Is the map ever going to get fixed?

[william.nance]

Edit - you can move from one half of the Pacific to the other. Although you have to either scroll or use the mini map to do get over there. Really counter-intuitive, and I still disagree with the map, but whatever - the game mechanic works well enough.

As the subject says. The map is simply stupid with the Pacific split in half. Considering that the US has to go east in order to be a Pacific power is simply moronic when the entire time-frame of the games encompasses the US-UK-Japanese struggle for dominance in the Pacific.

[Sandam]

Originally posted by Kabob004:

The devs won't do a wrapping map.

yup, they lack the skill to do it...

[haavardwlarsen]

The map, mainly the pacific theater would have been better if the map was split along the Alaskan north Canada border putting Hawaii and Alaska as well as the most important islands in one theater. Increasing the signifance of pearl harbour to the americans as it would be the main base of their operations in the area, currently it does not hold much advantage over other islands in the area

[Nitemares]

The map is just how they want it.

[SethAlevy]

There are lot more things thar are wrong on this map. It hurts me when I see Europe befor WW1 created from modern borders :P also I think spliting most provinces could add some realism with invasions

[Hidden Gunman]

Yeh,there were a lot of dreadnoughts in 42-45. Ffs, get off the rah rah US focus folks.

[Hidden Gunman]

Originally posted by Kabob004:

Originally posted by Hidden Gunman:

Yeh,there were a lot of dreadnoughts in 42-45. Ffs, get off the rah rah US focus folks.

Methinks you missed the point of the OP.

No, I didn't. The map split had to be somewhere, due to the lack of wraparound. As the original game finished in the 1930's, that ruled out the period of strain between the US and Japan...in fact, the Japanese were on the allied side fighting germans in ww1 two years before the US got upset enough to join in. Apart from a bit of thuggery on Spain, and fairly broad flag waving, the US didnt have a lot of impact on naval warfare in the original game period...and I'd lay good money that many people aren't aware of the brit, australian and japanese naval and amphibious ops in the pacific in ww1.

[Nitemares]

Originally posted by Hidden Gunman:

Originally posted by Kabob004:

Methinks you missed the point of the OP.

No, I didn't. The map split had to be somewhere, due to the lack of wraparound. As the original game finished in the 1930's, that ruled out the period of strain between the US and Japan...in fact, the Japanese were on the allied side fighting germans in ww1 two years before the US got upset enough to join in. Apart from a bit of thuggery on Spain, and fairly broad flag waving, the US didnt have a lot of impact on naval warfare in the original game period...and I'd lay good money that many people aren't aware of the brit, australian and japanese naval and amphibious ops in the pacific in ww1.

NONONO!!!

WW1 was only fought in France!!!
The TV told me so!



Yea, there is a lot that happened during both world wars that many people are not aware of. And its a shame to, because maybe, just MAYBE we wouldn't have the social strife we have today if people were taught to remember where that social strife has lead us to in the past.

[vanDyck]

Yeah its really hard to do one click onto the minimap before clicking were your ships should move...

[Sandam]

It's fascinating how many fangirls there are to always defend these drawbacks and bugs in the game as "features". Hilarious.

[Nitemares]

Originally posted by Nitemares:

The map is just how they want it.

That was my statement....
And its true. After the 34,982 thread about how much the map sucks, and the 733,982 posts agreeing that the map sucks, the only reason the Developers haven't changed it, is because they like it that way.

They know WE don't like it. So, what's the point the of making the 34,983, thread about how much people hate the map???

it's not going to change anything. Might as well state the obvious, for the benefit of the oblivious.

[william.nance]

Originally posted by Hidden Gunman:

Yeh,there were a lot of dreadnoughts in 42-45. Ffs, get off the rah rah US focus folks.

First, I got my answer - In short, not happening. Sorry for being oblivious. Been away from the forum for quite some time, so sorry for not digging through pages of forum reading. Many of the responses here are EXACTLY why I have not been around. The game has its issues. The forum has many as well.

As for the quote above, how about Dewey in the Philippines in 1898? The conquest of said islands that dominated US Pacific Policy for decades? Or War Plan Orange, which started as early as 1911? Or how about if the US player decides to openly enforce the Open Door policy? The game starts in 1890 before the US has a major presence in the Far East, and game mechanics, not player choices make that a mid to late game decision, not the early game decision that it would have been historically. The map makes playing the US historically essentially impossible. As an aside, it basically makes playing as the Japanese less interesting too, as it forces them into an westward only focus. Go west or go south and east was the primary point of significant internal Japanese strategic wrangling throughout the 1930s between the army and the navy. With the US removed as a major threat until much later, the Japanese defense policy shifts significantly. And they viewed the US as a threat MUCH earlier than the 1930s

As for the rah, rah, US, not really, but it is one of the chosen major factions of the game, and by the end of WW1 was considered one of the pre-eminent naval powers. Look up the Washington Naval Treaty (1922) and the London Naval Treaty (1930) and see who the players were. The way the map is shaped fundamentally changes how at least one major nation is played. All of this to say that the Pacific was a major, major point of international contention, particularly in the Naval realm.

So, to sum - got it. The map changing is not happening. I think this is a bad choice and defeats much of the flavor and feel that the developers were going for, but it's their game.

[Bramborough]

Originally posted by vanDyck:

Yeah its really hard to do one click onto the minimap before clicking were your ships should move...

I'd agree that particular bit is just a minor annoyance (although still an annoyance).

More substantive, however, is that supply-port routing doesn't cross the edge. As one example, a fleet operating near Auckland cannot be supplied from, say, Brisbane, or Honiara.

In addition, submarine range doesn't cross the edge either. For instance, with late-game long-ranged fleet submarines, Japan can send them to the North Atlantic, Caribbean North Sea...by going west. They can even send subs to the Central/South American west coasts...but only, again, by going west and using the Panama Canal (which obviously cannot do once at war with US). But what they cannot do is simply send the subs eastward from a Japanese home-island port straight across the Pacific. The displayed range-line (which afaict is only used for submarine orders; not applicable to surface ships) won't allow the move order to be issued.

Are these insurmountable "game-breaking" issues that simply prevent successful US-vs-Japan wars in either direction? No, of course not. But they're significant enough, imo, to warrant attention and correction, rather than dismissing as unimportant.

[vanDyck]

Compared to the situation we had BEFORE the Mini map was added, its way better, you had to scroll around the whole world an back for every TF you wanted to move over the maps edge. And not only the US and japan are interested in these waters or have holdings there.

The stuff with Subs and supply range, i never noticed, but i dont use much subs. But that should not be tied to the map presentation... and get fixed hopefully.

[william.nance]

AND an update that might not news to some, or useful to others. Ships CAN traverse from one part of the map break to the other - fairly counter-intuitively, with nothing in the game that actually points out that this works. I'll edit the original post above. You do have to click around the mini map, but it does work.

That said, rather than the fairly hyperbolic responses I got about "it's too hard to click" or random comments about American "fanboyism" are the reasons I stopped following this forum a year ago. Rather than helping someone out who is not understanding a counter-intuitive feature, you get vitriol or sarcasm.

[kf.*****]

I did suggest some time ago they could use two fixed maps, one centred on the Atlantic, current one and the other on the pacific, both full maps but you would toggle one or the other. This would possible be easier to implement as they could use a simple offset number when on or the other is taggled to relate to their fixed positional logic which gives them an issue implementing a full scrolling globe.