AE Map, Base, Economic Issues [OUTDATED]

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: pad152

Will we see river movement?


There are a few "navigable" rivers that can accommodate ships up to 15,000 tons. Navigation along smaller rivers is not possible (as currently).

Andrew

Hmm Littoral Warfare...

I assume we're going to have River patrol boats?

No river patrol boats. Remember it is only the biggest of rivers that are navigable, and the navigable stretches are only short. The longest of them is the Yangtse, which is navigable all the way to Hankow.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: pad152

In CHS 2.08 I can send barges from Shanghai to Nanking but, not to Ichang or ChungKing!

That is as designed - the Yangtse is only navigable as far as Nanking on my current WitP map.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
Buck Beach
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Upland,CA,USA

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Buck Beach »

Does this mean that the Columbia river to Portland, Oregon is closed and that is not a port city?

Edit, I may have misinterpreted your post as the Yangtze was the only navigable river.
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

Does this mean that the Columbia river to Portland, Oregon is closed and that is not a port city?

No, Portland is still a port.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
treespider
Posts: 5781
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:34 am
Location: Edgewater, MD

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by treespider »

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

Does this mean that the Columbia river to Portland, Oregon is closed and that is not a port city?

No, Portland is still a port.

Andrew


Afterall it is named PORT-land...[;)]
Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910
Flying Tiger
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:45 pm
Location: ummmm... i HATE that question!

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Flying Tiger »

Is Nadzab included as a seperate base from Lae? Lae itself was never very suitable for airstrips - Nadzab on the other hand is perfect. Both should be included seperately. In 1944 a highway was built connecting Lae to Nadzab, previously only a track - not sure how you work that in game terms.
 
Is Gove included (east of Darwin)? One of the best protected (and biggest) deep water harbours in Australia, but never developed because even today there is no all weather road to it! Was a smallish fighter strip (but could have been much bigger if needed) and large PBY base.
 
Is Goroka included (highlands of PNG). a track (at best!) should connect it to Nadzab. No port (obviously!!) and only size 1 airfield (no heavy bombers). BUT... it should be NON malarial - too high for mosquitoes. It was not a significant base at any point in the war (too difficult to supply), but japs were there until at least 1943, and it could add some interesting options.
 
Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!!
 
 
Cavalry Corp
Posts: 4158
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 5:28 pm
Location: Sampford Spiney Devon UK

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Cavalry Corp »

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown




There are a few "navigable" rivers that can accommodate ships up to 15,000 tons. Navigation along smaller rivers is not possible (as currently).

Andrew

Hmm Littoral Warfare...

I assume we're going to have River patrol boats?

No river patrol boats. Remember it is only the biggest of rivers that are navigable, and the navigable stretches are only short. The longest of them is the Yangtse, which is navigable all the way to Hankow.

Andrew

Please note although the Yangtse is very long and wide its quite shallow and very shallow at times of the year - I know I have been on it all the way to Wuhan then on to Chonqing- barges yes - most others no
M
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: cavalry

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Shark7




Hmm Littoral Warfare...

I assume we're going to have River patrol boats?

No river patrol boats. Remember it is only the biggest of rivers that are navigable, and the navigable stretches are only short. The longest of them is the Yangtse, which is navigable all the way to Hankow.

Andrew

Please note although the Yangtse is very long and wide its quite shallow and very shallow at times of the year - I know I have been on it all the way to Wuhan then on to Chonqing- barges yes - most others no
M

So basically you're saying that anything with a deeper drought than a flat bottom river boat (IE Panay) would likely bottom out on the Yangtse?
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
Cavalry Corp
Posts: 4158
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 5:28 pm
Location: Sampford Spiney Devon UK

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Cavalry Corp »

Yes from Wuhan up river only shallow drafts allowed - its still a very long way

M
User avatar
Herrbear
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:17 pm
Location: Glendora, CA

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Herrbear »

ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger

...

Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!!


IIRC bases are malaria free if combined air and port = 10.

User avatar
Gen.Hoepner
Posts: 3636
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 8:00 am
Location: italy

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Gen.Hoepner »

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger

...

Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!!


IIRC bases are malaria free if combined air and port = 10.


That rule never worked unfortunately[:-]
Image
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger

...

Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!!


IIRC bases are malaria free if combined air and port = 10.


That rule never worked unfortunately[:-]

I've noticed this, too.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger

Is Nadzab included as a seperate base from Lae? Lae itself was never very suitable for airstrips - Nadzab on the other hand is perfect. Both should be included seperately. In 1944 a highway was built connecting Lae to Nadzab, previously only a track - not sure how you work that in game terms.

Nadzab is not currently included, but I might change that.
Is Gove included (east of Darwin)? One of the best protected (and biggest) deep water harbours in Australia, but never developed because even today there is no all weather road to it! Was a smallish fighter strip (but could have been much bigger if needed) and large PBY base.

Gove is included.
Is Goroka included (highlands of PNG). a track (at best!) should connect it to Nadzab. No port (obviously!!) and only size 1 airfield (no heavy bombers). BUT... it should be NON malarial - too high for mosquitoes. It was not a significant base at any point in the war (too difficult to supply), but japs were there until at least 1943, and it could add some interesting options.

No plans to include Goroka, but Wau is included.
Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!!

I don't look after the code, just the map graphics and the base list. This would be best posted in the land thread. I basically agree with the reasoning, by the way.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: cavalry
Please note although the Yangtse is very long and wide its quite shallow and very shallow at times of the year - I know I have been on it all the way to Wuhan then on to Chonqing- barges yes - most others no
M

This is how the Yangtse is represented on the AE map:

- A series of coastal hexsides links Nanking to the Pacific, so ships of any size can reach Nanking (just as they can on my current WitP map).

- Series of navigable river hexsides between Nanking and Hankow. Only ships of 15,000 tons or less can cross navigable river hexsides.

- Normal river hexsides, uncrossable by ships, upstream from Hankow. So TFs cannot move past Hankow.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by mlees »

Andrew, will your map art make clear the differences of the various parts of the Yangtse?
Flying Tiger
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:45 pm
Location: ummmm... i HATE that question!

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Flying Tiger »

quote:

ORIGINAL: Herrbear



[blockquote]quote:

ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger

...

Also, not sure if this is the correct forum, but could you PLEASE address the malaria issue. Definetly units IN COMBAT shuold suffer serious degradation from malaria zones (as they do) but secure areas far in the rear which are reasonably developed (at least to Port 3, AF 3) should not. I do not want the tedium of rotating base forces in and out of rea areas just beacause they are in a malaria zone. For the sake of the game lets just pretend (!) that some of the personnel in that unit are being sent off for R&R so the unit itself can stay where it is without slowly falling to a 0 support, 0 air support situation!!!!


[/blockquote]


IIRC bases are malaria free if combined air and port = 10.


That rule never worked unfortunately[:-]

 
 
2 problems:
1. the rule does not work!!
2. The rule does not make sense!! Yes, if a unit is IN COMBAT (ie. guys are spending their time crawling through swamps with leeches in their ears and snakes in their boots, getting bitten by a million mosquitoes, etc, etc, etc...) then there needs to be a morale penalty. BUT if the unit is happily living out the war in some small remote base (maybe a port 0, AF 0 - so max of 3 and 3) they should not be penalised - they are sleeping in huts under mosquito nets, spending their days catching waves (and the odd fish), and DDT has killed all the local bugs. Sounds like a holiday to me!! So i think the combined port+AF total of 10 is wrong - 6 should be fine - for NON combat units NOT in combat.
 
any arguments? (and yes, i know i was exaggerating the conditions slightly, but you get the picture...)
User avatar
treespider
Posts: 5781
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:34 am
Location: Edgewater, MD

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by treespider »

So what do you suggest when one side is in a 3 - 3 base and the other guy is in the same hex...but no fighting occurs today ...but it does on Wednesday...but not on thursday and maybe resumes on Saturday?
Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: mlees

Andrew, will your map art make clear the differences of the various parts of the Yangtse?

The different types of river are drawn differently, so hopefully it won't be too confusing.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by mlees »

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: mlees

Andrew, will your map art make clear the differences of the various parts of the Yangtse?

The different types of river are drawn differently, so hopefully it won't be too confusing.

Andrew

Thank you, sir.
Flying Tiger
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:45 pm
Location: ummmm... i HATE that question!

RE: Admiral's Edition Map Thread

Post by Flying Tiger »

So what do you suggest when one side is in a 3 - 3 base and the other guy is in the same hex...but no fighting occurs today ...but it does on Wednesday...but not on thursday and maybe resumes on Saturday?
 
Try to picture the reality of the situation.... if opposing units are occupying the same lump of coral then they can be considered 'in combat' even if they are not actively shooting at each other - the guys are forced to spend their days and nights sitting in foxholes or on patrol and a a result getting bitten by mozzies, eaten by scorpions, and generally feeling irritated - thus a morale penalty. If on the other hand the particular lump of coral is secure then the majority of personnel can be assumed to NOT be 'suffering' in this way - thus no penalty. Make sense?? 
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”