Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: mlees

In CWiF, the Maginot fort hexsides dissappeared from the map when overrun by the Huns. This graphical feature remains, correct?

No. As Patrice noted, when an enemy enters a hex, the fortificatiosn are destroyed. This applies to both preexisting and newly constructed forts.

I have the code set up to maintain the original color for preexisting fortifications at all times but to change the color fo newly constructed ones to whoever occupies the hex. So the newly constructed Italian forts in North Africa could change color to German gray if they are occupied by German units. It makes no difference to game play whatsoever.

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Neilster

I have to admit to not being wild about the design of the fort icon thingies. They look like crashed Space Invaders. Still, I'll get used to it. It's good to see more progress.

Cheers, Neilster

They didn't crash. The tape worms killed them.

Hahahaha! (John Wayne voice) Well, I'm giving it to you straight, pilgrim.

Cheers, Neilster

I know the forts are supposed to dissapear.

Maybe my question was poorly worded.

I meant to ask if MWiF removes the fort icons when overrun by the enemy, just as CWiF did. I think Shannon said "yes".

I wouldn't worry about the permanent forts disappearing underneath multiple counters. If you forgot about the Maginot, Sevastopol, or Singapore, you are probably having a lot of other problems playing WiF already.

How the constructed forts look will be interesting. Is is possible to draw them directly on the hex-line so they disappear a bit less underneath counters?

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I wouldn't worry about the permanent forts disappearing underneath multiple counters. If you forgot about the Maginot, Sevastopol, or Singapore, you are probably having a lot of other problems playing WiF already.

How the constructed forts look will be interesting. Is is possible to draw them directly on the hex-line so they disappear a bit less underneath counters?

No.

The newly constructed forts will be just like the preexisting ones except for a color change to the underlying stars (black to white). There isn't a lot of room to work with (as always). In some of the variations we looked at, placing the forts to close to the border created a mess when there were forts on both sides of the hexside. This happens immediately when the Germans place their newly constructed forts opposite the Maginot line during setup. It couldn't simply be brushed aside as a rare occurrence.

BY the way, what I was attempting to do with the stars and bar shape was pay some homage to Vauben's design with its interlocking fields of fire for the defenders and the trenches of WW I.

Having seen the fort icons at a less zoomed in scale (and one that is more likely to be used during play), I like them even less. Their detail is lost and they just look messy and nothing like fortifications. I know that the actual game images have better detail but this image is fairly well zoomed in, so what are they going to look like at the commonly used, less-zoomed in views?

Cheers, Neilster

Board wargames often use a fort symbol that looks like a 2D version (seen from above) of the image of part of Fort McHenry below. Wouldn't a linear version of this with the spear-shaped elements projecting forward look (and scale) better than the symbol we have now?

Cheers, Neilster

ORIGINAL: Neilster
Board wargames often use a fort symbol that looks like a 2D version (seen from above) of the image of part of Fort McHenry below. Wouldn't a linear version of this with the spear-shaped elements projecting forward look (and scale) better than the symbol we have now?

Cheers, Neilster

This was the basis for the current depiction - including the 5 points. Scaling is the problem, for fine details get lost. The Maginot line is a very busy section of the map too.

Here's Sevastopol at zoom levels 8 and 7.

The newly constructed/weaker forts actually look a little cleaner. Here's Lulea at zoom levels 8, 6, and 5

Last in the series is Maginot at zoom level 5. The river undeerneath it and the forest hex really interfer with the fort image.

I for one am happy with the forts depiction.

Perhaps you could replace each crashed Space Invader ([:'(]) with a single spear head? That would hold up better at lower zoom levels.

Cheers, Neilster

ORIGINAL: Neilster

Perhaps you could replace each crashed Space Invader ([:'(]) with a single spear head? That would hold up better at lower zoom levels.

Cheers, Neilster

No. They be done. I have more important items to work on.

Rob Armstrong suggested a slightly different color for the rivers/lake outlines. This is a closer match to the water in the swamps. Opinions?

If you have a very keen eye, you might notice that I have rounded the corners of the units a touch more. This makes them look rounded at all levels of zoom (except maybe Z1).

Still smarting over those tapeworms, eh, Steve?

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Neilster

I have to admit to not being wild about the design of the fort icon thingies. They look like crashed Space Invaders. Still, I'll get used to it. It's good to see more progress.

Cheers, Neilster

They didn't crash. The tape worms killed them.

eeeeewwwwww.
 
but I do like the rounded corners as shown.

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Rob Armstrong suggested a slightly different color for the rivers/lake outlines. This is a closer match to the water in the swamps. Opinions?

If you have a very keen eye, you might notice that I have rounded the corners of the units a touch more. This makes them look rounded at all levels of zoom (except maybe Z1).

The rounded corners are excellent.

The swamp colored outline makes it look like the swamps are all part of the same watershed, which is, in fact, true, and makes the lakes more clear.

Peering closely I see that it appears to be possible to attack around the "southeastern corner" of Lake Pei from one swamp hex to the other (the hexes W and NW of Pskov). You could easily miss that little detail ... WOuld it be possible to toggle on /off a view of blocked lake hexsides that cannot be crossed?

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Rob Armstrong suggested a slightly different color for the rivers/lake outlines. This is a closer match to the water in the swamps. Opinions?

If you have a very keen eye, you might notice that I have rounded the corners of the units a touch more. This makes them look rounded at all levels of zoom (except maybe Z1).

I love both the new colors and the new rounded corners [:D]

All those new maps of USA are making me green. Heres my best effort  on how Scotland should look when Shannon gets around to WIFFE #2. Ignore my home port/city of Dundee I just added it to feel good.
 
* Loch Ewe added as Major Port - natural deep harbour used during the war to hide the fleet (like Scapa Flow) and also used to marshall convoys for sailing to US.
* Rosyth added as separate Major Port. It was, and still is, a major Royal Navy dockyard. Edinburgh could be a minor port but not necessary. Of course if enemy control Edinburgh then Rosyth is effectively blockaded so WIFFE is technically correct.
* The Forth River/Esturay shown as a major impediment to ground movement.
* North East rail line from Edinburgh shown as crossing the Forth and then Tay River. (think first major bombing raid was on Forth Rail bridge and first enemy bomber shot down here? - someone correct me if I'm havering?)
* Mountainous costal areas changed to Clear.
 
Loch Ewe and Scapa Flow are shown as Major Ports but are green because they should qualify for stacking but not for ship building. Rosyth and Glasgow/Clydeside should be the only two places that players can build major ships.
 
In the current map if Froonp can change csv file to show the Port symbol with Edinburgh at 1 o clock and the port symbol with Glasgow at  11 o clock then this will look better.
 
cheers
 

ORIGINAL: Plain Ian
All those new maps of USA are making me green. Heres my best effort  on how Scotland should look when Shannon gets around to WIFFE #2. Ignore my home port/city of Dundee I just added it to feel good.

* Loch Ewe added as Major Port - natural deep harbour used during the war to hide the fleet (like Scapa Flow) and also used to marshall convoys for sailing to US.
* Rosyth added as separate Major Port. It was, and still is, a major Royal Navy dockyard. Edinburgh could be a minor port but not necessary. Of course if enemy control Edinburgh then Rosyth is effectively blockaded so WIFFE is technically correct.
* The Forth River/Esturay shown as a major impediment to ground movement.
* North East rail line from Edinburgh shown as crossing the Forth and then Tay River. (think first major bombing raid was on Forth Rail bridge and first enemy bomber shot down here? - someone correct me if I'm havering?)
* Mountainous costal areas changed to Clear.

Loch Ewe and Scapa Flow are shown as Major Ports but are green because they should qualify for stacking but not for ship building. Rosyth and Glasgow/Clydeside should be the only two places that players can build major ships.

In the current map if Froonp can change csv file to show the Port symbol with Edinburgh at 1 o clock and the port symbol with Glasgow at  11 o clock then this will look better.

cheers

Thanks. All of this is interesting but not much can be used in MWIF product 1.

I noticed when we were revising southern Sweden that the port symbols cover two possiblities and sometimes that's confusing (this comes up in programming all the time - each variable should have a single purpose, when it is trying to do 2 things at once, one of them gets broken). Getting back to the ports, a port symbol in WIF is both a naval unit birthing/berthing location and/or a facility for unloading men, war materiel, and raw material. The role they play for supporting naval combat units and resource/production are mixed. Some ports are military, some civilian, and some both. All in all, somewhat muddled.