Page 8 of 12
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:57 am
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: rtamesis
There is a typographical error on the map of the Philippines. The island labeled Palay should be changed to Panay instead.
Thanks, I did not see it.
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 12:07 pm
by Neilster
ORIGINAL: rtamesis
There is a typographical error on the map of the Philippines. The island labeled Palay should be changed to Panay instead.
As in the gun-boat what got sunk. How appropriate to a discussion of the Pacific theatre of war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panay_incident
Cheers, Neilster
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 7:44 pm
by Froonp
Here is a view of Southeast Asia that I've done, seen at 30% size only.
I'll post a close up for Malaya & Burma next.

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 7:50 pm
by Froonp
Here are Southern Burma & Malaya.
Singapore was discussed in an old thread, and I re-did it here as we discussed it.

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 7:55 pm
by Froonp
As part of the review of the map, I also did draft coastlines of NE Australia, and of New Guinea.
I post them too, this is not only to get praises [8D], this is also to get comments about the map and about what could be blatantly wrong with the MWiF map, so that it can be corrected.

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 8:35 pm
by Ballista
Outstanding ! It looks great ! I really, really can't wait to scroll over the map and look at it at various levels of detail......
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:52 pm
by trees trees
maybe the Delta area south of Rangoon would be a bit swampy?
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 5:31 pm
by Ballista
The same could apply to the delta south of Saigon I would think....
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:41 pm
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: Ballista
The same could apply to the delta south of Saigon I would think....
The WiF FE Pacific scaled maps supports this.
I've added both your suggestions in my suggestion file for this map.
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:33 pm
by wosung
Patrice, first thanx for the great looking maps.
Based on the scaled map, what about adding a few more minor ports (or even just "named hexes") in Northern Papua? From West to East Madang, Buna/Dobodura and Milne Bay comes to mind. And perhaps Kavieng in New Ireland.
According to Eric Bergerud, 1. Fire in the Sky, and 2. Touched with Fire by the same author (former, about the air war, latter about the land war in the South Pacific):
1. even Port Moresby wasn't a big place in 1940/41: 2.000 inhabitants, and not much of an harbour. (2. p. 60).
2. in Milne Bay, for example there was a Lever Bros. coconut plantation, because of the good natural harbour.(2. p. 251).
So the differences down there were just gradual. But all you Australian, New Zealand and Tasmanian folks at the forum probably do know better.
Questions is, how far would these ports change balance of play in the South Pacific.
Another thing, I noticed: On your map New Ireland basically extends from East to West. Shouldn't it extend more from North to South, that means, shouldn't the angel be steeper??
Regards
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 3:33 pm
by lordzyplon
i have to say, i love what you guys did with Singapore... MUCH more realistic!
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 8:32 pm
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: wosung
Based on the scaled map, what about adding a few more minor ports (or even just "named hexes") in Northern Papua? From West to East Madang, Buna/Dobodura and Milne Bay comes to mind. And perhaps Kavieng in New Ireland.
Well, I would be against adding ports, even minor ones.
In thoses sea areas, the number of ports is also proportional to the number of air bases, I would not want to fiddle with this. We had good reasons to add some in Scandinavia (although I voted nearly against all ports addition proposals), and in China, but we can't add more only because the place is famous asa were Buna, Kavieng, Milne Bay or Biak.
About "named hexes", well I do not really know.
Named hexes are useful for islands, but are they that useful for land hexes ?
I don't care even if there are more than 1 name for each island hex, there are not many anyway, but adding "named hexes" elsewhere seems not as usefull to me.
Another thing, I noticed: On your map New Ireland basically extends from East to West. Shouldn't it extend more from North to South, that means, shouldn't the angel be steeper??
Well, it is drawn that way on the original CWiF map, and I don't see how to change this without changing all the area, which seems not usefull to me neither. It did not seem that wrong to me.
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 8:33 pm
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: lordzyplon
i have to say, i love what you guys did with Singapore... MUCH more realistic!
Yes, and much more like WiF FE.
In CWiF it was too easy to conquer.
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:53 pm
by rtamesis
While a good first effort, the Philippine Islands, especially those depicted in the Visayas region in the middle of the country, appear too skinny. I realize that there are limitations and requirements imposed by the hex grid, but I'm hoping for a more accurate depiction of the coastlines and shape of the islands in the final product since it looks odd, being from the Philippines myself. Here is a comparison of the MWIF map and the Google map to give a better idea of the shapes of the islands.

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 10:08 pm
by wfzimmerman
I realize this is out of scope, but it really bothers me that Corregidor is not a fort.
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 11:42 pm
by wfzimmerman
ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman
I realize this is out of scope, but it really bothers me that Corregidor is not a fort, when you consider the quality of the natural fortification, the length (2 turns) of the holdout, and the courage of the occupants.
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:04 am
by Froonp
While a good first effort, the Philippine Islands, especially those depicted in the Visayas region in the middle of the country, appear too skinny. I realize that there are limitations and requirements imposed by the hex grid, but I'm hoping for a more accurate depiction of the coastlines and shape of the islands in the final product since it looks odd, being from the Philippines myself. Here is a comparison of the MWIF map and the Google map to give a better idea of the shapes of the islands.
The skinny aspect comes mainly from the requirements of the hexgrid. Panay, Negros, Cebu for example, must be separated by all sea hexsides, because a land unit can't go walking from one island to the next, and the hexgrid being hexagonals, the limit between 2 two-hexes island is not a straight line.
Anyway, I'll try to improve it soon.
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 1:07 pm
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: Froonp
While a good first effort, the Philippine Islands, especially those depicted in the Visayas region in the middle of the country, appear too skinny. I realize that there are limitations and requirements imposed by the hex grid, but I'm hoping for a more accurate depiction of the coastlines and shape of the islands in the final product since it looks odd, being from the Philippines myself. Here is a comparison of the MWIF map and the Google map to give a better idea of the shapes of the islands.
The skinny aspect comes mainly from the requirements of the hexgrid. Panay, Negros, Cebu for example, must be separated by all sea hexsides, because a land unit can't go walking from one island to the next, and the hexgrid being hexagonals, the limit between 2 two-hexes island is not a straight line.
Anyway, I'll try to improve it soon.
Would you like it better like that ?
There is still the Leyte / Mindanao area that is not as good as reality, but to make it straight, I would have to expand Leyte and / or Samar into a third hex each. It would not be a problem to do it, but I wonder if it is worth it ?

RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 5:59 pm
by rtamesis
That's looking a lot better. I would not worry too much about Leyte, although Palawan still looks too short. It's not a big deal, though, if you really need to keep the existing hexes that represent it and the surrounding islands.
RE: MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands
Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:30 pm
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: rtamesis
That's looking a lot better. I would not worry too much about Leyte, although Palawan still looks too short. It's not a big deal, though, if you really need to keep the existing hexes that represent it and the surrounding islands.
rtamesis, Steve and I both think that the MWiF map will be better if it is as close as possible to the WiF FE map, and as close as possible to reality.
So I made another try at the Leyte Mindanao area, here it is. I think it is ok like this. For reality, Leyte is nearly 210 km from tip to tip, which is 3 hexes. For WiF FE, this is better too because movement is allowed by the drawing of Leyte & Mindanao, so by drawing it like this this is better.
For Palawan, nothing can be done, as an hex must be kept for the island south of it, which is part of the Philippines, and another south of it is needed for the islands that are part of Borneo.
Palawan could be extended 1 hex more, but then the island south of it won't be an island anymore in WiF FE, so I feel this is OK like this.
