New to the game - Basic Questions

[rkr1958]

Thanks guys, as aways for your response(s) and help!

[rkr1958]

Another rules question ...

I know that artillery divisions if alone defend at at a basic strength of 1.

However; is the same true for attacking?

MWIF thinks so. Is this correct?

999-LC-Question.png (804.8 KiB) Viewed 313 times

[Joseignacio]

I thought it didnt matter that it was not stacked if it attacked along with other units, as well.

Not so long ago, it happened to me and I checked it.

It turns out it matters and it is worth 1 in this case too.

From RAW:

A towed or motorised artillery unit has a combat factor (before modification) of ‘1’ unless it is stacked with a land unit other than an artillery or notional unit (exceptions: anti-aircraft fire by AA units and bombardment by field artillery).

Doesnt talk about attacking or defending.

[rkr1958]

I thought it didnt matter that it was not stacked if it attacked along with other units, as well.

Not so long ago, it happened to me and I checked it.

It turns out it matters and it is worth 1 in this case too.

From RAW:

A towed or motorised artillery unit has a combat factor (before modification) of ‘1’ unless it is stacked with a land unit other than an artillery or notional unit (exceptions: anti-aircraft fire by AA units and bombardment by field artillery).

Doesnt talk about attacking or defending.

Wow. Thanks! I'm glad that I've got the computer to enforce the rules or I'd mess up a lot!

[Joseignacio]

I have (messed them a lot). In fact, most board game players in such a complex "monster game" make some, or most times many mistakes.

MWIF has shown me some. Others came while interpreting the rules with my mates. But when you met people from other groups, especially if they are really apart, like in my case EuroWifCon, you discover even more.

Some rules are agreed in your group, and if it is a wrong interpretation, then you meet other groups' people and it is like

Of course it doesnt help that (IMO) Harry doesnt redact so well and that there is a not so well known rectifications ( ehem, I mean Clarifications) document where rules are many times ruled upside down regarding how they were written in the RAW.

[rkr1958]

I have (messed them a lot). In fact, most board game players in such a complex "monster game" make some, or most times many mistakes.

MWIF has shown me some. Others came while interpreting the rules with my mates. But when you met people from other groups, especially if they are really apart, like in my case EuroWifCon, you discover even more.

Some rules are agreed in your group, and if it is a wrong interpretation, then you meet other groups' people and it is like

Of course it doesnt help that (IMO) Harry doesnt redact so well and that there is a not so well known rectifications ( ehem, I mean Clarifications) document where rules are many times ruled upside down regarding how they were written in the RAW.

Jose, do you still play face-to-face? Have you played the new rules (i.e., WIF CE)? If you have, what do you vs WIF v 7 (i.e., MWIF rules)?

[Joseignacio]

Well, no. I still have my group but Covid changed our patterns and now I play through Vassal mostly.

However, yes, I have played a lot WIF CE and it has meant great advances, IMO and that of those around me. Due to the work of the team which seems to be advising Harry, we have some Living Rules, that is itself an advance, because many small or big mistakes had to wait for the Clarifications in their day, and to the Mail List ( of core players, for doubts) afterwards.

Some aspects have been patched, now it is a bit more difficult to take the Netherlands because of a tiny change of the map, for instance.

I cannot recall all the changes at the moment, but Oil expenditure has became more tolerable. I still prefer not to use it, anyway.

OFF points work differently, you can spend 2 OFF to move a ship or a plane in a Land. It's a huge cost for just one unit but if your current offensive requires it... There is not supercombined, instead you can make several combinations like land+naval or naval+air spending a lot of OFF plus a lot of OIL.

AN OFF of 15 BPs is replaced por individual OFFs of one BP each (bought in groups of 5), which you can spend at your pleasure. But now to duplicate in a land attack, it is not necessary to spend 15 just the double of the reorg factor of the HQ plus 5, so one of 2 would pay 9 to be able to double its units' value and one of 4, 13.

You can now reorganize individual HQs for a cost of Reorg value+2, IIRW, instead of reorg all with a chit. So it's more flexible.

Some optionals have dissapeared (few), and FiF has been incorporated within the core rules as an optional, which may make it more popular. Factories in Flames shows an absolutely different approach to Production. It was possible to play earlier, and the rules of it havent changed but now it is more inviting to use. We use it all the time.

There are really a lot of more changes, and I believe it has become a small revolution. Some say it has unbalanced to one side, I cant recall if Allies or Axis, and to be true I believe that still depends on the optionals selected.

Surely people can add some input as well.

[paulderynck]

The biggest change IMO - especially considering I play both CE and MWiF, is the way re-org works. In CE you count motorized movement points from the unit to the HQ (somewhat like tracing supply) whereas in MWiF you count motorized movement points from the HQ to the unit. This can make a big difference since many players will try to put their HQs in forest hexes to aid in protection from ground strikes.

[rkr1958]

Thanks guys.

Also, how big difference does the Asian and Pacific hex scale make on strategy and play for you between MWIF and CE or even FE?

Which scale do you prefer?


And, personally having only played MWIF regularly and dealing with MWIF convoy routing and production, how much easier is it doing all that yourself in CE or FE?

[Joseignacio]

Huge difference in mobility basically, of land (they are not flipped so frequently) and air units. More stacking as well (many more hexes with the same stacking each.

As for combat, to deal with having few units for 3 times as much (or more) hexes, MWIF solves it through having a limited number of railroad (probably historic) and road (maybe not) connection, so all the fighting and advance must be around them. This makes the axis of movement similar.

It might have been a better idea to make more corps of lower value for JA and CH so as to be able to have wider fronts and stop so many possible infiltrations, but then these JA units wouldnt be able to face USA corps. So, no.

It may be easier for a good JA player versus a goof CH player, to advance in WIFCE/WIFFE IMO than in MWIF, however I like more MWIF's european hex. In the WIF FE and CE maps, if you keep on pounding with all your crappy air force, you may get a -4 that, along with your loosy proportion and a good roll take a hex (easier at the beginning in the Clear hexes).

Being so few hexes in the map, the JA many times gets 2 or 3 resources early (and can build a road to extract one or two if necessary). To obstinate in conquer China is a possibility, but many times the USSR offers possibilities and the USA is lurking anyway, so that uses to be enough.

In fact I hate Asian and off-map hexes in WIF CE and FE although I understand it is a must ,because of the size of the map, already humongous.

CE and FE management of CONV is pretty easy for an experienced player with a paper and pencil or even a normal one with some of the map recommendations. After all it is the same as in MWIF but without the disturbing bugs.

[Joseignacio]

Hi, guys.

I dont use to play with oil, cause I hate it. Because of that, I dont really know whether MWIF is acting correctly in this case.

Vichy has been declared and the ships returned to their bases. However, it seems the FR player didnt have oil (I am not positive) so Vichy got none. In this case, it is obvious that normally these units could not reorg, but this is not a normal case, it is Vichy declaration. Shouldnt these units (and the rest of them) be restored after the reflag? Doesnt seem fair to me the opposite.

Those who have played on the board can comment?

Captura de pantalla 2025-03-11 202449.png (780.45 KiB) Viewed 184 times

Captura de pantalla 2025-03-11 203017.png (341.87 KiB) Viewed 184 times

[Centuur]

In RAW it's stated that you need to rebase French naval units. And rebasing means that you get disorganised. And nowhere in RAW you will find that Vichy units will get reorganised after Vichy gets declared. Therefore: they stay disorganised at that point.

To reorganise the French navy, Vichy needs oil. If it hasn't got it, the Vichy fleet can't sail, making it more vulnerable to capture if the Axis decide to collapse Vichy. This is historically correct. The ships which escaped Toulon after the Axis attacked the port, only had enough fuel to sail them towards Algiers and Oran and not much further. A lot of players want to use the Vichy navy in the Med on the Axis side. In reality, they stayed in port. There was only enough fuel for a one way trip.

And that brings us to a strange thing, historically speaking. Why didn't the Germans and Italians provide fuel to the Vichy navy after Mers-el-Kebir? I never understood this mistake, because at that moment, a more active Vichy navy was a real possibility.

[paulderynck]

In WiFFE and presumably in MWiF, there are limits on Vichy lending. If Syria goes Vichy the oil Iraq lends to France must be passed on to the axis power that installed Vichy. And Vichy can't lend any other resources or BPs it controls to any axis powers unless it becomes hostile to an Allied power (being at war with an Allied power is not enough).

But the axis power that installed Vichy can always lend to Vichy. In this case, there will be a two turn delay due to sequence of play, FREX: Vichy declared at the end of MJ40. Germany lends an oil to Vichy at the beginning of JA40 but it arrives after Final Re-org of that turn. In Final Re-org of SO40 Vichy can flip its ships back up.

All of this assuming the oil can be traced from origin to destination and the Vichy ships can trace to the oil.

[Joseignacio]

In RAW it's stated that you need to rebase French naval units. And rebasing means that you get disorganised. And nowhere in RAW you will find that Vichy units will get reorganised after Vichy gets declared. Therefore: they stay disorganised at that point.

To reorganise the French navy, Vichy needs oil. If it hasn't got it, the Vichy fleet can't sail, making it more vulnerable to capture if the Axis decide to collapse Vichy. This is historically correct. The ships which escaped Toulon after the Axis attacked the port, only had enough fuel to sail them towards Algiers and Oran and not much further. A lot of players want to use the Vichy navy in the Med on the Axis side. In reality, they stayed in port. There was only enough fuel for a one way trip.

And that brings us to a strange thing, historically speaking. Why didn't the Germans and Italians provide fuel to the Vichy navy after Mers-el-Kebir? I never understood this mistake, because at that moment, a more active Vichy navy was a real possibility.

Well, when you dont give the Finnish Borderlands and there is a war , you set up the finnish. After the peace is agreed upon, the Finnish go, and come back after GE declares war to USSR at GE request.

They dont appear disorganized, I believe. And there is no provision in the rules one way or another. It just is the way players understand that war entry.

[Joseignacio]

In WiFFE and presumably in MWiF, there are limits on Vichy lending. If Syria goes Vichy the oil Iraq lends to France must be passed on to the axis power that installed Vichy. And Vichy can't lend any other resources or BPs it controls to any axis powers unless it becomes hostile to an Allied power (being at war with an Allied power is not enough).

But the axis power that installed Vichy can always lend to Vichy. In this case, there will be a two turn delay due to sequence of play, FREX: Vichy declared at the end of MJ40. Germany lends an oil to Vichy at the beginning of JA40 but it arrives after Final Re-org of that turn. In Final Re-org of SO40 Vichy can flip its ships back up.

All of this assuming the oil can be traced from origin to destination and the Vichy ships can trace to the oil.

True, thanks.

Forgot that shitty part:

"All of this assuming the oil can be traced from origin to destination and the Vichy ships can trace to the oil."

[rkr1958]

FYI -- edited for critical correction in (3) below

Just noticed this ...

(1) USSR DOW and invaded Persia 3 turns ago, which was aligned to Japan.
(2) Persia will be conquered by the Soviets this turn; however,
(3) I was checking out the partisan threat to the USSR and discovered that the threat is actually to Japan, who aligned Persia.
(4) In other words, there's no partisan threat at this point vs the Soviet invaders.
(5) Is this right?

999-Persian-Partisan-Threat.png (1.19 MiB) Viewed 115 times

[Centuur]

Yes. Persia is a "red" partisan country. This means that whoever controls Persia, has the risk of partisans appearing in the country. They don't like any side. When the USSR conquers Persia, the partisans will change sides. They want indepence for the country and no foreign influence at all.

[Joseignacio]

Well, yes.

There are two kind of partisans: Red go against anyone other than their own country (i.e. Persia), green go against their invaders, but not their invader's enemies, who are "friendlies"; they can stack with their own country units (like the URSS PARTs with USSR units) but even though they cannot do so with the country "enemy of their invader" (Persians with USSR), they are not hostile to it.

The ones in Persia are green, so they dont attack the USSR, not really "liberators" but not the original invaders at least, unlike Japanese.

Captura de pantalla 2025-05-06 151836.png (79.53 KiB) Viewed 104 times

So it is correct that there is not PART menace against USSR ... but there must be against Japan

[rkr1958]

Hey guys, thanks. I made a mistake in my original post which I just corrected. USSR invaded Persia, who was aligned to Japan. The current partisan threat is against Japan, who aligned but did not invade.

So I'm now more confused due to confusing you guys.

Centuur says Persia is Red so that's correct the threat is against Japan?

But Jose says it green, which means the threat should be against the Soviet invaders?

[Centuur]

I should have checked the table first.... Persia is green, so it should only get partisans against the invading major power (the USSR). This looks like a bug, because against Japan there should not be a possibility of partisans appearing.