Modifying which bases are malarial

[Andrew Brown]

This refers to my WitP map, but could be applied to the official map as well.

Several of the bases in Australia are considered to be malarial in WitP, namely Thursday Island, Wyndham, Derby, Broome, Cairns and Cooktown. In reality, malaria was (and is) not at all common in these locations, or any other locations in Australia. Although there are some tropical diseases in the Australian far north, their effect during the war was tiny compared to the effects in places such as New Guinea.

On the other hand, there are several bases in, and near, New Guinea, that are not malarial, because there is a gap in the areas designated as malarial on the map, and a few bases are located in this gap. The bases in this category, on my map, are: Sarmi, Timoeka, Aru Island, Kai Island and Tenimbar Island. I am not certain about the islands (the last three), but the first two bases at least, and probably at least a couple of the islands, should be malarial.

It is possible to correct both of these things by swapping bases around in the database, as the malarial bases in Australia are made that way using hard coding in the EXE file according to their base slots. A possible fix would be to swap five of the six Australian bases listed above with the five bases in or near PNG, and move the sixth Australian base to a vacant slot.

I am considering doing this for the modded official scenarios, and proposing it for inclusion in CHS.

Does anyone else have an opinion about this? Agree/disagree?

Andrew

(edited - removed a spelling error)

[saj42]

Makes perfect sense to me.
Would the change be available to an existing game? or will it only affect the the 'virgin' scenario data?

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Tallyho!

Makes perfect sense to me.
Would the change be available to an existing game? or will it only affect the the 'virgin' scenario data?

If the changes are made in the scenario data, then they will only affect new games.

[Bodhi]

Sounds reasonable. The only worry I would have is if there are any other, currently unknown, places in the program where bases/hex locations are hard-coded. I guess there's a possibility that at least the AI could affected.

[Sardaukar]

Very good idea, IMHO.

[michaelm75au]

Making north Australia a "malaria" zone did not seem correct to me.
So making Cairns and Cooktown available to rest troops in sounds right to me.

Only concern is if these base numbers are hard-coded as Bodhi said.

Michael

[Damien Thorn]

Does anyone even know how to change a hex from malaria to non-malaria?

[Captain Cruft]

The general Malaria zone is defined by a range of hex co-ordinates and no Aussie bases fall into that range. However, there is a set of base slots which are hard-wired to be malarial regardless of hex co-ordinate. Most of these slots are currently occupied up by the northern Aussie bases.

At the same time there are a number of slots which are hard-wired to not be malarial, regardless of hex co-ordinate. Rangoon, Bangkok, Saigon, Singapore etc.

Mike Wood posted the actual C code which defines all this a while back (attached below).

AB is proposing moving the northern Aussi bases to standard non-malarial slots and replacing them with, presumably, bases that would be malarial anyway.

I agree with the idea.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
AB is proposing moving the northern Aussi bases to standard non-malarial slots and replacing them with, presumably, bases that would be malarial anyway.

That's right. However I have also proposed to Mike Wood that the malaria zones be tweaked a little in the code, as well as removing the Australian bases from the "hardwired malarial list", so that the right bases will be defined as malarial. If this is done then bases won't need to be swapped in the scenarios, and existing games would also benefit from the update.

[Damien Thorn]

// city has drained swamps
if(gPlace[base].size>8) answer=false;


So if the base is size nine or greater then there is no malaria, right? Base size = airfield size plus port size, right?

[michaelm75au]

It is the maximum normal airfield build size of 9 or more, according to last patch notes.
Michael

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn

// city has drained swamps
if(gPlace[base].size>8) answer=false;


So if the base is size nine or greater then there is no malaria, right? Base size = airfield size plus port size, right?

[Damien Thorn]

Thanks. That's good to know.

[Mattremote]

Australia has been considered a non-malarial area for some years now, but was it effectively so in 1942?

I know that the Australians were doing extensive malaria research (especially on atebrine) in Cairns during the war; Cairns was considered to have endemic malaria at the time. Couldn't say about Darwin and other N.Coast towns.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Mattremote

Australia has been considered a non-malarial area for some years now, but was it effectively so in 1942?

I know that the Australians were doing extensive malaria research (especially on atebrine) in Cairns during the war; Cairns was considered to have endemic malaria at the time. Couldn't say about Darwin and other N.Coast towns.

Good question. Before I started this thread, I did a lot of looking around online (my reference library is almost non-existent) to see what I could find out about malaria in Australia during the war. I coudn't find anything about malaria being a major problem. Some cases did occur, but as I mention far fewer than occurred in PNG, for example.

The only reference I could find of a major outbreak of malaria in Australia near the time of the war was in Fitzroy Crossing (Northern Western Australia) in 1934, which resulted in 160 deaths.

I found a few references describing the treatment of soldiers with malaria in Australia during the war, but all of these mentioned them in the context of having returned from service in PNG and other places. There was no mention of malaria being a problem for local personnel.

I did find this interesting website:

3RD PORTABLE SURGICAL HOSPITAL, USASOS IN AUSTRALIA DURING WW2

This page contains a document titled "History of Activities of the 3rd Portable Surgical Hospital for the period of March 1 to June 30, 1943" which is a report on an American medical unit which was in Australia during the war. Here is a quote from the report about the types of cases it treated while at Portland Roads (North of Cooktown):

17. Fifty hospital beds were kept open at all times. The average number of patients daily was about twenty, the majority of which were infected wounds with lymphangitis and lymphadenitis, infected tinea, with the occasional acute appendix or fracture. The most frequent fractures in the area were of the skull, one occurring nearly every Sunday in a cricket match. There were occasionally cases off the ships, which passed along the coast, of diarrhea, malaria and minor accidents. On the whole both surgery and medicine was very light and we turned to a training program to fill the time.

The only mention of malaria refers to cases "off the ships". It seems that the greatest danger came, not from malaria, but from playing cricket (!). I realise that this is just anecdotal, but I could not find any evidence that malaria was a major problem in Northern Australia during the war. Remember that in the game it is debilitating, causing very large reduction in the fighting power of entire units. There is no justification for this type of effect on units stationed in Australia.

Andrew

[Gen.Hoepner]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

It is the maximum normal airfield build size of 9 or more, according to last patch notes.
Michael

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn

// city has drained swamps
if(gPlace[base].size>8) answer=false;


So if the base is size nine or greater then there is no malaria, right? Base size = airfield size plus port size, right?

This doesn't seem to work....at least not with games started under 1.5 and upgraded to 1.6/1.62

[Captain Cruft]

The size variable in the code refers to the airfield SPS only, not the actual size and not including port. I have tested this and it does work.

In stock and CHS campaign scenarios there are no bases in the malaria zone with an airfield SPS of 9, so you won't see the effect normally. In fact the only such bases are in Japan, China, Manchuria (?) and the USA.

I would guess that the reason it only looks at airfield SPS is because there are numerous inland bases defined as "AFs" and which therefore do not have a port component.

[Mattremote]

Andrew: Found this in an Australian Malaria Register report from the 1990's:

"Australia was certified free of malaria by WHO in 1981, but it is believed that environmental conditions in Australia north of latitude 19°S still favour the transmission of malaria were parasites to be reintroduced."

Of course, most of the US eastern seacoast south of New York would be considered malarial by the same definition.

I assume that the use of 'malarial areas' is a general WITP convention for infectious, insect vector, tropical diseases (malaria, dengue, filariasis, etc.). Not sure about info for other diseases in the WITP map area in the 1940's.

[Captain Cruft]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
That's right. However I have also proposed to Mike Wood that the malaria zones be tweaked a little in the code, as well as removing the Australian bases from the "hardwired malarial list", so that the right bases will be defined as malarial. If this is done then bases won't need to be swapped in the scenarios, and existing games would also benefit from the update.

Good. What would be even better, and not take that long to code, would be to allow the zones to be defined in an external ASCII text config file. No need to modify the database structure.

Problem is that would open up avenues for the Japanese player to cheat. You'd need to read the zones once at game start and then embed them into the save game file. Still doable though ...

[michaelm75au]

That is how the programmer explained it.
A base is "malaria-free" if the base has Airfield ?(9) or Airfield ?(10). The Port value does not come into it. Not many bases in the malaria zone qualify for this exemption.

From WhatsNew notes:

Clarification:

Rule Clarification: The rule that says bases in malaria and cold zones are exempt from the penalties applies to bases with a maximum normal airfield build size of 9 or more. Building facilities at bases with smaller maximum normal airfield or port sizes will not negate the penalty, but will somewhat ameliorate the problem.

[michaelm75au]

The ideal place to put the "zone" (cold, temeperate, malaria,etc) information would have been in the pwhex file. That way each hex could be placed in to a zone, rather than use blanket grids of hexes as in the program. And then bases could have an attribute to modify the "zone" - like no malaria.
Michael

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
That's right. However I have also proposed to Mike Wood that the malaria zones be tweaked a little in the code, as well as removing the Australian bases from the "hardwired malarial list", so that the right bases will be defined as malarial. If this is done then bases won't need to be swapped in the scenarios, and existing games would also benefit from the update.

Good. What would be even better, and not take that long to code, would be to allow the zones to be defined in an external ASCII text config file. No need to modify the database structure.

Problem is that would open up avenues for the Japanese player to cheat. You'd need to read the zones once at game start and then embed them into the save game file. Still doable though ...