Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

Surely Bergen should have direct access to the Norwegian Sea, else why would the German player ever base the Bismarck there in preference to, say, Tronheim?

As far as I am aware, Bergen was not used to base capital ships. Bismarck stopped in Bergen purely to top up on fuel prior to her first and last break-out into the Atlantic.

When the Germans based their fleet in Norway later in the war to threaten both the Arctic convoys and future break-outs, this was generally in Trondheim, or Tromso - not as far South as Bergen. Therefore I do not think this needs alteration.

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

The large lake in Northern Ireland really need to appear.

Lough Neagh is 25 km long and 15 km wide. This is not large enough to be relevant in a WiF FE hex.

For reference, an hex is on an average of 89 km for side to side, and so its hexside is 51 km long.
A lake that is 25 km long is not an obstacle in an hex that is larger than it is, so has not to be represented.

Now, if it is for cosmetic purpose only, this is another matter.
As far as I know, except for having lakes' shape looking like their real counterpart, we included no lake for cosmetic purposes only.

Very nice artwork.

Regards,

Grell

ORIGINAL: Grell

Very nice artwork.

Regards,

Grell

Thanks.

Welcome to the forum. Please let me know what you think about stuff, both pluses and minuses. It's primarily through feedback from forum members that I've been able to strengthen the quality of MWIF.

Well, I guess I should say that the beta testers are indispensible too. But those guys just keep telling me what I've done wrong - they remind me of my father.[;)]

 
Ok here is a question:
 
The staits hexsides that parallel a sea zone boundary (such as Gibraltar>Tangier; Olbia>Corsica, etc), in which seazone are they considered in for purposes of:
 
Rule:

2.4.2 Limited Supply Paths
Option 12 (limited supply across straits): A unit can't trace supply across a straits hexside, if the presence of enemy units would prevent you tracing an overseas supply path into that sea area.

 
Do you need to cut off sea supply in both sea areas on either side of the boundary, or just the side the straits arrow is printed on?  The latter would make where the arrows are placed quite important.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

There is too few room to write "Finnish Borderlands" here.

Perhaps just put in "FB" in red print so people would know what those sectioned off small areas represent.

Bismarck stopped in Bergen purely to top up on fuel

 
Correct. 
 
The Kriegsmarine only based some small patrol vessels here (mostly captured Norwegian ones) and a few older coastal UBoats since it was well within RAF bomber range and larger vessels would have been juicy targets.

ORIGINAL: Norman42

 
Ok here is a question:

The staits hexsides that parallel a sea zone boundary (such as Gibraltar>Tangier; Olbia>Corsica, etc), in which seazone are they considered in for purposes of:

Rule:

2.4.2 Limited Supply Paths
Option 12 (limited supply across straits): A unit can't trace supply across a straits hexside, if the presence of enemy units would prevent you tracing an overseas supply path into that sea area.

Do you need to cut off sea supply in both sea areas on either side of the boundary, or just the side the straits arrow is printed on?  The latter would make where the arrows are placed quite important.

Harry Rowland has answered this specific question in a pending list of clarifications to the RAW. You have to cut off both sea areas to prevent the straits from being used by the enemy.

By the way, what in your opinion is the right english exonym for Hango ? Hango (as you write), or Hanko as I wrote on the map.
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanko) says that Hango is the Swedish spelling and Hanko is the Finnish spelling. Moreover, the english speaking Wikipedia entry is Hanko rather than Hango.
If you look for Hango in Wikipedia you don't find Hanko.
So ?
Hanko or Hango ?

My suggestion when naming the two ports in Finnish Borderlands (Hanko and Vyborg) is to be consequent and base the names on the same language. While the Finnish Borderlands are Finnish at the start of the game in 1939, the Finnish names would perhaps be the ones to prefer. Hanko is here the correct Finnish name, while Vyborg is the Russian name for Finnish Viipuri and would need to be changed.
Of course as a Swede I wouldn't object using the Swedish names Hangö and Viborg [;)], but I believe they are used to a lesser extent in English naming. And besides almost every city and port in Finland has a Swedish name, including Tampere and Helsinki, so I would suggest to use Hanko and Viipuri.

ORIGINAL: ahlner

By the way, what in your opinion is the right english exonym for Hango ? Hango (as you write), or Hanko as I wrote on the map.
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanko) says that Hango is the Swedish spelling and Hanko is the Finnish spelling. Moreover, the english speaking Wikipedia entry is Hanko rather than Hango.
If you look for Hango in Wikipedia you don't find Hanko.
So ?
Hanko or Hango ?

My suggestion when naming the two ports in Finnish Borderlands (Hanko and Vyborg) is to be consequent and base the names on the same language. While the Finnish Borderlands are Finnish at the start of the game in 1939, the Finnish names would perhaps be the ones to prefer. Hanko is here the correct Finnish name, while Vyborg is the Russian name for Finnish Viipuri and would need to be changed.
Of course as a Swede I wouldn't object using the Swedish names Hangö and Viborg [;)], but I believe they are used to a lesser extent in English naming. And besides almost every city and port in Finland has a Swedish name, including Tampere and Helsinki, so I would suggest to use Hanko and Viipuri.

I would tend to agree with you 100% here.

Last year, I did not want to rename Vyborg as Viipuri, as I did not want to rename any name appearing on the WiF FE map. But since that time, a couple of places have been renamed to a better consistent English spelling, or commonly used names, so now I would agree on renaming Vyborg.

For Hanko, I stay with Hanko for the moment, as your point is the same as mine. Seems that Hango is only the Swedish spelling, not the international, or English spelling.

Thanks.

Just like to echo the call of good work.
 
Forgot that Cernauti was part of Bessarabia.  The old Wiffe maps have it outside, it stays part of Rumania after the Soviets demand the province.  But this is the more accurate representation, correct?
 
And still no change on Elba!  [:D]  That's ok I guess.
 
Anthony DeChristopher

(post 282)

Agreed. However, keep in mind that some lakes on the map are smaller than 51kms. Lake Ilmen (for instance) is 40kms max length (by 36kms max width).

ORIGINAL: jcprom

(post 282)

Agreed. However, keep in mind that some lakes on the map are smaller than 51kms. Lake Ilmen (for instance) is 40kms max length (by 36kms max width).

40 by 32, this looks like 11 km short.
But maybe it was seen as a movement & combat hindrance, or maybe it was longer in the 40s.
Als, it is in a swampy area. Maybe it is the accumulation of lakes and water filled area that caused a movement & combat hindrance, and Lake Ilmen as the largest body of water of the area was placed here to represent all.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
The spurious red political border along the NE hexside of Petsamo has yet to be removed.

This is to show that the area NE of Petsamo (Rybachi peninsula) was given to the Russians when they demanded the Finnish Borderlands.

I do think both the Rybachi Peninsula and Hango should have the initials F.B. so that new players are aware of the situation. (Never did understand why the Soviets gave back Petsamo).

We now have the slightly odd situation of a port (Petsamo post-1940) boxed in by neutral territory (USSR and Norway). Presumably the RAW does permit supply, naval movement etc to be traced through the sea portion of neutral coastal hexes?

Anyone who has been to Northern Ireland knows that Lough Neagh is a dominant feature of the province, representing a significant proportion of total surface area.  It should appear, even if non-functional.
 
The same goes for Lake Balaton in Hungary which was a significant feature in the counterattack of 1945.

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

Anyone who has been to Northern Ireland knows that Lough Neagh is a dominant feature of the province, representing a significant proportion of total surface area.  It should appear, even if non-functional.

The same goes for Lake Balaton in Hungary which was a significant feature in the counterattack of 1945.

I do not want to add visual map elements that do not affect game play. Every land hex on the map is a compromise between reality and WIF's simulated world: rivers do not run along hex edges world-wide, terrain is almost never the same throughout a hex, cities are not simple dotsin physical reality, etc..

Adding water to the map visually, that has nothing to do with game play, would be very confusing to players. We have done some of this by adding the tips to lake hexes and hexsides for cosmetuic purposes, but that has always been in direct support of lakes that do affect game play.

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
Anyone who has been to Northern Ireland knows that Lough Neagh is a dominant feature of the province, representing a significant proportion of total surface area.  It should appear, even if non-functional.

Well, I understand, but if we are to do that, we're not finished, as there are thousands of geographical features that exist on Earth, that are too small to have an effect on the WiF FE hexes, that a geographic purist like me (and you it seems) would like to add, but we have to decide what is on and what is in, as not everything can be in, as this is a game map. We should remember the purpose too.

The same goes for Lake Balaton in Hungary which was a significant feature in the counterattack of 1945.

This later one has sufficient dimensions to appear on the map [77 km long 14 km wide, I would place it on the NW hexside of the resource hex], and is noted in my list of things to add to the European Map when we will decide that the European Map is no longer Holy Land, and that we can modify it.

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
I do think both the Rybachi Peninsula and Hango should have the initials F.B. so that new players are aware of the situation. (Never did understand why the Soviets gave back Petsamo).

I'll try to add this ("FB") as you suggested, using the "Finnish Borderlands" usual font & color.

We now have the slightly odd situation of a port (Petsamo post-1940) boxed in by neutral territory (USSR and Norway). Presumably the RAW does permit supply, naval movement etc to be traced through the sea portion of neutral coastal hexes?

Sure.
The fact that this port looks landlocked has no effect on the access to this port. It would have if it was known that the Russians had the capacity to impede naval movement into and out of Petsamo, but this is not the case.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: jcprom

(post 282)

Agreed. However, keep in mind that some lakes on the map are smaller than 51kms. Lake Ilmen (for instance) is 40kms max length (by 36kms max width).

40 by 32, this looks like 11 km short.
But maybe it was seen as a movement & combat hindrance, or maybe it was longer in the 40s.
Als, it is in a swampy area. Maybe it is the accumulation of lakes and water filled area that caused a movement & combat hindrance, and Lake Ilmen as the largest body of water of the area was placed here to represent all.

Indeed maybe it was longer in the 4Os. Maybe it represents more than just the lake (in that case, the same reasoning should apply for other lakes). Or maybe the designer just thought 40kms is 80% of 51kms, so it basically covers most of the hexside (it complies with the Pareto rule: 80/20). Or maybe the designer didn't have time to evaluate lakes, since he left Balaton and others out of the game. I don't know.

What matters is most additional lakes have very little impact on game play, if any. They just add realism and historical flavor to the game.

steve and patrice, the european maps look fantastic. i just want to play now . . .

for the britain, n. germany & s. scandinavia one, it all looks good. i have some questions tho!

firstly, whether there should be a straits crossing between lubeck and the danish island hex to the northeast.

i checked on the German invasion of Denmark and German troops crossed on the mainland border in schleswig, landed from ship in Copenhagen, and took the air base in the north of the country by paratroop. they did not attempt to use the crossing from puttgarden (Lubeck hex) to Lolland and Falster islands, probably because there is a bridge between those two islands and yet another crossing after that, to Sjaelland/Zealand. it would have taken too long on the timescale the Germans were working to, with risk of delay if any of the ferries and bridges were disabled. if so they would need kriegsmarine support and if they had that they may as well go straight to copenhagen. which they did, as this operation was part of the larger 'operation weser' invasion of Norway.

but that does not mean there is not a ferry from lubeck/puttgarden to lolland island. it is about the same distance as the odense-sjaelland and lolland-langeland straits, and shorter than the copenhagen-malmo strait, all of which have crossing arrows.

in sweden, there could also be a crossing arrow from oland island, to the hex that kalmar would be in

also, i worry about scapa flow. surely the base for the main battle fleet had rail supply. according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_North_Line there is a railway that ended at thurso on the coast opposite, with a ferry to the islands and "The line did become strategically important during World War I and World War II as part of a supply route for Scapa Flow, Orkney: Jellicoe's Express linked Thurso directly with London (Euston) and Portsmouth". there is probably a case for putting in the rail line from inverness to thurso and a crossing arrow from the mainland to scapa flow/orkneys.

regards

Mike