Tutorial #5 - Naval Units

[stretch]

ok dumb question.  which countersheet is the Forrestal on?  The silhouette looks like Midway class, which of course it wasn't.
 
 

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: stretch
ok dumb question.  which countersheet is the Forrestal on?  The silhouette looks like Midway class, which of course it wasn't.

#30, Politics in Flame. I have taken some of the supplementary counters from that add-on, (but not the add-on's rules).

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Skipping over the pages on convoys (7 & 8), here are 3 of the 4 pages on task forces. No controversy here, I am sure.[:D]

[Shannon V. OKeets]

One of my favorite sayings (when things are complicated and/or poorly explained) is "intuitively obvious to the casual observer, eh what?"

[Shannon V. OKeets]

3rd and last in the series.

[lomyrin]

These last pages 9 thru 11 are great examples for the game, both graphics and text. They alone ought to get the new player very excited about playing.
 
Lars 

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

One of my favorite sayings (when things are complicated and/or poorly explained) is "intuitively obvious to the casual observer, eh what?"

Typo in final para... "All tolled" should be "All told" ... unless you are saying that the fleet was wiped out and there was a requiem mass afterwards [:)]

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

These last pages 9 thru 11 are great examples for the game, both graphics and text. They alone ought to get the new player very excited about playing.

Lars 

Thanks Lars. I especially value your opinion because of all the contributions you have made to WIF over the years.

[Arron69]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

3rd and last in the series.

I think these 3 are near well perfect. I especially like the lines on using the carriers without the carrierplanes.

Andi

[CBoehm]

Hi Shannon, the tutorial looks great ...I think it will really be a great help to beginners. However, I feel that in page 6 there is a few tiny places where you could be a bit more specific in order to avoid confusion.

- As I read it you imply that the French MTN corps sets up in morocco this is NOT the case.

- You write about the queens that they can transport only “infantry units” – in order to not confuse people I would stress that its infantry-TYPE units. ei. the queens can transport MOTs.

- You write that light & heavy cruisers can carry infantry divisions …but this is true of all SCS ei. including BBs …and in this case its important to stress that only NON-MOTORIZED inf-type divs can be carried.

- You write that when using the amphibious rule – only MAR units can invade from TRN, this is only true with respect to corps! ANY inf-type division can still invade from a TRN.

cheers
Claus

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: CBoehm
Hi Shannon, the tutorial looks great ...I think it will really be a great help to beginners. However, I feel that in page 6 there is a few tiny places where you could be a bit more specific in order to avoid confusion.

- As I read it you imply that the French MTN corps sets up in morocco this is NOT the case.

- You write about the queens that they can transport only “infantry units” – in order to not confuse people I would stress that its infantry-TYPE units. ei. the queens can transport MOTs.

- You write that light & heavy cruisers can carry infantry divisions …but this is true of all SCS ei. including BBs …and in this case its important to stress that only NON-MOTORIZED inf-type divs can be carried.

- You write that when using the amphibious rule – only MAR units can invade from TRN, this is only true with respect to corps! ANY inf-type division can still invade from a TRN.

cheers
Claus

You are correct on these points.

However,

1 - The mountain unit has 'Morocco' written on it. So talking abour moving it from Morocco seems reasonable. Given that setting up the Global War scenario requires the placement of hundreds of units (e.g., 81 CW convoys), I doubt that a newcomer to WIF is going to notice when he gets around to setting up the scenario. The program gets the placement restrictions correct.

2 - the subtle distinction between Infantry units and Infantry-type units [as defined in WIF] would be lost on a newcomer. Explaining the distinction would take a lot of words don't you think?

3 - Ok, I'll make it more vague about which naval units are able to carry divisions. I do not want to get into a zillion details here. E.g., ASW escorts can carry divisions but ASW carriers can not. Personally, I really dislike the SCS abbreviation used throughout the rules in WIF FE. I use the BB abbreviation because it is obvious. But in case you didn't notice, I try to avoid using the CA and CL abbreviations in the text. I am also reluctant to use CV in the text. If I were not so tight on space when explaining things, I would write out the words all the time since it communicates the meaning more readily, especaially to the novice.

4 - I'll change the wording to marine corps.

In general your comments here are about imprecision through omission of details. The imprecision doesn't bother me in the least in the context of what is being explained. I could have discussed invading into different terrain types, or added the effects of weather, or gone into excruciating details about notional units and units from different nationalities with the impact of whether the major powers cooperate or not. Then there are all the optional rules and units like armored marine divisions.

My point here, probably made a little too heavy-handedly, is that the tutorials are NOT going to explain all the details of the rules. I have said this several times already, but here it is again in different words: "Too much detail confuses and bores the reader/student. He will lose interest and stop reading/playing. It is essentail to deliver facts gradually, building upon what the reader already knows. Through repetition/reinforcement a complete picture can be presented by the end of the tutorials. Trying to explain all the details and nuances defeats the primary objective, which is to teach to the novice how to play."

I intentionally will present partial information and leave questions 'hanging'. For example, the tutorial on naval units has mentioned aspects of air units (tactical factor, air-to-air factor, ground support) without giving anything even close to an explanation as to what those terms mean. They're a tease to get the reader to go on to the next tutorial to learn what those terms mean.

In summary, what you are going to see in the tutorials is roughly half of the rules. The program enforces the rules rigidly, so a novice can play without making illegal moves. As his understanding progresses through game-play he is likely to want a better understanding of what is going on behind the scenes - the rules. Those will be available to him - hopefully through context-sensitive help so he can get the answers he wants without having to page through a rules book, muttering "I remember seeing that somewhere ...".

[Arron69]

I think the tutorial are good, very much like what i would tell a new player i wanted to play with. Any thing to detailed will also be forgotten once you are through all the pages of the tutorial.

Keep going Shannon[&o].

Andi

[CBoehm]

Shannon,
I hope you do not take my comments as criticism as I think you do a splendid work ...and I have no problem accepting your decision ...I was merely trying to be helpful incase one or more of my points was not deliberately worded so ...but from your answer I can see that they were, and at some point in the tutorial you ofcause have to draw a line on how detailed to get ...so thats cool.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: CBoehm
Shannon,
I hope you do not take my comments as criticism as I think you do a splendid work ...and I have no problem accepting your decision ...I was merely trying to be helpful incase one or more of my points was not deliberately worded so ...but from your answer I can see that they were, and at some point in the tutorial you ofcause have to draw a line on how detailed to get ...so thats cool.

I do want to receive comments on these, that is why I post them. And I have made major changes to many of the pages.

But it's late; I have a deadline Thursday to generate 3,500 mailing labels for our Xmas show; and I'm a bit testy.

Here is the 4th page on task forces.

[Arron69]

I think its an exelent naval tutorial. It covers the points you need to get startet.

[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

Andi

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

do those cl have torpedoes as in real life?

Yes.
Japanese CA also had, and were deadly with them.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: stretch
ok dumb question.  which countersheet is the Forrestal on?  The silhouette looks like Midway class, which of course it wasn't.

PoliF. CS30.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
(...) here are 3 of the 4 pages on task forces. No controversy here, I am sure.[:D]

About page 5 (Post #43) :
I think I have a controversy for this one :

Quote from RAW :
*************************************
11.4.1 Definition of ‘naval move’
Each group of units you move is called a task force. A task force can contain any number of surface naval units or any number of SUBs. You can’t have surface naval units and SUBs in the same task force.
You make 1 “naval move” with surface naval units every time you:
(a) move a task force of face-up surface naval units (plus, of course, any units they are transporting) from one port, to any one destination (either to one other port or to the same section of a sea-box); or
(b) move a task force of face-up surface naval units from one section directly to one lower section of the same sea-box; or
(c) return a task force of face-up surface naval units from one section of a sea-box to one port (see 13.4).
*************************************

Bottom line is that if you want to have both Ships and SUBs in the same sea area section, you need to perform at least 2 naval moves, and the SUBs are not moving along witht he Ships.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Skipping over the pages on convoys (7 & 8), here are 3 of the 4 pages on task forces. No controversy here, I am sure.[:D]

About page 5 (Post #43) too :
You could also show in your tutorial, in this page, the "sum-up form" (I don't remember its real name) that shows the different cumulated factors of the whole Task Force (or of the ships selected). By reading this it seems that the player has to calculate himself the surface & AA factors.

Also, I don't know if the tutorial is meant to give real strategic or tactical insight to the player, but such task force is IMO too big for the job intended, assuming the job is only to skirmish the KM, and not a try at having a decisive battle being fought. If the job intend is the first, only 7 ships should be used (optimal target size), with 2 BB, 3 CA and 2 CV being a good repartition (or 3 BB, 2 CV, 2 CA). If the job intended is the second, it is IMO vain, because the KM won't come to meet the RN in a death trap. The KM will either try to pass through this sea area in bad weather, to fight in another sea area, or not come out at all, and the CW would have wasted the oil.
It is IMO better to take the first posture (intending only to skirmish the KM) so that the KM has an incensitive to sail out of Kiel, and then meet the KM next impulse with the rest of the RN kept in reserve. For sure, that's only my opinion.

[CBoehm]

I absolutely agree ...if you put that much out either the KM will stay in port OR it will try to sneak past to raid the faroegap ...where if successful the CW will have very little to counter with since they put all their toys in the North Sea ...or if the KM fails to slip by they will most likely "hide" in a lower seabox section under landbased aircover.
 
Naval warfare in WIF is probably the hardest thing for newbies to grasp ...ei. never EVER (unless ...bla bla bla) commit your last reserve. etc etc etc.