Idea for map landmarks - please give your opinion

[Cpl Steiner]

Hi all,

 

I am working on a 1.5 x 1.0 km rural terrain map which has quite a few farms on it. One of my favourite eras for wargaming is the American Civil War, and the maps in those battles often had farm landmarks named after the owner, e.g. "A Spangler", "B Herr" etc. I was thinking of doing a similar thing with this rural map, but with Ukrainian surnames, e.g. "V Lysenko", "P Melnyk" etc. I think it looks kind of cool and makes the map look like it's inhabited but maybe the allusion to 19th century battle maps would be too "in your face" and look a bit goofy in a modern setting. What do you think? Should I leave the farms as they are or rename them to more boring military map type names like "Farm A", "Farm B" etc?

Edited February 23, 2015 by Cpl Steiner

[Kieme(ITA)]

It's Tricky.

 

If the scenario has to be played by the US side only, for example, I'd go with a Farm A, Farm B etc. or something like that kind of naming. As I would expect US troops to use this kind of code to identify local keypoints.

 

If the scenario is for UA/Rus I'd go with the personal, original names, which are quite recognizable for the russians and ukrainian already.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Kieme(ITA)

[Cpl Steiner]

It's Tricky.

 

If the scenario has to be played by the US side only, for example, I'd go with a Farm A, Farm B etc. or something like that kind of naming. As I would expect US troops to use this kind of code to identify local keypoints.

 

If the scenario is for UA/Rus I'd go with the personal, original names, which are quite recognizable for the russians and ukrainian already.

 

Thanks - and I should have mentioned in my original post that the battle will be Separatists vs. Ukrainians with a tentative title of "Neighbours from Hell", so I did think the combatants on both sides might know who lived at a particular farm when drawing up their battle plans. I agree that it might look a bit goofy if intended to be played as Americans vs. Russians.

[kevinkin]

In my AI mods for RT QBs I had one map with Russian names for farms and fords. Pretty much just for fun. It might be fine for small battles where local knowledge comes into play. City districts could also have local names associated with them.

But your right, to NATO the labels might are probably meaningless and better to use generic objective and phase line names.

GPS coordinates?

Kevin

[agusto]

Personally i like NATO designations for landmarks best. For example Phase line Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, NAI (named area of interest) 123, etc.

[MOS:96B2P]

One of my favourite eras for wargaming is the American Civil War, and the maps in those battles often had farm landmarks named after the owner, e.g. "A Spangler", "B Herr" etc. I was thinking of doing a similar thing with this rural map, but with Ukrainian surnames, e.g. "V Lysenko", "P Melnyk" etc. 

 

In the WWII titles when I do my terrain analysis before a PBEM battle I name all the farms and prominent terrain features.  Miller's Woods, Krause Farm, Kaiser Ridge etc.. I take a screen shot of the map (or more than one depending on the size) load it in paint and add the labeling.  I then use the names in my battle log.  I Googled surnames for French, Italian, Dutch, Russian and German etc..........  I have not got around to getting Ukrainian surnames yet.  When I am really into a battle I print out the map and do overlays with alcohol based markers.  Modified combined obstacle overlay, Operational overlay , sitmap etc..  (I can't help myself.  It's part of what I did in the army)

 

But naming the farms etc is just a personal thing I also liked from the Civil War era books and games.  When I did it for a living back in the mid 1980s it was all Named Areas of Interest (NAI), phase lines, grid coordinates, Objective Bravo, etc....   

[Kieme(ITA)]

Thanks for sharing MOS.

 

What kind of names did you use? Did you have a preferred "set" or was it just a random choice between the same "sets" of names?

[MOS:96B2P]

Thanks for sharing MOS.

 

What kind of names did you use? Did you have a preferred "set" or was it just a random choice between the same "sets" of names?

 

Some of the naming conventions were sometimes re-used.  Phase line Aluminium, Bronze, Copper.  Also phase lines were often tied to a terrain feature like a road, river or ridgeline.  Named Area of Interest were not very imaginative, just NAI1, NAI2.  Sometimes the number of the NAI was used to show a priority.  #1 being of more interest than #5.  Battle Positions and Objectives would often get cool Hollywood type names.  Usually a theme would be used for a mission.  State names, city names, sport teams.  (Sports team names would get a lively conversation going in the TOC) Most of the above was at the direction of whoever the G2 (colonel) was at the time.             

[Cpl Steiner]

Thanks for all your replies. I think I will stick with the Ukrainian place names for now. Here is a screenshot of progress so far - minus elevations which I will add in later.

Edited February 28, 2015 by Cpl Steiner

[MOS:96B2P]

The map looks nice.  I like the place names even if that is not how the modern Army does the terrain labeling.  

 

It looks like some of the farmers did not get their crops in.  A lot of plowed (barren) fields on the map with well established crop fields.  I guess that could be realistic due to the war.  It will no doubt drive up the price of commodities.    

Edited February 28, 2015 by MOS:96B2P

[Kieme(ITA)]

It is also possible that some crops were harvested earlier due to the type.

Edited March 1, 2015 by Kieme(ITA)

[Cpl Steiner]

The map looks nice.  I like the place names even if that is not how the modern Army does the terrain labeling.  

 

It looks like some of the farmers did not get their crops in.  A lot of plowed (barren) fields on the map with well established crop fields.  I guess that could be realistic due to the war.  It will no doubt drive up the price of commodities.    

 

As a matter of interest, some of those fields that look freshly plowed actually do have green crops on them but the green crops disappear when the camera is far away from them. Tthis is the effect on my machine at least - I was thinking of suggesting to BFC that they work on the LODs for these fields so they still look green when zoomed out.

 

I am still playing around with the map so bear in mind that the crops in each particular field may not be the same in the finished map.

[MOS:96B2P]

As a matter of interest, some of those fields that look freshly plowed actually do have green crops on them but the green crops disappear when the camera is far away from them. 

 

That explains it.  In any case, I look forward to maneuvering units across said fields.