Matrix Games Forums

I had time at my job this morning, so I redid the northern coastlines to have a better place for Tromso. This was not 100% accurate previously. Now it is better.

I agree that the new placement of Hjälmaren is better when compared to 'real' maps. Quality work.

I believe the hex east of Oslo should belong to Sweden.
The Swedish-norweigian border is in the middle of the norweigian west coast and stockholm. on the map it is 10 hexes so 5 hexes should be swedish and 5 Norweigian, now 6 are Norweigain and 4 Swedish.
But maybe that's for game purposes.

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

I believe the hex east of Oslo should belong to Sweden.
The Swedish-norweigian border is in the middle of the norweigian west coast and stockholm. on the map it is 10 hexes so 5 hexes should be swedish and 5 Norweigian, now 6 are Norweigain and 4 Swedish.
But maybe that's for game purposes.

I think it looks fine the way it is. [:'(]

ORIGINAL: Toed

I agree that the new placement of Hjälmaren is better when compared to 'real' maps. Quality work.

Great work. I think the coast line extension to Tromsø is also very nice.

On the latest map you added the port of Turku. I agree with that, but I guess we need to extend the rail line to Turku so the port is rail connected. It was connected in 1939.

It's done by creating a branch in the hex 1xNE of Hanko. Draw the new rail line 1 hex westwards to Turku.

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

ORIGINAL: Toed
I agree that the new placement of Hjälmaren is better when compared to 'real' maps. Quality work.

Great work. I think the coast line extension to Tromsø is also very nice.

On the latest map you added the port of Turku. I agree with that, but I guess we need to extend the rail line to Turku so the port is rail connected. It was connected in 1939.

It's done by creating a branch in the hex 1xNE of Hanko. Draw the new rail line 1 hex westwards to Turku.

I done it already.
Also, I made Turku an iced-in port, as Nils had drawn it that way in his first variation on Scandinavia. For Tromso, I drew it as an Ice free port, Am I right ?

I entered all the boring data in the CSV files so that the MWiF maps now is the same, except for the graphic for coastlines and lakes that will need to be done or re-done by the Graphic Artist.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

ORIGINAL: Toed
I agree that the new placement of Hjälmaren is better when compared to 'real' maps. Quality work.

Great work. I think the coast line extension to Tromsø is also very nice.

On the latest map you added the port of Turku. I agree with that, but I guess we need to extend the rail line to Turku so the port is rail connected. It was connected in 1939.

It's done by creating a branch in the hex 1xNE of Hanko. Draw the new rail line 1 hex westwards to Turku.

I done it already.
Also, I made Turku an iced-in port, as Nils had drawn it that way in his first variation on Scandinavia. For Tromso, I drew it as an Ice free port, Am I right ?

I entered all the boring data in the CSV files so that the MWiF maps now is the same, except for the graphic for coastlines and lakes that will need to be done or re-done by the Graphic Artist.

All the ports of Norway are ice free. So you're definitely right there.

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I think Gothenburg is slightly better than Göteborg. So I have decided on the former for the choice of names.

I agree with you here.

Tampere (35,47) (Borger) : Add. Third largest city.
6 Voters : 50 % YES, 50 % NO.
City / Finland

I just wanted to go through my votes again. This vote is YES.

Lake Femunden (34,38 E) (Borger) : Remove.
5 Voters : 40 % YES, 60 % NO.
Lake / Norway

Since lake Mjøsa is added then I will vote NO here. Always nice with extra
lakes in Norway. [:)] I notice the Swedish lakes don't use lake before the
name (Vänern, Hjälmaren etc.). Maybe we can do the same for the Norwegian
lakes too? Only Femunden and Mjøsa.

How will you find space to name all the finnish lakes? [;)]

Bodø (Bodo) (26,41) (Borger) : Add. For supply reasons.
6 Voters : 50 % YES, 50 % NO.
Minor Port / Norway

I keep my vote of YES for this one. Port is as I mentioned in another message ice
free.

Clear hex (Resource) (40,35) (ullern) : Change to Mountain.
4 Voters : 50 % YES, 50 % NO.
Terrain / Norway

For accuracy I would have voted yes, but for game play issues I would have voted no.
I agree with the arguments of both Ullern (who wants yes) and Froonp (who wants no).
But I have to make a choice and I think SW Norway should be a place where the Allies
should have a fair chance of making an invasion and grab the resource.

So for game play issues it's best to keep this hex a clear hex. It's not so wrong we
can't live with it. So my vote is now NO.

If there is more discussion on these 4, let's hear it. I'll make some sort of a decision in the next 2 days on these too. Of course, my preference would be for the group to reach near-unanimous agreement, so I don't have to decide.

That's a good point. We are getting down on the remaining issues on the list so we can finally close the Scandinavian map discussions and move on to other map issues.

What all MWIF map section discussions have shown is that there is always room for improvement. The more eyes looking the better the result. [:)] So I wonder if there are any other sections of the map we have not looked at yet that would deserve our attention? Maybe Australia and New Zealand? Maybe India, Burma, Malaya etc.?

At least it's fun for all of us contributing to the discussion to see the great progress of the maps. And it makes the waiting for MWIF to finally finish easier to bear. [:D]

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

I believe the hex east of Oslo should belong to Sweden.
The Swedish-norweigian border is in the middle of the norweigian west coast and stockholm. on the map it is 10 hexes so 5 hexes should be swedish and 5 Norweigian, now 6 are Norweigain and 4 Swedish.
But maybe that's for game purposes.

I agree. I'd say that most of Norway south of Trondheim is to wide compared to Sweden or Sweden to narrow. However to fix this within the hexgrid available seems hard and not necessary in my opinion. And we do need to let our sad Norwegian brothers feel big for once. [:'(]

How will you find space to name all the finnish lakes?

For the moment I did not enter the name of the Lakes, neither the Finnish nor the Swedish. I have them on my drawn map, but not yet on the real MWiF map, but I'm not sure if Steve would want them all. We'll see. This is very very easy to add anywhen.

Maybe Australia and New Zealand? Maybe India, Burma, Malaya etc.?

Burma and Malaya are already dealt with in the "MWiF Map Review - Pacific Islands" thread.
I've also already done Northeastern Australia.
But I now realize that I only posted abstracts of these maps, and that Burma & Malaya were not shown [&:].

I'll post them to this thread then !

India is for some time in the future, as would be more Pacific Islands (South East pacific was not yet reviewed), as well as Manchuria and Siberia. I would also like to review Central America. Well we'll see.

ORIGINAL: Toed

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

I believe the hex east of Oslo should belong to Sweden.
The Swedish-norweigian border is in the middle of the norweigian west coast and stockholm. on the map it is 10 hexes so 5 hexes should be swedish and 5 Norweigian, now 6 are Norweigain and 4 Swedish.
But maybe that's for game purposes.

I agree. I'd say that most of Norway south of Trondheim is to wide compared to Sweden or Sweden to narrow. However to fix this within the hexgrid available seems hard and not necessary in my opinion. And we do need to let our sad Norwegian brothers feel big for once. [:'(]

We'll keep the border where it is then. Anyway, it would put it much near from Oslo, maybe too near ?

You might want to place Tromsø on the island rather than on the mainland.
Tromsø is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island:
http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg



[quote]ORIGINAL: Froonp

I had time at my job this morning, so I redid the northern coastlines to have a better place for Tromso. This was not 100% accurate previously. Now it is better.

You might want to place Tromsø on the island rather than on the mainland.
Tromsø is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island:
http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg

Well, looking at it from Google Earth from 11,24 km high reveals that Tromso sits in a 10 km x 3 km island, separated from the mainland by a 700 to 1800 m wide arm of sea.
Should this really count as an island ?

What are the other's opinions ?

ORIGINAL: Froonp

You might want to place Tromsø on the island rather than on the mainland.
Tromsø is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island:
http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg

Well, looking at it from Google Earth from 11,24 km high reveals that Tromso sits in a 10 km x 3 km island, separated from the mainland by a 700 to 1800 m wide arm of sea.
Should this really count as an island ?

What are the other's opinions ?

I assume this is similar to Singapore, where the hex is bigger than the island where the city actually is. That's always a messy situation to translate to a hex grid. We could either just ignore the interveneing water or place Tromso on an island with a straits connectnig it to the mainland. We just had a similar problem with Stockholm, where the hex in which the city is located has a lot of other terrain features. Deciding which features are important enough to warrant appearing on the MWIF map is a judgment call. In this case it is best made by people who know the area best.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

You might want to place Tromsø on the island rather than on the mainland.
Tromsø is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island:
http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg

Well, looking at it from Google Earth from 11,24 km high reveals that Tromso sits in a 10 km x 3 km island, separated from the mainland by a 700 to 1800 m wide arm of sea.
Should this really count as an island ?

What are the other's opinions ?

I think it's good enough as it is. You can't have every little detail on a map. Such a small island can be considered to be integrated into the mainland close to it.

I like the way Scandinavia looks right now and don't think we should try to improve it indefinitely. Sometimes we have to say good enough is good enough and move on to more important areas. [:)] I feel that focus could now be shifted to Burma, Malaya, New Guinea etc. Our time can be better spent there now.

We have all contributed a lot to improve the Scandinavian part of the MWIF map. So lets be content with what be already managed and move on. It's impossible to make the map in a way that everybody would be 100% satisfied with every hex. Our voting shows there are different opinions, but I think the end result is going to be great even though some of my suggestions were voted down. [;)]

Time to move on and get the last 4 items on our voting list settled. I guess Steve could by maybe the end of this week make a decision of yes and no for the remaining items based upon the votes at that time. When we have split votes (like for Tampere) then I believe he has to make his choice and we should support his decision. There are pros and cons for every suggestion and we can live with the result regardless of a yes or no.

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

ORIGINAL: Froonp

You might want to place Tromsø on the island rather than on the mainland.
Tromsø is actually a quite small island in a fjordlike strait between the mainland and a larger island:
http://www.rhd.uit.no/art/tuss.jpg

Well, looking at it from Google Earth from 11,24 km high reveals that Tromso sits in a 10 km x 3 km island, separated from the mainland by a 700 to 1800 m wide arm of sea.
Should this really count as an island ?

What are the other's opinions ?

I think it's good enough as it is. You can't have every little detail on a map. Such a small island can be considered to be integrated into the mainland close to it.

I like the way Scandinavia looks right now and don't think we should try to improve it indefinitely. Sometimes we have to say good enough is good enough and move on to more important areas. [:)] I feel that focus could now be shifted to Burma, Malaya, New Guinea etc. Our time can be better spent there now.

We have all contributed a lot to improve the Scandinavian part of the MWIF map. So lets be content with what be already managed and move on. It's impossible to make the map in a way that everybody would be 100% satisfied with every hex. Our voting shows there are different opinions, but I think the end result is going to be great even though some of my suggestions were voted down. [;)]

Time to move on and get the last 4 items on our voting list settled. I guess Steve could by maybe the end of this week make a decision of yes and no for the remaining items based upon the votes at that time. When we have split votes (like for Tampere) then I believe he has to make his choice and we should support his decision. There are pros and cons for every suggestion and we can live with the result regardless of a yes or no.

Yeah, I'll do that.

I might add that for people who are really upset by what I decide, most of these decisions concern map data which will be available in the comma separated values files (CSVs) and can be edited by the players who feel an overwhelming need to do so.

just curious why Bergen is now five hexes away from Oslo, rather than the four on WiF:FE paper maps?

Note that without using the Scandinavian map at all, Trondheim is in supply from Oslo and the Germans gain a SUB base in supply in clear weather on the Norwegian Sea.

But now that Narvik no longer figures in for moving the Swedish Iron Ore, Norway is more generally a potential Allied theater in the mid-game than any other outcome.

ORIGINAL: trees trees

But now that Narvik no longer figures in for moving the Swedish Iron Ore, Norway is more generally a potential Allied theater in the mid-game than any other outcome.

You're wrong (see previous post #174)

Note that without using the Scandinavian map at all, Trondheim is in supply from Oslo and the Germans gain a SUB base in supply in clear weather on the Norwegian Sea.

It is true if playing without the Scandinavia map.
Playing without the scandinavia map leads to gross simplifications.

Playing MWiF will be different than playing with the old off-map boxes, this is sure, but this is a blessing too.