Matrix Games Forums

The further I get into this the deeper the rabbit hole becomes. So, a town of 6,000-8,000 people - it's 4% of the hex, but logistically it is the key to the hex.

Here's an example; Southeast of Lviv/Lvov is Rohatyn. The Germans took an aerial photo of Rohatyn in 1944.

In-game at 10km per hex; Here's a 10km circle over the actual terrain with the photo inserted (it's amazing how little has changed - and sad because WW2 and the Holocaust are the reasons why); Here's the zoom=in of the town; My question - Is it justifiable to include places like Rohatyn on a 10km/division scale scenario for operational consideration, or is it slipping into window dressing?

Just to the north of Rohatyn is Bibrka. Equal size populations but not on a road therefore not as operationally important? Is that one worth keeping at this scale?

Three notes; Bob - I'm concerned I'll hit the place names limit of 4,000 at this rate but be only 1/2 complete... . Lobster - your Campaign Barbarossa map is a masterpiece. I use it as a reference. Something I've discovered is that the Pripat Marshes were actually fairly populated pre-war - numerous smaller towns all through it. I always thought it was always a desolate swamp region.

sPzAbt653 and cathar1244, I'm doing this for me, but if you want it after I'm done I'll gladly share it. I'm through Poland Belorussia, and the Baltics with just Russia and Romania to go. Mostly adding towns and naming rivers.

@ Cpl GAC

Re: placenames

As a suggestion, one needn't have a name for every town on the map. If you wish, you could code an event string to note "Vodka Falls has been occupied by the Germans" etc. Sometimes, too many place names looks cluttered.

The other thing is, there exists a crash to desktop bug that has yet to be squashed (Bob has it on a to-do list IIRC). The bug's crash effect is sped up as one browses a map, and the number of place names influences the speed at which RAM is allocated (but not released), eventually leading to the crash. This can be viewed using task manager in Windows while a scenario is loaded. Just start browsing the scenario map and watch the RAM consumption for TOAW in task manager. Up, up, and away!

Re: tactical influence

I'm sure you realize this is more art than science. If the terrain (the genuine terrain, not the scenario terrain tile) around the town would induce mech units to use the road and fight for passage if necessary ... I would include the town. But that's me. Hex and unit scale should drive such considerations.

Kind Regards--

Cpl GAC wrote: Thu Dec 12, 2024 2:02 pm Here's my next attempt - convert sandy pngs to towns and require an underlying terrain as well. It doesn't work with light woods, forest or evergreen - it replaces those similar to how wadi replaces river.

My thought - the sandy movement and defense modifiers are overridden by the underlying terrain. Most common will be "towns" on cropland (which logically works in that towns are almost assumed to be surrounded by cropland in 1940s Russia. The town would at least get a reconnaissance benefit and the +1 movement effect can be rationalized as the unit had to slow down while moving through as it's still fairly primitive logistics there.

You might explore the use of the “Map_Place Name_<xxx” function as a way put towns and villages on the map. The combat/defense value would be determined by the underlying terrain. Others have used a dot to represent the town, but you can easily adapt your town graphic as the map option. No need to mess with the existing terrain graphics.

Regards

Thank you both - it helps my thought process.

Rhino - I'm the king of dots as cities; https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 6#p5008436.
My mapping addiction requires more than that. That's how this whole mess started - my need for geographic planning and historical reference. Creating dots was just an observable symptom of my problem, you understand.

Cather, I think you make a good point about rules for town inclusion.

Cpl GAC wrote: Fri Dec 20, 2024 10:32 pm My mapping addiction requires more . . .

Mapping addiction . . . sounds bad. Maybe RFK Jr. will approve a vaccination. Hope it’s not contagious.

Default entrenchment settings for Dense Urban and Urban appear to be 30% and 15%. Based on the terrain maybe you can just set the default entrancement for villages/towns for something under 15% and be done with it. Units stationed there are going to dig-in anyway and raise the entrenchment, so what you’re talking about is basically the starting point before digging-in.

Regards

With regards to the 4,000 limit; I keep track of it with an excel spreadsheet. It is also a good place to store the populations of each town as I research them.
I think you will still have to pick and choose. The German 1939 census alone indicates over 700 towns and cities with a population of 10,000 and over.
With the town you are talking about would you have the town on a farmland terrain background to show the market gardens surrounding the town?

Yes - I'm keeping a spreadsheet - there's too much data not to. I'm basically using ChatGPT to do the work; I ask for a list of Soviet Oblasts in 1940, then query; "top 20 towns 1940 Vinnytsia Oblast". It gives me;

20 Largest Towns in Vinnytsia Oblast (circa 1940)
Vinnytsia – ~90,000–100,000
Bershad – ~25,000–30,000
Mohyliv-Podilskyi – ~30,000–35,000
Haisyn – ~20,000–25,000
Tulchyn – ~18,000–22,000
Koziatyn – ~15,000–20,000
Zhmerynka – ~20,000–25,000
Bar – ~15,000–18,000
Lityn – ~10,000–12,000
Kryzhopil – ~8,000–10,000
Yampil – ~8,000–10,000
Murovani Kurylivtsi – ~7,000–9,000
Sharhorod – ~7,000–9,000
Nemyriv – ~10,000–12,000
Tyvriv – ~5,000–7,000
Illintsi – ~5,000–7,000
Pohrebyshche – ~5,000–7,000
Trostenets (Trostianets) – ~5,000–6,000
Chechelnyk – ~4,500–6,000
Orativ – ~4,000–5,000

I skip anything under 10,000 and if I see anything missing I ask specifically about that town. Sometimes a town will also show up in a neighboring oblast list too - so again - I ask about the specific town.

I'm putting down a crop tile on Open hexes with my "Sandy-to-Town converted" tiles and starting at 15% entrenchment to afford the defender restricted vision and disengagement benefits like an Urban hex.

And to your other point - I'm skipping this level of detail in Germany because by the time the players are fighting there it's almost over.

What I'm trying to capture is the need to dash and fight for towns which was so much of the week-to-week planning and fighting during an advance on the East Front.

AAHHRRGG! cathar, you had to post a link to all those sweet sweet maps?! I've only downloaded about 75 so far. I'm trying to get them as an I V drip...

One thing I noticed - the roads in red are marked Durchgangverkehr - main logistical roads. They seem plentiful in 1941 and 1942 versions but start getting revised out in the 1943 & 1944 versions. I'm assuming we're watching them learn how poor Soviet roads were over time.

So here's my question - If I only use those few and far between durchgangverkehr roads on my map will it make lines of advance too rail-line driven for supply purposes? From a "simulation" approach is probably more realistic for the East Front - but how drastically will it alter supply and things like advancing in a forest - having to stay around a rail line but expending huge movement points?

If you look at the Wehrmacht's advance on Leningrad in 1941 you can see they basically advanced via the 1943 Leningrad and Schluesselberg maps durchgangverkehr. Manstein fumbled around the swamps south of Narva for a bit but basically returned to the road/rail route;
In a nutshell, will substanially cutting back on the roads make it unplayable from a supply perspective?

will substanially cutting back on the roads make it unplayable from a supply perspective?

You can probably adjust the Supply Radius and rail repair rate to keep things playable. I think you are on to something. I've always felt that East Front maps are generally generous in their portrayal of the movement grid.

@Cpl GAC

Yeah, that is a fascinating resource.

Maybe strings of clear hexes can be used to represent fair weather supply routes (using new supply rules). I was surprised how supply propagated using the new rules.

Cheers--

I'm going to play and see how it going with many many fewer roads but upping the supply radius. In the above screenshot, to get from Velikiye Luki to Rzhev there is no main road - only bridges and open hexes. Places like Velizh are now villages and it has a bridge off to the right like the German maps showed. I think it will change the dynamic of advancing and planning logistics.

Working on the map east of Moscow and Voronezh - there is no way the Astrakhan to Archangel plan was going to work. That is waaay too much space to control - and now with no roads... All the rail would have to be re-done, and, most of these towns are on navigable rivers - the Wehrmacht would have basically become Kriegsmarine.

Let us know how it plays.

I wonder if Elmer will drive bunches of units into unsupplied state without a fuller road and rail network.

Map looks more like what the Germans faced in Russia regarding lack of roads.

Cheers

Well, Elmer seems to push them to the edge already; Does Elmer try to correct a situation when units become overextended? Would changing the force overextended supply threshold from 0 to 1 help Elmer not run everything full-out all the time, or are desertion rates not included in his move/attack calculations?

This sort of map is better for human vs human play.

Elmer's objective tracks might need editing to steer him away from the boondocks.

Another idea might be to place low value supply points for Elmer in the rural areas so that he draws enough supplies to survive.

Cheers