MWiF Map Review - America

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: abj9562
Supply could be a major issue in the western USA. Since highways have been a significant source of moving goods in the us perhaps a highway or two should appear with the same rules as railroads. Hwy 66 comes to mind very quickly due to its extreme importance in the wetward migration during the depression and dustbowl eras. Maybe a few others too. This might eliminate the empty map syndrome without placing insignificant cities.

Well, isn't there already enough east-west rails on this map ? There are a lot !
There are rules for roads in WiF FE, but WiF FE roads are used in WiF FE in places where historicaly there was a transportation mean that was not as good as rail (road, river), but when there are so much rail already, WiF FE roads are useless to me.
Opinions ?

Note, Roads of MWiF already on the map :
- a tiny bit of the Silk Road (China)
- Burma Road (Burma, China)
- Arctic Highway (Finland)
- Kasai River Road (Belgian Congo)
- Amazon River Road (Brazil)

You see, those are all remote locations with a mean of transporting goods, but not as efficient as rail.

Another option would be to mark cities with significant military installations  even if there was no city of importance there. Especially since there were large bases for armor and air throughout the SW USA during the war.

Well, I'll leave the decision about this to Steve, I for one am happy with the existing cities. A couple of excceptions can be considered too.

Adding cities west of the Mississippi should only be done when an obvious error has occurred. There is not a lot out there, especially in 1940. I also am opposed to adding roads. If the rail lines exist, then transporting troops and munitions is easy. If they don't, it isn't.

As for the Boston to NYC stretch of coastline, I take back what I said earlier and now agree with Patrice about keeping things as they are in WIF FE - unless a specific reason for the change can be proposed.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

4. The coast between NY City and Boston could almost be filled in with the cities in Massachusetts or Connecticut or thereabouts like Providence RI (249k), Worcester MA (203k), Hartford CT (177k), or Springfield MA (163k).

The coastline from Boston to Washington D. C. is now often referred to as a megametropolis - one continuous stretch of cities + suburbs. So I agree with your suggestion that the hexes from Boston to NYC being all city hexes.

OK, I'll look at adding cities in the empty hexes.

Coastline from Boston to Washington DC.
- hex 63,318 : Boston
- hex 64,318 : ?
- hex 64,317 : Bridgeport minor port for the moment.
- hex 64,316 or 65,316 : ?
- hex 66,316 : New York
- hex 66,315 : Newark
- hex 67,314 : Philadelphia
- hex 67,313 : ?
- hex 68,313 : Baltimore
- hex 69,312 : Washington
I suppose there should be no additionnal cities in lower New Jersey (2 forest hexes south of NYC) and no additional cities in the peninsula south of Philadelphia (what's its name ?).

So that is 3-4 cities to add.
PS : See post #23 or #33 for the graphics of this area.

The peninsula south of Philly is Delaware in the north and Maryland in the south. Delaware (my wife lived there until she went to college) doesn't have much in it. There is Wilmington in the north and the rest is mostly chicken farms ("Lower Delaware" is sometimes referred to as "Slower Delaware"). Most of this peninsula is fishing and/or beach resort towns. Though that could be said of a lot of the eastern seaboard of the US.

[Froonp]

As for the Boston to NYC stretch of coastline, I take back what I said earlier and now agree with Patrice about keeping things as they are in WIF FE - unless a specific reason for the change can be proposed.

Not that I would like to add chaos to the discussion (advocating the "add cities" side while I advocated the "add no cities "side previously), but if we look at the WiF FE map for the area, there is nearly 1 city per hex.

So putting 1 city per hex is also what I called in post #54 "making it like WiF FE".

[sajbalk]

I understand the concept of not adding too many cities, but I think the Boston to NYC stretch should be filled in and Ohio should get another city. Moving to another topic, some rivers should show lake status.
 
1. Cumberland in Tennessee and Kentucky.
2. Colorado in Nevada.
3. Missouri in the Dakotas.
4. I am not sure when Lake Powell in Utah was completed, but this would be another candidate.
 
 

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: sajbalk
I understand the concept of not adding too many cities, but I think the Boston to NYC stretch should be filled in and Ohio should get another city. Moving to another topic, some rivers should show lake status.

1. Cumberland in Tennessee and Kentucky.
2. Colorado in Nevada.
3. Missouri in the Dakotas.
4. I am not sure when Lake Powell in Utah was completed, but this would be another candidate.

The lake status is because they are impassable, I gather? For instance taking a corps sized unit in combat across the Grand Canyon wouldn't work out very well.

[Anendrue]

Edited. See next post.

[Anendrue]

More Rio Grande river changes after i thought about it some more. Add the hex 2 hexes SE of El Paso and raise the river North one more hex where you moved it earlier to include the rough terrain hex. The oil fields could use some adjusting. I included an oil field map of Texas to help on that one. The major fields are named and outlined on the map should give some pretty accurate perspective on the placement. Sorry about the changes; it is my home state and like most Texans I am overly proud and slightly obnoxious about it. [;)]

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: abj9562
More Rio Grande river changes after i thought about it some more. Add the hex 2 hexes SE of El Paso and raise the river North one more hex where you moved it earlier to include the rough terrain hex. The oil fields could use some adjusting. I included an oil field map of Texas to help on that one. The major fields are named and outlined on the map should give some pretty accurate perspective on the placement. Sorry about the changes; it is my home state and like most Texans I am overly proud and slightly obnoxious about it. [;)]

No need to apologize. The best advice we get on the geography of different regions is from people who live there. Indeed, we depend on input from 'locals' to improve the map.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: sajbalk
I understand the concept of not adding too many cities, but I think the Boston to NYC stretch should be filled in and Ohio should get another city. Moving to another topic, some rivers should show lake status.

1. Cumberland in Tennessee and Kentucky.
2. Colorado in Nevada.
3. Missouri in the Dakotas.
4. I am not sure when Lake Powell in Utah was completed, but this would be another candidate.

The lake status is because they are impassable, I gather? For instance taking a corps sized unit in combat across the Grand Canyon wouldn't work out very well.

Talking about the Grand Canyon, as it is made not, it is perfectly crossable by any unit. It is just a river between Clear, Desert and Mountains hexes.
Can something be done to make Grand Canyon hexsides impassable without putting an Alpine hexside or a Lake hexside ?

[Anendrue]

If you could put an alpine hexside and then overlay that with an additional sea and then lake hexsides; I believe you'd get the impassability to all land units and it would even appear to be seperated by water. However I do't know if the multiple hexsides would work, It depends on how Steve programmed it.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: abj9562

More Rio Grande river changes after i thought about it some more. Add the hex 2 hexes SE of El Paso and raise the river North one more hex where you moved it earlier to include the rough terrain hex. The oil fields could use some adjusting. I included an oil field map of Texas to help on that one. The major fields are named and outlined on the map should give some pretty accurate perspective on the placement. Sorry about the changes; it is my home state and like most Texans I am overly proud and slightly obnoxious about it. [;)]

Well, I'm not too keen on moving the border much to the north, not that I am reluctant to cede American territory to Mexico, but the overall USA border wouldn't look good. You see, west of El Paso the border is kind of an horizontal line, and that horizontal line, if prolongated to the east, should pass well north of the Rio Grande Great Bend, which would not be the case anymore if I make the bend push more to the north.

However, I though about another solution, here is a rough sketch of it :
Chihuahua is about 180 km from the USA / Mexican border, and it would fall 1 hex from it with my sketch, but if I place the city in the SE corner of the hex, it would not show very much.

Well, anyway I still prefer it as it is now.

[gbirkeli]

I have a remark regarding Minneapolis and St. Paul. The two cities are quite close, about 15 km apart (according to Google Earth). That is about the distance between Marseille and Aubagne. It might be better to leave St. Paul out.

Gaute

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: abj9562
More Rio Grande river changes after i thought about it some more. Add the hex 2 hexes SE of El Paso and raise the river North one more hex where you moved it earlier to include the rough terrain hex. The oil fields could use some adjusting. I included an oil field map of Texas to help on that one. The major fields are named and outlined on the map should give some pretty accurate perspective on the placement. Sorry about the changes; it is my home state and like most Texans I am overly proud and slightly obnoxious about it. [;)]

Well, I'm not too keen on moving the border much to the north, not that I am reluctant to cede American territory to Mexico, but the overall USA border wouldn't look good. You see, west of El Paso the border is kind of an horizontal line, and that horizontal line, if prolongated to the east, should pass well north of the Rio Grande Great Bend, which would not be the case anymore if I make the bend push more to the north.

However, I though about another solution, here is a rough sketch of it :
Chihuahua is about 180 km from the USA / Mexican border, and it would fall 1 hex from it with my sketch, but if I place the city in the SE corner of the hex, it would not show very much.

Well, anyway I still prefer it as it is now.

Some of this will be improved by having the river lines drawn in freehand instead of rigidly following the hexgrid. Not much can be done about the border between the countries though - that will match the hexgrid. For example, here is the Rhine river line.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: gbirkeli
I have a remark regarding Minneapolis and St. Paul. The two cities are quite close, about 15 km apart (according to Google Earth). That is about the distance between Marseille and Aubagne. It might be better to leave St. Paul out.

Gaute

A good point but I wonder about how to model that they are on different sides of the river. If land combat ever does occur here, the opposing forces are likely to be on opposite sides of the river. In which case, perhaps both hexes should be modelled as city hexes because of the advantages that would provide: easier to defend, increased stacking for air units, and a primary supply source. But I only visited there once, for a half a day, so I will defer to the judgment of others.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: gbirkeli
I have a remark regarding Minneapolis and St. Paul. The two cities are quite close, about 15 km apart (according to Google Earth). That is about the distance between Marseille and Aubagne. It might be better to leave St. Paul out.
Gaute

A good point but I wonder about how to model that they are on different sides of the river. If land combat ever does occur here, the opposing forces are likely to be on opposite sides of the river. In which case, perhaps both hexes should be modelled as city hexes because of the advantages that would provide: easier to defend, increased stacking for air units, and a primary supply source. But I only visited there once, for a half a day, so I will defer to the judgment of others.

Both cities are on the WiF FE maps, so for me they are on the MWiF map.
But I noticed that MWiF added a couple of extra cities already to the USA. Newark and Spokane.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: gbirkeli
I have a remark regarding Minneapolis and St. Paul. The two cities are quite close, about 15 km apart (according to Google Earth). That is about the distance between Marseille and Aubagne. It might be better to leave St. Paul out.
Gaute

A good point but I wonder about how to model that they are on different sides of the river. If land combat ever does occur here, the opposing forces are likely to be on opposite sides of the river. In which case, perhaps both hexes should be modelled as city hexes because of the advantages that would provide: easier to defend, increased stacking for air units, and a primary supply source. But I only visited there once, for a half a day, so I will defer to the judgment of others.

Both cities are on the WiF FE maps, so for me they are on the MWiF map.
But I noticed that MWiF added a couple of extra cities already to the USA. Newark and Spokane.

There are a lot of 'Newark's in the US. The one in northern NJ is an ok addition. It represents several smaller cities across the river from NYC, which together make up a significant urban area (Newark airport is there and a lot of industry).

I thought about adding Camden/Trenton - across from Philadelphia - but that area is more woods than urban.

I don't know about Spokane.

[Froonp]

However, I though about another solution, here is a rough sketch of it :
Chihuahua is about 180 km from the USA / Mexican border, and it would fall 1 hex from it with my sketch, but if I place the city in the SE corner of the hex, it would not show very much.

Just wanted to point out that this mod (Post #71) is not adopted on the map, I'm waiting for comments about it, whether it is good or not.

[Missouri_Rebel]

I like the flow of the rivers but couldn't help but notice that they seem rather narrow compared to the hexsides. I think that a wider representation would help avoid some confusion and just look better. What do you think?

Also, I am not familiar with the rules but are there any differences between smaller river and large rivers or is it either passible or lake-like? i.e.impassible
Rivers such as the Mississippi and Volga might be different than some of the others due to their size

A variant width hand-drawn river would look GREAT but, would be a huge pain considering the ammount of rivers on the map and probably not worth the time and trouble. Any drawing tool that could do that, make em look unique and realistic?

Just a thought.

Mo reb

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel
I like the flow of the rivers but couldn't help but notice that they seem rather narrow compared to the hexsides. I think that a wider representation would help avoid some confusion and just look better. What do you think?

Also, I am not familiar with the rules but are there any differences between smaller river and large rivers or is it either passible or lake-like? i.e.impassible
Rivers such as the Mississippi and Volga might be different than some of the others due to their size

A variant width hand-drawn river would look GREAT but, would be a huge pain considering the ammount of rivers on the map and probably not worth the time and trouble. Any drawing tool that could do that, make em look unique and realistic?

Just a thought.

Mo reb

The rivers drawn in so far are perfect replicas (pixel for pixel) of the ones in the WIF Final Edition European map. Probably of interest here is that the scale is roughly 90 kilometers per hex (~56 miles) so the rivers are actually way too thick already. A river 1 mile wide should only get 1 or 2 pixels in width; what you see in the screen shots are about 3 pixels wide.

We'll stick with what Australian Design Group did in WIF FE for rendering the rivers.

[Froonp]

Also, I am not familiar with the rules but are there any differences between smaller river and large rivers or is it either passible or lake-like? i.e.impassible
Rivers such as the Mississippi and Volga might be different than some of the others due to their size

Unfortunately, WiF FE does not have 2 kinds of rivers. All rivers are the same.
However, some rivers are so wide that some parts of them are represented by lake hexsides. But this is very rare too, there is none of these on the European maps.
I would have liked the Volga to have those, and I added some on the Urals map, but not on the Europe map.