Page 5 of 5
RE: USFEE or USAFFE
Posted: Mon Jan 03, 2005 9:52 am
by Tanaka
was reading"midway" by fuchida and okumiya and it talked about the japanese plan to occupy kure island 60 miles northwest of midway so that it might be used as a seaplane base for direct support of the midway landing. should this island be in the game? they planned to do the same with french frigate shoals which is in the game....
RE: USFEE or USAFFE
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:26 pm
by SemperAugustus
Peking was called Peiping until 1949. Name was changed in 1928. Port Arthur is also anachronistic the Chinese name would be Lüshun.
RE: Map Comments
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:24 pm
by steve99x
maybe someone deep in the thread mentioned this, but the small island off the coast of Kauai is spelled with two "i"s... NIIHAU
RE: Map Comments
Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:09 am
by JeffroK
Papua (Southern New Guinea)
The tracks between Pt Moresby & Gili-Gili(Milne Bay) and Pt Moresby-Lae should be removed.
A track could be placed between Buna & Lae
While typos are annoying, items which change the game are important
RE: Map Comments
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 11:49 pm
by el cid again
Actually the White Pass and Yukon RR WAS strategically significant in WWII. It was run by the US Army, and it was used to facilitate the Alcan highway and CANOL (pipe line) projects. [Canadian oil was sent to the air force bases near Anchorage by the CANOL project. There is a short sea link - but the eight inch pipe is STILL the main way Elmendorf AFB gets its avgas - although there is now a proper port at Anchorage with storage tanks.
Anchorage was an ANCHORAGE - population 500 in 1941 - NOT a port at all - and hardly a level 6 port!!!
RE: Map Comments
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:06 am
by Halsey
This is an extremely old thread.[;)]
Most players are using Andrew Brown's updated map for the CHS.
There are many more scenarios for it. Not just the CHS.
It's nothing like the original game map.
Much, much better.[;)]
RE: Map Comments
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:56 am
by el cid again
the railroad on the eastern side of japan has a missing link between Sendai in the south and Aomori in the north. The RR runs through a water hexside which makes all units track back to the tokyo area, cross the country and then use the western side RR for trips to the north of japan.
This may be an art error. The real world rail net of the period DID require use of the western route - because there was no eastern one!
RE: Map Comments
Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:17 am
by madgamer2
I can see where this is going. We put the canal in there for historical reasons. Some over active PBEM bigger is better will say
"HEY we got the canal now we need a War in the Atlantic to link with this game!"
It seems like when I had the old apple 2 with that little bit of memory and 8 Bit OS we kept wishing that games should get bigger and better and they have and I think they will go on doing so but at some point in the future this old gamer will throw the sponge in the water bucket and ride on. This whole thing about bigger and bigger might be an age related thing, after all when I was young in those early days I wanted bigger and better games so why should this generation be any different. Build a bigger game and lots of folks will stand in line to buy it.
I love this game and will keep playing it till my brain is dust and my fingers fall off. My problem is that the size and scope of the game is about all I can deal with. I think that AE will make it better and easier to play. I learned back in the 70's that even though I loved most of the big games (War in Europe come to mind) it was not possible gfor me to play them due to complexity and lack of any AI because that was BC before Computers) and the same thing is happening now. I except the complex nature of WitP because I love it but I don't think I could be that good at playing anPBEM or God forbid a Head to Head game. My brain can only deal with so much and I fear that is where I am at now or will soon be.
I was just wondering if I am alone in this situation. It would be nice to find others who believe as I do so I don't feel like a one armed man in a face slapping contest.
Lawrence
RE: Map Comments
Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:37 am
by GaryChildress
Actually I was going to post a suggestion that a version of the entire World War be done with the War in the Pacific engine. Maybe two maps, one for the Atlantic, one for the Pacific. East Africa would be the cut off point for the Pacific Map and then once through Suez or around the Cape of Africa you're onto the second map. [:D]
RE: Map Comments
Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 6:00 am
by madgamer2
Well ya will have to carry on with out me. This game is pushing my mental limit. I do not play it to finish it or even to win but I play it because I love the dam thing. I hope that AE will make the interface better and even with the added features maybe a little easier for us old guys. In one thread I mentioned an old DOS game called "action Stations" with simple WW 2 plotting board graphics but a great AI and lots of scenario's. If you could ever find a copy ya should take a look at it.
All kidding aside I would consider a two ocean game if you could make the computer system do more of the work. Also the Atlantic sea war was a totally different kind of war. It might be possible to have the computer run one and a human the other.
looking forward to seeing AE but I would give an arm or leg if I could find out where the price range is going to be for download and boxed and even if it runs $70'80 I would go for it.
Lawrence