider]

Wow look at the scale of the map

That was 1:10,000,000....close to what we're playing on. I also have access to China maps at 1:2,000,000.

[Jaws_slith]

Nice[:)] Great I have maps from 1:25000 and 50:000 (Some Europe countries) I saw up to 1:-750:000 but 1:10.000.000 beat the sh.. out of me.

Thx for info[:)]