Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets
These were Sining, Ningsia (was Yinchuan) and Anking (replaced Hofei).Sorry, to the 3 cities that were split 2-2
ORIGINAL: Froonp
Also, in the south portion, I proposed to move Chungking (and the river around it and the factories and the resources) 1 hex SE, so that all hexes on the other side of the rivers would be mountains (well, nearly all), as in the WiF FE maps.
Comments ?
ORIGINAL: Yohan
I'm going to chime in on the split votes and vote nay. While certainly not the expert on China others here appear to be I am concerned about the effect on play balance.
One of the GREAT things about WiF and the reason it has such a large and long standing following is that it is a great game to play, not neccessarily a great historical recreation. Having lots of options for both sides is part of what makes the game fun. One of the big what ifs is Japan applying extra resources and efforts into China. We don't want to get to the stage where this cannot happen.
Japanese players who commit to this strategy often go down in flames as they are not prepared for the war with the USA. A good Allied player sees the strategy being implemented and builds against it.
WiF has to remain a playable game at its core, not a recreation of WWII. The beauty of a computer game is that changes can be made if the play testers or early palyers find it an issue but I am betting they will not. China may get smacked from time to time but the USA will more often than not defeat Japan in the end.
And if you like Froonp, you can play Axis in our first game and go for China and we will see what happens
It looks to me as if this additional port enables the Japanese to have one additional hex from which to attack Nanning with out an HQ. I am assuming that Hanoi and Haiphong are in Japanese hands already. It really seem to be there to support attacking the resource hex northeast of Nanning.
If there was enough units, but unfortunately, this is not the case in September 1939 for the Communist.ORIGINAL: Incy
Yennan YES (but in doubt, as it's a good flanking point for china and may help extend the "active" frontline
Was 2 hexes west of Sian. This is here that the rail stops offcially.Paochi (was Baoji) (not on the latest maps posted)
It was at the end of the rail going north and then west from Taiyuan. I commented on her deletion in the first posts I made in this thread.Paotow (not on the latest maps posted)
-Don't know where these two are.
Unfortunately I fear there is nothing here. At most, some alpine hexsides.-From playbalance perspective I'd wish for a city between Chengtu and Tianshui/Lanchow
Good point. I'll leave this area as is. There are already a vas amount of desert hexes.More Desert NW & W of the line Lanchow-Taiyuan
-No, desert has good weather in bad weather turns, and is easy to move through, so it's very good "raider country".
It stops 2 hexes west fro Sian normaly.Road to Lanchow and resource far away
-I like it, but I'd prefer the road/RR transition to be further east (Sian?)
In fact, Wuhan is some sort of supercity, regrouping 3 cities. But this may be too much, it would be a unique case in WiF FE of a city represented by two cities in 2 different hexes..Coastal :
Wuhan (moved 1 hex NW) Yes (can we have one city on each side of the river??)
In fact, those mountains seems to be the least high and the least wide in this area, south of Chengchow, east of Nanyang. They seem to be more dense around Anking (and Wosung asked to put more mountains around Anking IIRC -- But I'm not sure where).New Mountain (Between Anking & Sian) Yes.
-Could they extend to the hex SW of Chengchow?
Real geography warrants it, and the way I placed it it is not in the way of anything.New Lake hexside east of Shanghai Not sure.
Good point.New River along the railway Tientsin, Tsinan, Suchow (the imperial channel) (not represented on the map) No
South
Chihchiang
Yes, but it's behing river, on the road, and in mountain. Is it possible to place it so it's not such a juggernaut fortress city?
There is nothing I see to add.Also, I wouldn't mind a second city in the Chungking/Kweiyang Chichiang triangle (if there is some historical merit to it)
I prefer to vote this one out, because it would provide supply to the Chinese in the supply hole (WiF FE maps) east of Canton.Hengyang (not on the latest maps posted, it is a proposal of Wosung that no one supported yet) unsure.
So you prefer Pakhoi (would be 2 hexes SE of Nanning) ?Zhanjiang (to provide supply south of Nanning from the sea) Yes, but I still prefer it to the NW
Just for clarity, let me warn you that on the map I posted in post #129 (28 May), the Nanning resource is at its normal MWiF place, and the Changsha resource was moved 2 hexes southwards from its original MWiF position.Move resource south
-No, not the southern resources. But possibly the resource in the east, near Shanghai
ORIGINAL: FroonpGood point. I'll leave this area as is. There are already a vas amount of desert hexes.More Desert NW & W of the line Lanchow-Taiyuan
-No, desert has good weather in bad weather turns, and is easy to move through, so it's very good "raider country".
It stops 2 hexes west fro Sian normaly.Road to Lanchow and resource far away
-I like it, but I'd prefer the road/RR transition to be further east (Sian?)
In fact, Wuhan is some sort of supercity, regrouping 3 cities. But this may be too much, it would be a unique case in WiF FE of a city represented by two cities in 2 different hexes..Coastal :
Wuhan (moved 1 hex NW) Yes (can we have one city on each side of the river??)
In fact, those mountains seems to be the least high and the least wide in this area, south of Chengchow, east of Nanyang. They seem to be more dense around Anking (and Wosung asked to put more mountains around Anking IIRC -- But I'm not sure where).New Mountain (Between Anking & Sian) Yes.
-Could they extend to the hex SW of Chengchow?
Real geography warrants it, and the way I placed it it is not in the way of anything.New Lake hexside east of Shanghai Not sure.
Good point.New River along the railway Tientsin, Tsinan, Suchow (the imperial channel) (not represented on the map) No
South
Chihchiang
Yes, but it's behing river, on the road, and in mountain. Is it possible to place it so it's not such a juggernaut fortress city?
The best is to redraw the river passing there so that it flows on the southern & eastern hexsides of the SE & E hexes. This seems correct too on the real maps.I prefer to vote this one out, because it would provide supply to the Chinese in the supply hole (WiF FE maps) east of Canton.Hengyang (not on the latest maps posted, it is a proposal of Wosung that no one supported yet) unsure.
So you prefer Pakhoi (would be 2 hexes SE of Nanning) ?Zhanjiang (to provide supply south of Nanning from the sea) Yes, but I still prefer it to the NW
Just for clarity, let me warn you that on the map I posted in post #129 (28 May), the Nanning resource is at its normal MWiF place, and the Changsha resource was moved 2 hexes southwards from its original MWiF position.Move resource south
-No, not the southern resources. But possibly the resource in the east, near Shanghai
Wosung, you wanted more mountains around Anking ?For the Anking mountains, I would like to see what Wosung proposed in more detail.
If I move the river, it does not weaken the defensive line, it just put the city and the river in 2 separate hexes. One way or the other, the river will have to be crossed.No strong preference about the river around Chichiang. I can see Incy's point clearly and I also could see someone arguing for a good defensive strongpoint for the Chinese. On the WIF FE map, the geography between Changsha and Chungking is merely mountains, but the defensive line only requires defending two hexes. Here the distance is greatly increased between the two cities (from 3 hexes to 10) which has the side effect of requiring a longer defensive line to prevent flanking.
In WiF FE, Nanning is in a mountain with a river on 3 sides.The river running south of Nanning doesn't exist in WIF FE. That hasn't been discussed here as either a good or a bad change.
Seems to be like this on WWII maps.The rail line from Nanning to the resource NE of it doesn't appear on the historical map. If that is truly the case, I would prefer this linkage to be a road connection. The rail line would run from Kweilin to the resource.
ORIGINAL: wosung
Selection of new cities:
(...)
The nowadays more important Hofei could be substituted with [font="Arial"]Anking[/font] (just one hex apart, in the mountainous Yangzi-hex to the south east, then Provincial capital of Anhwei).
(...)
I added those as you described.ORIGINAL: wosungAbout Anking: As I said above.ORIGINAL: wosung
Selection of new cities:
(...)
The nowadays more important Hofei could be substituted with [font="Arial"]Anking[/font] (just one hex apart, in the mountainous Yangzi-hex to the south east, then Provincial capital of Anhwei).
(...)
The China Handbook 1937-44, names it the Capital of Anhwei Province with the alternative Name (Hwaining) in brackets. But personally I prefer Anking.
About additional mountains there:
As far as I can see they would be warranted in the 2 hexes just south of Anking. That means: The 2 hexes east of Wuhan.
Note that Anking itself is a Yangtze port, in what seems to be a steep vally.
Generaly I tend to agree with you, and I could have written what you wrote.ORIGINAL: trees
I have followed this thread for awhile (and played WiF since 3rd edition)...I would just like to say that perhaps the map of China should be made as realistic as possible. The physical geography of China is what it is. The social geography of China in 1937 can be researched. But the map should represent what the military leaders of the day had to deal with. If there are play-balance / blow-out problems they should be addressed within the game, not by tweaking the map. Now, a wargame map represents a lot of judgement calls; which ports and cities qualify for that status within the rules of a game is a decision that has to be made. Ditto for what side of a river a city is on when the river flows through downtown. But moving things around to change play balance seems like the wrong approach. Or moving them around so things can be how you _want_ them to be...well what military commander wouldn't want to be able to change the terrain in front of him? Can a small port handle the shipping to feed a few score thousand men?
It is not what we are doing.The idea of "I want to attack in this direction, can you put a port on the map there for me?" seems wrong.
According to 3 physical maps (best one 1:4 000 000) it is warranted, to make the Nanning hex and the ones left and right to its mountain hexes.
According to these maps there also should be a continuous double row of mountain hexes from the mountain hex south of Nanning via the 2 forest hexes to the mountains of Kweilin. This is the so called Yunkai dashan (Yunkai big mountains).
