What about to make a bit improved design of DH map with some fixed mistakes?

[Nick3210]

Do you intent to correct important provinces mistakes on the whole map ?

It all depends on @Vilochka, how motivated he is to improve the vanilla DH map, therefore it's question for him.

For my part, I will say that after we fixed the key mistakes - Shanghai, Iwo Jima and removed 4 microscopic provinces in the Mediterranean, first of all I want to spend his enthusiasm on bringing the Soviet-German theater of operations into line with the real geography, since this is in any case the most important theater in the game. Then, if Vilochka is motivated, we can improve other important theaters of military operations, for example, to check the forms of provinces in Poland, France and Germany.
As for London, Australia, Tokyo and Italy, this is definitely not a top priority at this moment, as battles do not take place there in every game, unlike in Poland, France, USSR and Germany.

- In USSR, many northern provinces are far to big and at the opposite there is many very small provinces in center Siberia. In Caucaus, it is the same problem of big and small provinces ;

That's good, the northern provinces should be visually 'huge' because of the Mercator projection. Moreover, they must have a huge number of blocked passages between provinces, which is done at least in my Mod. Therefore, there is no point to divide them into smaller, because there are still no many roads on which divisions could move.
I also don't see the point to put efforts to check/fix forms of provinces to the east of the Volga because all major battles in the Game take place to the west of the Volga. Moreover, right now I'm only checking provinces to the west of Moscow, because all that is to the east of Moscow has much less significance for the real game.

I totally agree with the Caucasus. It makes no sense for the WW2 game to depict the current Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, and therefore I plan to divide Baku province into at least two and remove Nakhichevan from the Map for this. It is also necessary to check the necessity of the existence of the province of Nazran, may be it is better to use it for making more provinces in southern Caucasus. Checking/fixing the Caucasus is one of the main priorities.

 

[Rodolphe123]

Well, I do undestand what you says about USSR. Howewer, for a sound tactical game, maybe at least Utha (688) province could be reduced and provinces at the south could be expanded. The provinces between sea of Azov and Caspian sea are to big (Krasnodar to Elista).
For Italy (and Roma area), war was waged during 2 years by germans and allied army. It might worth to add a province close to Roma (in Perugia and Cassino).
For UK, it is a small but densely populated country. Adding one or two provinces around London would make sealion more interesting (in provinces 25 to 28).
For Japan, the ground invasion could have happened (by US and/or USSR) and it is a densely populated country. Adding provinces around Tokyo would make the invasion more interesting (in provinces 1549, 1547, 1551).
In Germany there is a lot of work to do in theory. In Poland there work only around Warsaw. In France, there is work in provinces 54, 95, 97 (had one or two provinces there).
In general, having more provinces around a capital rendered the game more difficult and interesting, and it reflects the greater number of population around capital cities (like around Moscow). An army that is close to a capital entered densely populated suburb area and it slowed the operation.
I don't know if mr Vilochka is interested by that work, but if so, it would seriously improved the strategic aspect of this great game.
If not, could you make a tutorial about map editing ? Those existing seems to be incomplete or obsolete actually.

 

[Nick3210]

Howewer, for a sound tactical game, maybe at least Utha (688) province could be reduced and provinces at the south could be expanded.

The map of Europe contains a huge number of small provinces for a good tactical game even without Ukhta. Ukhta is definitely not the place to play good tactical games.
Ukhta is a huge, inaccessible space inhabited only by wild animals and small-numbered aborigines and with only one drop of oil per day.
(an interesting fact - Russians have long called the local aborigines of this area - 'Samoyedy' which literally means "self-eaters", because voluntary ritual cannibalism probably was practiced here in the old days)

The military really has nothing to do there. The only railway through these deserted places through Ukhta to Vorkuta is just being built since 1938 and was finished december 25, 1941.

But really, vanilla DH map completely lacks any blocking of connections between provinces in this deserted area, which is complete bs.
But these blocks can be easily set by everybody in the adj-defs.csv file, so there are no need to fix Map design to fix this vanilla mistakes.

True correct map of Ukhta - Vorkuta must be made like this:

So, you can see that the real Ukhta - Vorkuta is a bottle from which there is no other way in/out than through Syktyvkar. Ukhta is a one-way ticket - it's a dead end. Thus, the good tactical game in this area is just to ignore Ukhta at all and fight south of it.

 

[Lord Rommel]

My 2 cents:
- dont make micro changes. E.g. the Shanghai change is welcome but the design is way too small.
For game readbility and design more part of the province should be "sacrified" instead of creating another "mini map province".
Based on my experiance these "micro provinces" cause problems for clicking and organising in e.g. MP games.
I know that a big "cut" for the Shanghai province isnt "realistic" but from my side its better to add a bigger on map cut instead of adding a mirco part.

- keep gameplay in mind:
I know that Nick is hunting the illusion of "perfect historical design" but at some points gameplay should define the map and not "historical road layouts" or anything else. Attacking and defending vectors and marching time by geopoints are as important as "historical province design". Look at the "Kharkiv" changes. With the old design u had one big province with 6 angles. Now u have 2 provinces with 5 connections. That is a significant change for combat in the area. So I would suggest to cut the movement from Poltova to Charkiv to reduce the vectors to the town. Its a minor detail but in combat one cutted connection can already save a number of units u need now for more provinces to defend.

- USSR isnt everything:
France and other parts are as important. In our MP games we saw battles at all places. Africa is as important as the USSR. The french-belgium boarder can be a gamekiller like a bad placed province somewhere else.
When adding provinces it should be checked what they add and what they could offer.
Sometimes its better to add a second attack province to choke points instead of rework a map part somewhere else based on old road maps


My 2 cents.
Map improvements are always welcome

 

[Nick3210]

- dont make micro changes. E.g. the Shanghai change is welcome but the design is way too small.
For game readbility and design more part of the province should be "sacrified" instead of creating another "mini map province".

I'm known as an irreconcilable hater of microscopic provinces and popup magnifying windows!

In Soviet times, we had a saying for such cases - "don't agitate me for the Soviet Power!" which means that you have no need to agitate me for that things, that I already absolutely fully support!

As you can see, the first thing I asked to do was to remove these four terrible microscopic provinces in the Mediterranean and the terrible Iwo Jima magnifying window.

By the way, I've been thinking also about to remove that awful magnifying windows with Malta in the same way! Malta looks like a fairly large island, no smaller than the Hawaiian islands, and therefore in my opinion it can do without a magnifying window.
But I didn't take the risk to decide on my own to remove this Malta window, because I don't sure if the players will like it or not.

Therefore, I would be interested to know the opinion of the DH players - is it good to remove the magnifying Malta window or not?

####

Then, about Shanghai - I see only two places where the use of a 'magnifying window technique' is justified and makes sense - only Gibraltar and Shanghai.

Just there is no other way to display on the map the Japanese quarter in Shanghai from which Japan began the fighting, except as a (so hated by me!) magnifying window.

So don't worry, in my opinion, apart from Gibraltar and Shanghai, there are no more places where there would be a need to use magnifying windows. And I'm also categorically opposed to creating microscopic provinces - there's no need to worry about that too.

Moreover, if we don't have enough free provinces (I think it's right not to change the total number of provinces on the map) then we will remove three extra provinces with magnifying windows on islands in the Pacific Ocean to use them for creating new needed provinces.

####

I know that Nick is hunting the illusion of "perfect historical design"

Sorry, but I'm not creating the 'illusion of historical design' , I'm bringing the game to total deep reality, historicity and common sense in all aspects that are existed in game's mechanics. Just because I am one of the rare people who does not need to work for money and has the enthusiasm and a huge amount of time for this huge modding work.
(For example studying information about 1000 generals and giving them reasonable perks and skills, more or less corresponding to their real WW2 experience is not an 'illusion', but a really big work that was done to bring deep Realism/Historisity in this important aspect of the game. This is not an 'illusion', this is pure Realism and Historicity as it must be done in the Game.)

At the same time, I use the formula 'Historicity and Realism in all aspects of the game, as long as it does not interfere with good gameplay and multiplayer balance.'
Yes, in some very rare moments I had to sacrifice realism and historicity for the sake of gameplay. But these are very rare moments. In 99% cases, historicity and realism only improve the gameplay and increase the interest of the game.
But rest assured, as an old multiplayer player, I always think about gameplay and balance when making realism and historicity - so that in a big multiplayer game the Axis must have an equal 50% chance of winning or losing.

Multiplayer balance and gameplay are my top priority!
And surprisingly, in 99% of cases, good Multiplayer balance and gameplay does not conflict with realism and historicity.

Yes, in a completely historical game, the Axis will always lose. Therefore, in our multiplayer tradition, the Allies are debuffed by the fact that France and China have no players and are developing under AI control, and Spain is developing by the player who then unhistorically joins the Axis.
Yes, Spain, under the leadership of a player, unhistorically fighting in the Axis, is our only sacrifice of historicity and realism in multiplayer for the sake of a good 50%-50% balance for the Axis and the Allies.

#####

Look at the "Kharkiv" changes. With the old design u had one big province with 6 angles. Now u have 2 provinces with 5 connections. That is a significant change for combat in the area.

I don't even know what to say for this.

Hell, yes !
Yes, Hell !

Of course, bringing an absurd fantasy map, which in many places does not correspond to the real geography, will change the 'number of attack vectors' on some provinces.
And that's great! That's something new in 14-years old Map!
Hell, yes! And that's fine!
Who said that a fantasy map that doesn't correspond to the real geography of the earth is good, but a map with real geography is bad?

I assure you, when creating vanilla Kharkov province, no one thought about such higher matter as "strictly 6 attack vectors in this province or all gamepaly wil be totally fallen!" (to be honest, looking at some areas, I don't understand at all what they were thinking about when they made the vanilla map, lol).

Yes, some provinces will change their current connections for real geography, which will undoubtedly make some changes to the familiar gameplay, which is undoubtedly a huge plus, as it will add something new to the 14-year-old map!

But, of course, if I suddenly commit some huge stupidity by making suggestions for improvements to vanilla map, anyone please let me know about this stupidity!
(new Kharkov is not such a stupid thing)

Also, anticipating possible concerns, I must say right away that I am very cautious and conservative in the provinces of the left bank of the Dnieper.
I haven't checked this area yet, but I think that in any case there is no need to change the number of provinces on the left bank of the Dnieper River, because it is in this place that such changes can critically affect the gameplay. I will be as careful as possible with the provinces on the Dnieper, keeping multiplayer gameplay in mind.

So I would suggest to cut the movement from Poltova to Charkiv to reduce the vectors to the town.

But this is in no way possible, even for the sake of the holiest goals of tactics and attacking combat vectors. Poltava and Kharkov are directly connected by the railway.
I would be a greatest traitor to Historicity and Realism if I blocked this obvious connection.

Its a minor detail but in combat one cutted connection can already save a number of units u need now for more provinces to defend.

Do you seriously consider this new Kharkov combat vectors as a 'problem' rather than a new interesting opportunity and variety?

#####

By the way, I know about 'rule number one' - do not make more than 6 connections for one province. And I also known 'rule number two' - if you really need to, you can make an exception to this rule.

#####

- USSR isnt everything:
France and other parts are as important. In our MP games we saw battles at all places. Africa is as important as the USSR. The french-belgium boarder can be a gamekiller like a bad placed province somewhere else.
When adding provinces it should be checked what they add and what they could offer.

One cannot disagree with this. After the provinces of the Soviet-German front are brought to common sense, it will be necessary to check other theaters of military operations for common sense. It all depends on the enthusiasm of Vilochka.

#####

Africa is as important as the USSR.

By the way, about Africa. When I was doing proper connection between provinces in North Africa (based on the real road network and real combat routes) I don't remember being annoyed by any 'incorrect' forms of provinces. In Africa, it was enough just to set the right blocks between provinces to bring this theater to realism, fortunately, you do not need to fix the design of the map to set correct block between provinces here.
So, the visual design of the North African provinces is more or less adequate and does not require urgent correction.

While the design of provinces of the USSR sometimes cause me very strong rage!

Just imagine, Me, as 50/50 mixed Russian-Belarusian guy, traveled the Moscow-Minsk train many dozens of times in my life. Since early childhood, I have known by heart the order of stations on this route:

Smolensk-Orsha-Borisov-Minsk !!
There is no Vitebsk!!!

Smolensk-Orsha-Borisov-Minsk!!! And no other way!
But damned Vitebsk is embedded in this route on the DH map!!! Damn it! WTF?!!
I believe the creators of the vanilla DH map deliberately mixed up these provinces in places so that Guderian and Goth would get confused and get lost not reaching Smolensk.

So, no Africa, no Belgium, no France, until we fix this damn route to the only right one - Smolensk-Orsha-Borisov-Minsk!!!

 

[Rodolphe123]

Well Mr Nick3210,
I do respect your quest to perfect the russian map. It is where the most interesting and important battles occured.
Thank you for the infos about Ukhta. It is probably like northern Canada.
I'll wait the return of M. Vilochka, and maybe that he will be interested to improve the rest of the world after you will be done with USSR.

 

[Nick3210]

Thank you for the infos about Ukhta. It is probably like northern Canada.

True, all the northern provinces of the vanilla map are in dire need of setting realistic blocks between provinces - in Norway/Sweden, Russia, Alaska, Canada.
In the vanilla map, these desolate, harsh northern lands are presented as a great place for divisions to walk in any direction, which, of course, is completely wrong.

The only technically unsolvable problem is the road that connected Alaska with civilization. It was built only towards the end of the war. Therefore, I decided that this connection also should not exist in WW2 game, because all the time since game starts in 1936 this road do not exists and by the time this road is built, the game usually is already over.

At least this corresponds to the logic of the war - at the time when the Japanese could still rise landing in Alaska, this road did not yet exist. Therefore, a Japanese land invasion in Canada from Alaska should be excluded.

 

[Vilochka]

Hello Nick3210 & Vilochka,

I am a big fan of your work, it is good to see people still working this great game.

Do you intent to correct important provinces mistakes on the whole map ?

Interesting. Definitely better not to fix Siberia for now. If you could show screenshots as you would like, that would be great. I understand that every player probably wants to improve some aspects of the map. It is necessary to single out the most important areas from the network game. As for Great Britain - I think there is very little space. I just can't look at the map now, but at least the NATO icon should be smaller than the province. From the dialogues below:: As for Malta - the island probably needs to be enlarged, like in HOI2. And I have some problems that do not allow drawing borders. I just clone the borders.

 

[Vilochka]

My 2 cents:
- dont make micro changes. E.g. the Shanghai change is welcome but the design is way too small.
For game readbility and design more part of the province should be "sacrified" instead of creating another "mini map province".
Based on my experiance these "micro provinces" cause problems for clicking and organising in e.g. MP games.
I know that a big "cut" for the Shanghai province isnt "realistic" but from my side its better to add a bigger on map cut instead of adding a mirco part.

- keep gameplay in mind:
I know that Nick is hunting the illusion of "perfect historical design" but at some points gameplay should define the map and not "historical road layouts" or anything else. Attacking and defending vectors and marching time by geopoints are as important as "historical province design". Look at the "Kharkiv" changes. With the old design u had one big province with 6 angles. Now u have 2 provinces with 5 connections. That is a significant change for combat in the area. So I would suggest to cut the movement from Poltova to Charkiv to reduce the vectors to the town. Its a minor detail but in combat one cutted connection can already save a number of units u need now for more provinces to defend.

- USSR isnt everything:
France and other parts are as important. In our MP games we saw battles at all places. Africa is as important as the USSR. The french-belgium boarder can be a gamekiller like a bad placed province somewhere else.
When adding provinces it should be checked what they add and what they could offer.
Sometimes its better to add a second attack province to choke points instead of rework a map part somewhere else based on old road maps


My 2 cents.
Map improvements are always welcome

Benelux is very dangerous to change. Very small but important area. Spot for Japanese quarter, instead of a window - it's interesting. I'll make a test Shanghai without a window.

 

[Rodolphe123]

Mr Vilochka,
That is a very good news ! I'll post a small numbers of suggested changes in some countries.
It is a great news that you want to change the map, I can mod easily everything in DH but I never mastered map modding, and I thing others modder have the same problem.
Thank you in advance !

 

[tioperete]

Honestly I don't see the point of adding the minuscoulous Japanese zone in Shangai, doing that would mean to add the Italian, French and other japanese concessions. Just give the province to Nat China.

Other changes seems fine, especially the ones not deleting provinces, but there is a problem with Kalymnos/Dubrovnik. You are giving Kalymnos to Greece now, when it should be under Italy. Giving Dubrovnik to Mostar is fine, but you should move Curzola island to Cetinje then. In fact, if you want to stay historically correct, Kotor should be created taking a little part of Cetinje and Dubrovnik, and not remove Dubrovnik. Then make an arbitration event for Germany between Croatia and Italy.

It could be nice to split Meknes from Marrakesh and Fez in Morocco, as it was the main base for French Air Force in the area. Split Tetouan from Tangiers.

In New Guinea there were some errors in localization and distances.

In Spain it coulb be nice to have Lugo and Valladolid, and Cartagena split from Murcia as it was the main port and naval base in Spanish Mediterranean.

Missing York, the biggest city in Northern England.

Split the French Basque Country from Mont de Marsan as Bayonne or Biarritz.

Ireland could have Limerick in the Shannon..

Hundreds of changes I'd like to see.

 

[Nick3210]

Honestly I don't see the point of adding the minuscoulous Japanese zone in Shangai, doing that would mean to add the Italian, French and other japanese concessions. Just give the province to Nat China.

There is no need to add any other concessions, because they did not fight. We need only little Japanese quarter in Shanghai area and nothing more there.
Also, if you give the entire province of Shanghai to China, then this is also will be incorrect, because the Japanese will not be able to start fight without amphibious assault.
Shanghai province with little Japanese district in it, made as magnifying window, is an ideal and correct solution to this issue. And I will even say - a very beautiful and aesthetically pleasing solution. (unlike 90% of all other completely unnecessary magnifying windows on vanilla map.)
Ideally, the game requires only three magnifying windows - Gibraltar, Shanghai and Guantanamo.

but there is a problem with Kalymnos/Dubrovnik. You are giving Kalymnos to Greece now, when it should be under Italy.

Damn, I admit it, it really is my epicfail. 'facepalm'
Thanks for noting this!
Just I've always hated these non-clickable islands and dreamed of removing them.

@Vilochka, can you please also to fix my shamefull fail and to give the old deleted Kalimnos to Rodos ! Big thanks!! )

 

[Lord Rommel]

@tioperete
Tbf i think the Shanghai Edition is great in terms of gameplay.
The AI isnt great in terms of naval invasions. Adding a japanese part to the Shanghai map u will a Bug help to the japanese ai.
Perhaps its not needed for DH at the moment because i think the entire army balance between China and Japan is a big problem but with a more balanced setup the ai would need help

 

[Lord Rommel]

True, all the northern provinces of the vanilla map are in dire need of setting realistic blocks between provinces - in Norway/Sweden, Russia, Alaska, Canada.
In the vanilla map, these desolate, harsh northern lands are presented as a great place for divisions to walk in any direction, which, of course, is completely wrong.

The only technically unsolvable problem is the road that connected Alaska with civilization. It was built only towards the end of the war. Therefore, I decided that this connection also should not exist in WW2 game, because all the time since game starts in 1936 this road do not exists and by the time this road is built, the game usually is already over.

At least this corresponds to the logic of the war - at the time when the Japanese could still rise landing in Alaska, this road did not yet exist. Therefore, a Japanese land invasion in Canada from Alaska should be excluded.

View attachment 1271099

That is an example that is forcing me to scream.
Lets look at Bethel.
The province is fully isoldated. The only way in or out would by an invasion.
So lets assume that the province was conquered by an enemy. Now the AI (depending on the settings) will try to get it back. I'm not sure that the AI script it that great to see that naval invasion is the only way. But lets assume that the AI will see that the naval invasion is the only way. When my memory is right the AI has a target province list. When the ID is on the list and when the AI wants to invade it will start to collect the units needed based on the current situation at the targeted province (here Bethel). The unit concentration will be done until the AI can start a succesful landing. The moment the situation will change at Bethel -e.g. by landing more enemy's units or by massive front changes- the AI will stop the entire concentration process and will restart it based on the changed parameter.
So such a province design could lead to AI death traps keeping never ending invasion preparation scripts running or by luring AI units into an artifical pocket...

Such a design should be tried to be avoided. Perpahs in real life these provinces are difficult for movement but ingame turms I vote for movement to prevent AI traps.

And for Shanghai; My rough concept:

Its not historical but u can place units here without problems. There is some space for provincal building icons and it is big enough for map mode changes (like easy reading for the political or partisan or weather map mode). Gameplay is the key here - not a small town district that was under control of one nation...

 

[Victor1234]

There is no need to add any other concessions, because they did not fight. We need only little Japanese quarter in Shanghai area and nothing more there.
Also, if you give the entire province of Shanghai to China, then this is also will be incorrect, because the Japanese will not be able to start fight without amphibious assault.
Shanghai province with little Japanese district in it, made as magnifying window, is an ideal and correct solution to this issue. And I will even say - a very beautiful and aesthetically pleasing solution. (unlike 90% of all other completely unnecessary magnifying windows on vanilla map.)
Ideally, the game requires only three magnifying windows - Gibraltar, Shanghai and Guantanamo.



Damn, I admit it, it really is my epicfail. 'facepalm'
Thanks for noting this!
Just I've always hated these non-clickable islands and dreamed of removing them.

@Vilochka, can you please also to fix my shamefull fail and to give the old deleted Kalimnos to Rodos ! Big thanks!! )

I disagree, no province should be a magnifying glass. It's a very ugly solution visually and also breaks the immersion when only certain places are emphasized. E3 did it much better by making every island/exclave the same, in my opinion.

Leaving that aside though, I'm just curious why Guantanamo? It saw no fighting, didn't change hands, etc. The Americans largely fought the Uboat war from their mainland bases/British islands anyways. At least the Italians sometimes raided Gibraltar/it might have seen fighting if Spain joined the Axis but what happens in your games involving Guantanamo that doesn't happen with say Portuguese Goa in India?

 

[Nick3210]

When my memory is right the AI has a target province list.

True! I do not know which provinces are listed in the list of naval invasions of the USA, but I bet that Bethel (and all other lifeless northern provinces of Alaska and Canada) are not in this list!
Even if by some miracle these "AI traps" are listed in the list of marine invasions, then, attention (!), you just need to remove them. With a light flick of one finger. Just delete them from this list!

Proper, based on real geography, common-sense blocks should be set in such deserted places! It's amazing that such an obvious thing can raise objections.

(Unless, of course, your goal is to make true WW2 strategy on the real planet Earth, and not another alt-history scenario in a parallel universe where the north of Russia and America are flourishing fields with beautiful roads in all directions around )

The fear that 'AI will try to land there' is not an excuse, it is more a theoretical fantasy than a real problem.

This are too many inconclusive excuses, instead of just admitting that "I'm too old and lazy to do such nonsense as making right connections and blocks between provinces in a Map of ancient 20-years old game, I have other much more important things to do in my life'.

 

[Nick3210]

Its not historical but u can place units here without problems. There is some space for provincal building icons and it is big enough for map mode changes (like easy reading for the political or partisan or weather map mode). Gameplay is the key here - not a small town district that was under control of one nation...

I believe that Hoi games should also carry the mission of education.

I didn't know anything about WW2 and wasn't interested in the topic before Hoi2.

The Hoi2 game introduced me to this greatest exciting chess game in the history of mankind.

As an ordinary Soviet guy who spended more time on sports than on schoolwork, I didn't know anything about the Anschluss or Munich and about all the other events before June 22, 1941.
I got all my first basic knowledge about WW2 from Hoi2.

But then the moment came when my knowledge of WW2 history began greatly to exceed the Hoi game. But I want the Hoi to continue to carry out the mission of historical education of the poorly educated in history people , such as I was.

Therefore, it is absolutely important to make the Japanese zone as a microscopic point in Shanghai province, with a magnifying window.

You've been putting up with all these terrible and 90% completely unnecessary windows in DH for 14 years!
And suddenly you didn't like the reasonable window in Shanghai? Seriously?

No problem, make a fake Japanese zone if you don't need beautiful and true historical scenery for this game.

 

[Nick3210]

Leaving that aside though, I'm just curious why Guantanamo?

It's just that I recently discovered quite by accident that Guantanamo is made by a window.
I've never noticed this area at all, because it's far from all the wars.

But really, Guantanamo is very small and there is no way to make it without a window. At the same time, as you correctly note, no one needs it and therefore it does not irritate the eyes. I haven't noticed it at all all these years ))

 

[Nick3210]

E3 did it much better by making every island/exclave the same, in my opinion.

Well, my 3 cents about E3 map.

I once accidentally saw a screenshot of E3 Map Australia on this forum.

I just shrugged my shoulders and diagnosed that this map unfortunately was made without using any common sense at all.

Australia is essentially a huge, lifeless desert, with life lurking around its shores.

Therefore, Australia in DH is made wisely, in friendship with common sense - huge deserts in the center and smaller provinces along the shores.
When I saw Australia in E3 map, I was left completely perplexed - the entire centre Australian lifeless deserts was divided into a huge (!!) number of small (!!) provinces!

Perhaps this is a great map for creating a war scenario of Invasion of Martian robots to capture Australian sand and uranium or snakes against mice Great War or scorpions against spiders 100000000-years War or whatever other inhabitants there are in the central Australian desert?

But as a map for WW2, Australia, as it was made at E3, is unfortunately a complete lack of minimal common sense.
You might say me, that I shouldn't judge the quality of a map based just on one random region that happens to catch my eye... And I won't agree. Australia is so completely inadequate in E3, so I seriously assume that all other parts of the world also could be made there with the same complete lack of common sense..

The funny thing is that I've heard the opinion that a huge number of provinces in E3 make the game work worse. That is, the insane number of provinces in the center of the lifeless Australian desert is not only inconsistent with common sense, but also worsens the work of the game itself!

In my opinion, it is worth investing efforts in improving the vanilla DH map, because (not to watch to my criticism of vanilla DH map), it is stiil much more adequate map than E3 map, as I saw in Australia implementation.

 

[Nick3210]

And for Shanghai; My rough concept:

Its not historical but u can place units here without problems.

By the way, the size of your Jananese zone has no more size than our magnifying window. Then it doesn't make sense because it won't give you more comfort than our window.

Actually, the point of magnifying window is to bring more comfort and to make possible to fit all the necessary icons of divisions, ports and airfields there. The size of our beatifull Japanese window allows comfortably accommodate everything, so that the divisions would not close the port or airfield.

Thus, your way only destroys historicity and realizm, but it does not add more comfort in managing units that our window.
Having lost the historicity, you didn't get anything worthwhile in return.

Here our comfortable window. You can see it have enough place for all province icons.
Moreover, I took the time to arrange all possible icons of provinces (i.e. those that are not built) so that they would not be covered by the division Icon. If someone builds an airfield or AA or forts, they will be also good/smart located in this window.