Matrix Games Forums

Yeah, the landforms are beautiful, it's the ocean and smaller islands that look like an early '90's wargame. Nothing I can't live with. And, yes, I did check to see if CobraAus' version was out. Am waiting with baited breath...

Tried scenario 116 as IJN, landed SNLF in hex 58,96 after 3 turns of attacks against no opposition, there have been no casualties but I still have not "taken" the hex. In the "official" game attacking an empty hex usually ( always ? ) results in capture ... oh and I had 90+ supply point aboard the Island each of the three turns I attacked and my disruption was under 10 for each of the three turns. So I think this hex is "broke". Not a big deal just reporting test results.

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

base 737 and base 734 ( both dot bases ) seem to be in the same hex 58,96 ... I assume this is unintentional.

Thanks. I'll check it out.

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Andrew, I just dl'ed your map and have been looking at it. A definite improvement over the original one, except in looks (it is acceptable, however).

I did notice one thing. When you hit the "R" key, it appears that the railroad stops one hex short of Darwin. Is this intentional?

Thanks. I spotted that a few days ago as well, while doing some map proofreading for version 2, so it has been fixed. This one is kind of ironic since the reason I started all of this was to "fix" the Darwin rail link.[8|]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Yeah, the landforms are beautiful, it's the ocean and smaller islands that look like an early '90's wargame.

Guilty as charged. I used to play a lot of early '90's wargames...

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Tried scenario 116 as IJN, landed SNLF in hex 58,96 after 3 turns of attacks against no opposition, there have been no casualties but I still have not "taken" the hex. In the "official" game attacking an empty hex usually ( always ? ) results in capture ... oh and I had 90+ supply point aboard the Island each of the three turns I attacked and my disruption was under 10 for each of the three turns. So I think this hex is "broke". Not a big deal just reporting test results.

Thanks. There is obviously a problem with 58,96. I will check it out tonight.

I finally packaged version 2 of the mod last night for sending to Spooky. However I will have to delay that a bit longer while I chase up this problem. Once it is done then I will be sending a copy to CobraAus for his use as well.

"This one is kind of ironic since the reason I started all of this was to "fix" the Darwin rail link."



I wasn't going to mention that, but now that you have...[:'(]

Thanks for the good work. Unfortunately ([X(]) I will be flying off to Oahu for vacation tomorrow morning, so apparently I won't be able to download the map fix until I'm back. I am taking my laptop along (for WITP, of course!), but the web browser on it locks up, so no chance to get it while there. I am sure that you guys are all crying crocodile tears for me...[8D]

Edit: Do you think that I would be able to start a game on your map and then use the updated map to patch that game?

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
Do you think that I would be able to start a game on your map and then use the updated map to patch that game?

Yes you can. You can update the map data at any time and games already started will use it. This only applies to transport links and terrain data though.

What you don't get is the new bases that are added to the scenarios for version 2. These are not critical, however. Also, any problems with base placement (as opposed to things like broken/missing rail lines) will NOT get fixed by the map update. As stated in this thread there are a couple of base problems with the current scenarios 115/116. If you can live with those you can coninue your game for as long as you like.

Andrew

Andrew,

Fantastic job on the map mod - I really appreciate your efforts.

I think I saw in another thread that you were thinking of addding Ramree Island to the map, and I just wanted to toss in another couple of other possible locations for bases/beaches that I think could be added (at the risk of play inbalance and/or cluttering the map):

Phuket Island (hex 23,41). According to the original schedule of Op ZIPPER/MAILFIST (the British landings in Malaya and reconquest of Singapore respectively), Phuket Island was to be seized as an advanced base. Thus, " For the assault on Singapore and Malaya and subsequent operations against Siam and Sumatra, a forward air, naval and general supply base was required. Phuket Island, about half-way down the Malay Peninsula was chosen." While the decision was taken to bypass Phuket, minesweeping operations were carried out off the Island in July 1945.

Simalur Island (18,44). This was chosen as an advanced naval and airbase for Op CULVERIN (the proposed landings in N Sumatra), and would have been seized 14 days in advance of the main force wading ashore on the mainland near Sabang Island. Of course CULVERIN was strategic nonsense (as the British Chiefs of Staff recognised)but was very dear to Churchill's heart. Perhaps this could be a beach hex?

Cocos Islands (erhhh...somewhere 2,000 miles SW of Singapore). I'm not sure that this even within the map boundaries, but it held by the allies throughout the war and was turned into an advanced base of Liberators in July/August 1945. As I say, I'm not sure if its even within the WITP map 'universe'.

Finally, I assume that the Chittagong/Cox's Bazaar airfield complex is built into the Chadpur hex? If not, then perhaps we could consider adding the major base for operations in the Arakan.

As I said, just chucking out ideas...

Regards,

Philip Bass

Sir. Just loaded your Map Nod, tonight, gonna start scen 115.

Noticed that the base Victoria Point (in hex 25,39) is not connect to any road or trail to the rest of the world. (I used the "R" hot key to look at the road overlay data.) There is a road ending in the empty hex to the SW (25,40). Was Victoria Point supposed to be in that hex?

Also, the trail leaving Kuching is not fully connected to the one coming NE from Singkawang, when it is in the standard map. Was this intentional?

I apologize if these issues have already been discussed.

Keep up the good work!