Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:34 pm**

ORIGINAL: Norman42

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

I am intrigued that the Mannerheim Line is not shown as an on-map fortification, as it held the Soviets up for quite a few months. Or is the single hexside considered troublesome enough?

In WiF, map-printed fortifications usually represent massive construction elements on a strategic level. Reinforced earthworks, concrete pillboxes and bunkers, deep minefields, and/or massive large calibre gun emplacements in armored blockhouses. The Mannerhiem Line while it was effective in blunting and repelling the Soviet Winter Offensive, was more a series of strongpoints anchored by poor terrain held by very determined troops vs a rather poorly planned operation. A few anti-tank ditches, trenches, and hidden machine nests in log bunkers doesn't really compare to the massive fortress works of the Maginot and Sevastopol, or the giant naval artillery turrets of Singapore.

An argument *could* be made that a single hexside fortification facing Germany should be printed at Eben Emal in Belgium, as this kind of constructed defence was in fact a reality and was the major worry of the OKW in the planning of the Belgium operations. Since this area already has a river line defence I assumed that Harry and Co. felt a fortress hexside was too much.

.

An optional rule lets players build their own fortifications, pretty much anywhere. These 'new' fortifications effect attacking strength by only 1/2 while 'permanent' fortifications do so by 1/3. Lulea in Sweden has been given 'new' fortications to start the game - an MWIF change from WIF FE. Germany has several 'new' fortifications in hand at the start of the 1939 scenarios, and they can placed those where they want (usually opposing the Maginot Line).

Posted: **Sun Feb 10, 2008 11:55 pm**

Ah, but can fortifications be placed in a neutral Minor, and in particular a Minor with special rules like Finland?  Can Germany donate one of those fortifications on the production spiral to Finland before the Soviets attack?

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:12 am**

the at-start ones could not go to Finland. I'm fairly sure you can build them and then place them in an active aligned minor, cuz I've seen them in front of me in Rumania. They take five turns to build and can not be placed in an enemy ZoC the turn they arrive.

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 1:01 am**

ORIGINAL: brian brian

the at-start ones could not go to Finland. I'm fairly sure you can build them and then place them in an active aligned minor, cuz I've seen them in front of me in Rumania. They take five turns to build and can not be placed in an enemy ZoC the turn they arrive.

Yes.

By active, Brian means the country is at war.

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:29 pm**

Surely not? Can't Germany activate Romania before Germany is at war with the USSR? How about Finland? Or am I getting 'activate' confused with 'aligned'?

So the question then would be: Can I build a fort in an inactive but aligned Minor?

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 6:07 pm**

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

Surely not? Can't Germany activate Romania before Germany is at war with the USSR? How about Finland? Or am I getting 'activate' confused with 'aligned'?

So the question then would be: Can I build a fort in an inactive but aligned Minor?

An aligned minor is active, so Germany can build forts in Finland and Rumania when they are aligned to Germany.
Please note that generaly Finland can only be aligned when Germany & Russia are at war. Except if Russia declares war to Finland (and Germany aligns it).

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 6:12 pm**

For the purposes of WiF:FE, "activate" and "align" are identical - when you align a minor, it joins your side and is at war with everyone you are at war with.
 
It is possible for Germany to align Rumania and/or Finland before being at war with the USSR; the exact circumstances are described in section 19 of RAW.

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:21 pm**

I've read section 19.6.1 of RAW, and as far as I can see there is no facility for Germany to align Finland while the USSR is attacking Finland ... only once Finland is neutral again.  Is this correct?
 
How then are Finnish units rebuilt while they are fighting a lonely war with the Soviet Union?  And can they themselves build a fort, if they are not allowed to use one constructed by the Germans?

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:29 pm**

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

I've read section 19.6.1 of RAW, and as far as I can see there is no facility for Germany to align Finland while the USSR is attacking Finland ... only once Finland is neutral again. Is this correct?

How then are Finnish units rebuilt while they are fighting a lonely war with the Soviet Union? And can they themselves build a fort, if they are not allowed to use one constructed by the Germans?

When Russia DoWs Finland, it has to align on a Major Power on the other side of Russia. Germany is the best choice. Then Finland is aligned to Germany.

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:50 pm**

Post 7: My 1936 map shows Turkish rail-lines going from the Soviet border to just a little bit beyond Erzerum, rail-lines going up from Aleppo as far as Malatva (3SW Erzerum) and the line from Samsun going as far as Sivas (2SE 1E Samsun) as shown on the game-map.  But the 1942 map shows not only the Erzerum to Aleppo line completed as shown on the game-map, but also the Erzerum to Ankara link via Sivas completed.  That's to say, the Samsun rail-line should continue 1SE 1E from Sivas (the valley) to connect with the existing line.
 
Of course, if Germany were to ship Caucasus resources through aligned Turkey, such a rail-line would make a Commonwealth intervention to cut the line just across the Syrian border a non-starter.  So perhaps this rail spur has been left out intentionally?

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:57 pm**

ORIGINAL: Froonp

When Russia DoWs Finland, it has to align on a Major Power on the other side of Russia. Germany is the best choice. Then Finland is aligned to Germany.

So during the Winter War, forts constructed by Germany can be placed in Finland? But when Finland becomes neutral again at the end of the Winter War, it automatically stops being aligned to Germany, which means Finnish units cannot be rebuilt or forts placed until a new alignment occurs? Have I got it right now?

Posted: **Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:01 pm**

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
ORIGINAL: Froonp

When Russia DoWs Finland, it has to align on a Major Power on the other side of Russia. Germany is the best choice. Then Finland is aligned to Germany.
So during the Winter War, forts constructed by Germany can be placed in Finland? But when Finland becomes neutral again at the end of the Winter War, it automatically stops being aligned to Germany, which means Finnish units cannot be rebuilt or forts placed until a new alignment occurs? Have I got it right now?

Yes. But forts take 5 turns to build (10 months), so if the war is finished before the fort is placed on the map, it won't be able to be placed in Finland.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2008 8:53 pm**

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

19th and last in the series.

Southern Europe overview. I had to trim this to get it to fit within the 500kb file size limit.

I am sure that Patrice would welcome comments on the map labels. He did a lot of work on them.

Absolutely awesome, the lables are wonderful. I love the little detail ones, e.g. Monte Casino et al. A gaming work of art.

Posted: **Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:42 am**

ORIGINAL: Norman42

An argument *could* be made that a single hexside fortification facing Germany should be printed at Eben Emal in Belgium, as this kind of constructed defence was in fact a reality and was the major worry of the OKW in the planning of the Belgium operations. Since this area already has a river line defence I assumed that Harry and Co. felt a fortress hexside was too much.

I visited Eben Emael this summer with a few of my equally geeky friends and took a 3-4 hour tour of it, and it is truly an impressing place. However, since it only took the Germans some 30+ minutes to render it essentially inoperable, I think it is correctly represented on the WiF map.

Posted: **Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:55 pm**

In the RAW, I can't find a specific reference to Hango.  Is it simply considered a third Finnish Borderlands?  If so, perhaps it should be so marked on the map?
 
The Salla Finnish Borderlands should really extend further south.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War and note the southern end of the lost territory relative to the large lakes and the White Sea.  The Soviets were anxious to create a buffer zone to protect the Murmansk rail-line.

Posted: **Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:14 pm**

ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

19th and last in the series.

Southern Europe overview. I had to trim this to get it to fit within the 500kb file size limit.

I am sure that Patrice would welcome comments on the map labels. He did a lot of work on them.

Absolutely awesome, the lables are wonderful. I love the little detail ones, e.g. Monte Casino et al. A gaming work of art.

I think that we're open to add more, the little ones, if you've got good ideas.

Posted: **Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:19 pm**

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

In the RAW, I can't find a specific reference to Hango. Is it simply considered a third Finnish Borderlands? If so, perhaps it should be so marked on the map?

In MWiF it is simply part of the Finnish Borderlands. It's a little small to write it on the map.

The Salla Finnish Borderlands should really extend further south. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War and note the southern end of the lost territory relative to the large lakes and the White Sea. The Soviets were anxious to create a buffer zone to protect the Murmansk rail-line.

Well, you're right indeed. Adding a third hex in the south would be OK ? Adding a fourth would be too much as the Salla area is going slimer and slimer the southern it goes.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:13 am**

I agree that adding a single extra hex (southwest) to Salla would be quite sufficient.
 
I do think some identification of Hango's unusual status needs to be marked on the map, in a smaller font no doubt, because newbies aren't likely to be aware as we are of the terms of the 1940 treaty.  At the moment it looks a bit like a Baltic Gibraltar.  The fact that it doesn't have a red side to the west sort of implies it might belong to Sweden, the same way that the Aland Islands belong to Finland.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:58 am**

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Aland Islands belong to Finland.

Humbug! It should belong to Sweden!

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:17 am**

[blockquote]quote:

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Aland Islands belong to Finland.
[/blockquote]

Humbug! It should belong to Sweden!

 
Hrmpff! And so should all of Finland.

Matrix Games Forums

Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?

RE: Europe map?