Naval Combat Aborts

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Here is a question concerning the order in which naval combat aborts should occur. I have never seen any of the examples I present below actually happen when playing, and I doubt that any of you have either. However, the code has to know what to do in every possible situation, so I need to have a definitive answer for each of the examples given below.

1 - During the naval movement phase, the phasing player moves a group of naval units (A) into sea area S where enemy units (E) successfully intercept them. Already in sea area S are some other units belonging to the phasing side (B).

2 - A wants to continue moving, so they try to fight through which causes Naval Combat 1 to take place.

3 - In the first round of combat, a naval unit (F), belonging to the non-phasing side, is aborted.

Question #1:[&:]
Does the unit F abort immediately or does the naval combat continue to the second round (i.e., search rolls by both sides)?

From RAW it appears that F should abort immediately, but I have a lot of problems with that answer, as you will see if you continue reading (Question #4).

4 - For now, let's say that F is placed in a FIFO (First In, First Out) queue of aborted naval units from naval combat 1.

5 - The second round of naval combat 1 results in unsuccessful search rolls for both sides, so that combat is completed.

Question #2:[&:]
Does F abort before or after A continues moving?

RAW is even more forceful that the mandatory abort by F should occur before A continues moving. As a practical matter, if A is allowed to move first, it could proceed to sea area T (and stop there) so that when F aborts through T, A could intercept it. This becomes really silly if there had been multiple rounds of combat in naval combat 1 and multiple units aborted and placed in the queue (e.g., F1, F2, F3). A would have aborted all those units and then raced ahead to intercept them all in sea area T.[X(]

6 - F aborts to sea area T, which contains units from both sides (C and G).

7 - The units G, from the phasing side, successfully intercept F. Since F has to continue moving, naval combat 2 occurs.

8 - In the first round of the new naval combat a naval unit (H), belonging to the non-phasing side, is aborted.

9 - Following the logic from question #1, H is placed in a FIFO queue for naval combat 2.

10 - The second round of naval combat 2 results in unsuccessful search rolls for both sides, so that combat is completed.

Question #3[&:]
Does F continue its mandatory abort or does H's mandatory abort happen first?

Contrary to the answer to question 2, I believe unit F should continue aborting before H aborts. I could be talked out of this opinion though. The situation that makes me uncomfortable is if there is a queue of aborted units from naval combat 2 (H1, H2, H3). Having F abort before any of these means that F participated in the naval combats that caused H2 and H3 to abort, but somehow moved ahead in the time line to complete its abort before H1.

11 - F completes it move into a friendly port.

12 - H begins its abort and moves into sea area S.[8|]

13 - Units B of the phasing side in sea area S successfully intercept H, resulting in naval combat 3.

Question #4[&:]
Are the units A potentially part of naval combat 3? Remember, they still haven't 'left' sea area S and are still 'moving'.

I would like to say No, but then there is the possibility that A could decide to stop its movement in sea area S. If it decided to do that, couldn't it be part of the combat?
===
Add into this mix that both sides could voluntarily abort from naval combat 2. I intend to place those units at the bottom of the FIFO queue (so it wouldn't really be FIFO at this point). Assuming that units J from the non-phasing side voluntarily aborted from naval combat 2, the queue would be: H1, H2, H3, J, and the units would abort in that sequence.
===
Note that this could continue with new naval combats occurring in S and T and more units being forced to abort, with a separate queue of aborted units for each naval combat, that need move.[:@]

This is all definitely a ball of fog.[:(]

[lomyrin]

As I read the rules, the aborts take place immediately after the respective round of combat has been concluded, and all combats resulting from such aborts are also concluded before any other search in the initial combat sea area for additional combat rounds there can continue.
 
Lars  

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
1 - During the naval movement phase, the phasing player moves a group of naval units (A) into sea area S where enemy units (E) successfully intercept them. Already in sea area S are some other units belonging to the phasing side (B).

2 - A wants to continue moving, so they try to fight through which causes Naval Combat 1 to take place.

3 - In the first round of combat, a naval unit (F), belonging to the non-phasing side, is aborted.

Question #1:[&:]
Does the unit F abort immediately or does the naval combat continue to the second round (i.e., search rolls by both sides)?

From RAW it appears that F should abort immediately, but I have a lot of problems with that answer, as you will see if you continue reading (Question #4).

This is right, RAW says that F should abort immediately at the end of the combat round ("At the end of the combat round, return it to base according to the return to base rules (see 13.4)").

4 - For now, let's say that F is placed in a FIFO (First In, First Out) queue of aborted naval units from naval combat 1.

5 - The second round of naval combat 1 results in unsuccessful search rolls for both sides, so that combat is completed.

Question #2:[&:]
Does F abort before or after A continues moving?

RAW is even more forceful that the mandatory abort by F should occur before A continues moving. As a practical matter, if A is allowed to move first, it could proceed to sea area T (and stop there) so that when F aborts through T, A could intercept it. This becomes really silly if there had been multiple rounds of combat in naval combat 1 and multiple units aborted and placed in the queue (e.g., F1, F2, F3). A would have aborted all those units and then raced ahead to intercept them all in sea area T.[X(]

F sould abort before A continues moving, because RAW says that it must return to base at the end of the combat round where it was aborted.

6 - F aborts to sea area T, which contains units from both sides (C and G).

7 - The units G, from the phasing side, successfully intercept F. Since F has to continue moving, naval combat 2 occurs.

Yes.

8 - In the first round of the new naval combat a naval unit (H), belonging to the non-phasing side, is aborted.

9 - Following the logic from question #1, H is placed in a FIFO queue for naval combat 2.

Following that logic, yes, but RAW says that F should abort immediately at the end of the combat round.

10 - The second round of naval combat 2 results in unsuccessful search rolls for both sides, so that combat is completed.

Question #3[&:]
Does F continue its mandatory abort or does H's mandatory abort happen first?

H aborts occurs first, because H combat was within F abort movement, which was within A original movement. So H abort must be finished before F movement ca be resumed, before A movement can be resumed.

Contrary to the answer to question 2, I believe unit F should continue aborting before H aborts. I could be talked out of this opinion though. The situation that makes me uncomfortable is if there is a queue of aborted units from naval combat 2 (H1, H2, H3). Having F abort before any of these means that F participated in the naval combats that caused H2 and H3 to abort, but somehow moved ahead in the time line to complete its abort before H1.

I think that maybe your notion of queue of aborted naval units is resulting in this messy situation. If you see this as wheels within wheels, I think this is not as messy.
A moves and is intercepted, this causes F to abort --> F moves.
F moves and is intercepted, this causes H to abort --> H moves.
etc...
When H movement is finished (either sunk or safely at a home base), the movement of F can be resumed.
When F movement is finished, the movement of A can be resumed.

11 - F completes it move into a friendly port.

12 - H begins its abort and moves into sea area S.[8|]

13 - Units B of the phasing side in sea area S successfully intercept H, resulting in naval combat 3.

Question #4[&:]
Are the units A potentially part of naval combat 3? Remember, they still haven't 'left' sea area S and are still 'moving'.

Technicaly yes. RAW says that "You can try to intercept a task force of enemy naval units as soon as it enters a sea area containing at least one of your face-up naval or aircraft units.", which is the case.

But maybe they can be ruled out from the interception rule, because they are right in the middle of a naval combat (naval combat 1) and so are not technicaly patrolling the Sea Area as units E are.

I would like to say No, but then there is the possibility that A could decide to stop its movement in sea area S. If it decided to do that, couldn't it be part of the combat?

Yes, but the decision for A to stop or not in the Sea Area S comes a long time after F and H have finished their move, so IMO this is not a valid argument to allow them to Intercept. The only valid argument is the part of RAW I quoted above.

===
Add into this mix that both sides could voluntarily abort from naval combat 2. I intend to place those units at the bottom of the FIFO queue (so it wouldn't really be FIFO at this point). Assuming that units J from the non-phasing side voluntarily aborted from naval combat 2, the queue would be: H1, H2, H3, J, and the units would abort in that sequence.
===
Note that this could continue with new naval combats occurring in S and T and more units being forced to abort, with a separate queue of aborted units for each naval combat, that need move.[:@]

This is all definitely a ball of fog.[:(]

I'm not sure that queueing aborting ships is the solution now that you say it.
You'd rather make that immediate, so this is simpler (and in accordance with RAW).



[/quote]

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
1 - During the naval movement phase, the phasing player moves a group of naval units (A) into sea area S where enemy units (E) successfully intercept them. Already in sea area S are some other units belonging to the phasing side (B).

2 - A wants to continue moving, so they try to fight through which causes Naval Combat 1 to take place.

3 - In the first round of combat, a naval unit (F), belonging to the non-phasing side, is aborted.

Question #1:[&:]
Does the unit F abort immediately or does the naval combat continue to the second round (i.e., search rolls by both sides)?

From RAW it appears that F should abort immediately, but I have a lot of problems with that answer, as you will see if you continue reading (Question #4).

This is right, RAW says that F should abort immediately at the end of the combat round ("At the end of the combat round, return it to base according to the return to base rules (see 13.4)").

4 - For now, let's say that F is placed in a FIFO (First In, First Out) queue of aborted naval units from naval combat 1.

5 - The second round of naval combat 1 results in unsuccessful search rolls for both sides, so that combat is completed.

Question #2:[&:]
Does F abort before or after A continues moving?

RAW is even more forceful that the mandatory abort by F should occur before A continues moving. As a practical matter, if A is allowed to move first, it could proceed to sea area T (and stop there) so that when F aborts through T, A could intercept it. This becomes really silly if there had been multiple rounds of combat in naval combat 1 and multiple units aborted and placed in the queue (e.g., F1, F2, F3). A would have aborted all those units and then raced ahead to intercept them all in sea area T.[X(]

F sould abort before A continues moving, because RAW says that it must return to base at the end of the combat round where it was aborted.

6 - F aborts to sea area T, which contains units from both sides (C and G).

7 - The units G, from the phasing side, successfully intercept F. Since F has to continue moving, naval combat 2 occurs.

Yes.

8 - In the first round of the new naval combat a naval unit (H), belonging to the non-phasing side, is aborted.

9 - Following the logic from question #1, H is placed in a FIFO queue for naval combat 2.

Following that logic, yes, but RAW says that F should abort immediately at the end of the combat round.

10 - The second round of naval combat 2 results in unsuccessful search rolls for both sides, so that combat is completed.

Question #3[&:]
Does F continue its mandatory abort or does H's mandatory abort happen first?

H aborts occurs first, because H combat was within F abort movement, which was within A original movement. So H abort must be finished before F movement ca be resumed, before A movement can be resumed.

Contrary to the answer to question 2, I believe unit F should continue aborting before H aborts. I could be talked out of this opinion though. The situation that makes me uncomfortable is if there is a queue of aborted units from naval combat 2 (H1, H2, H3). Having F abort before any of these means that F participated in the naval combats that caused H2 and H3 to abort, but somehow moved ahead in the time line to complete its abort before H1.

I think that maybe your notion of queue of aborted naval units is resulting in this messy situation. If you see this as wheels within wheels, I think this is not as messy.
A moves and is intercepted, this causes F to abort --> F moves.
F moves and is intercepted, this causes H to abort --> H moves.
etc...
When H movement is finished (either sunk or safely at a home base), the movement of F can be resumed.
When F movement is finished, the movement of A can be resumed.

11 - F completes it move into a friendly port.

12 - H begins its abort and moves into sea area S.[8|]

13 - Units B of the phasing side in sea area S successfully intercept H, resulting in naval combat 3.

Question #4[&:]
Are the units A potentially part of naval combat 3? Remember, they still haven't 'left' sea area S and are still 'moving'.

Technicaly yes. RAW says that "You can try to intercept a task force of enemy naval units as soon as it enters a sea area containing at least one of your face-up naval or aircraft units.", which is the case.

But maybe they can be ruled out from the interception rule, because they are right in the middle of a naval combat (naval combat 1) and so are not technicaly patrolling the Sea Area as units E are.

I would like to say No, but then there is the possibility that A could decide to stop its movement in sea area S. If it decided to do that, couldn't it be part of the combat?

Yes, but the decision for A to stop or not in the Sea Area S comes a long time after F and H have finished their move, so IMO this is not a valid argument to allow them to Intercept. The only valid argument is the part of RAW I quoted above.

===
Add into this mix that both sides could voluntarily abort from naval combat 2. I intend to place those units at the bottom of the FIFO queue (so it wouldn't really be FIFO at this point). Assuming that units J from the non-phasing side voluntarily aborted from naval combat 2, the queue would be: H1, H2, H3, J, and the units would abort in that sequence.
===
Note that this could continue with new naval combats occurring in S and T and more units being forced to abort, with a separate queue of aborted units for each naval combat, that need move.[:@]

This is all definitely a ball of fog.[:(]

I'm not sure that queueing aborting ships is the solution now that you say it.
You'd rather make that immediate, so this is simpler (and in accordance with RAW).

[/quote]
The point you don't mention in your answer, (but you did in your email to Harry & others), is that if mandatory aborts take place before combat in a sea area is completed (to quiescience), then we could have a new unit (H) entering sea area S where combat 1 is in progress. Which leaves open the question:
What happens in sea area S, where a naval combat is in progress, if a naval unit belonging to either side, aborting from a naval combat in sea area T, enters the sea area? Reasonable choices seem to be:

1 - the aborting naval unit cannot be intercepted and gets a clean pass through the sea area.

2 - the aborting naval unit is temporarily halted in sea area S (section 0) and becomes part of the next round of combat in sea area S. However, note that the naval combat in sea area T is run to quiescience before the next round of combat in sea area S.

3 - an attempt to intercept the aborting naval unit occurs automatically (because of the on-going combat). If the interception fails, #1 occurs. If the interception succeeds, #2 occurs.

4 - the opposing side to the aborting naval unit may attempt to intercept, with outcomes the same as in #3.
===
My uses of queues is an attempt to avoid the situation where an on-going naval combat has newly aborting naval units arrive.

[:)]Just to really mess with your mind, it could have been the original aborting unit F that aborts from the second naval combat in sea area T and then decides to abort back through sea area S. Just when you throught you had seen the last of that carrier, here it comes again![:D]

EDIT: Upon rereading my answer I see that I did not address the possibility of a new naval combat (#3) occuring in sea area S if a naval combat is still in progress (#1). I find that quite unattractive for several reasons.

[hjaco]

To add to your christmas misery you also need to take into account in which order each sides aborts on each other takes effect [:D]

If say Allied inflict 2X/2D/2A on Axis which in turn inflicts x/3D/4A on Allies in which order are these results implemented on individual units and should that also make precedence for the order in which you resolve aborts?

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: hjaco

To add to your christmas misery you also need to take into account in which order each sides aborts on each other takes effect [:D]

If say Allied inflict 2X/2D/2A on Axis which in turn inflicts x/3D/4A on Allies in which order are these results implemented on individual units and should that also make precedence for the order in which you resolve aborts?

11.5.8 says :
*****************************************
The combat is simultaneous - both sides should work out the results they inflict before anyone implements them. However, the active player rolls for the damage of the defending player's ships first.
You must implement all ‘X’ results first, then all ‘D’ results and, finally, all ‘A’ results.
*****************************************
But it does not seems to say whether the active player makes his return to base aborts before the inactive player, or the reverse.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: hjaco

To add to your christmas misery you also need to take into account in which order each sides aborts on each other takes effect [:D]

If say Allied inflict 2X/2D/2A on Axis which in turn inflicts x/3D/4A on Allies in which order are these results implemented on individual units and should that also make precedence for the order in which you resolve aborts?

11.5.8 says :
*****************************************
The combat is simultaneous - both sides should work out the results they inflict before anyone implements them. However, the active player rolls for the damage of the defending player's ships first.
You must implement all ‘X’ results first, then all ‘D’ results and, finally, all ‘A’ results.
*****************************************
But it does not seems to say whether the active player makes his return to base aborts before the inactive player, or the reverse.

Well, it shuold simply be one side or the other. I'll make the side that initiated the combat abort their units first - and be consistent with that decision at all times.

This is not as much of a headache as the recursive nature of naval combat and aborts.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

The point you don't mention in your answer, (but you did in your email to Harry & others), is that if mandatory aborts take place before combat in a sea area is completed (to quiescience), then we could have a new unit (H) entering sea area S where combat 1 is in progress. Which leaves open the question:
What happens in sea area S, where a naval combat is in progress, if a naval unit belonging to either side, aborting from a naval combat in sea area T, enters the sea area? Reasonable choices seem to be:

1 - the aborting naval unit cannot be intercepted and gets a clean pass through the sea area.

2 - the aborting naval unit is temporarily halted in sea area S (section 0) and becomes part of the next round of combat in sea area S. However, note that the naval combat in sea area T is run to quiescience before the next round of combat in sea area S.

3 - an attempt to intercept the aborting naval unit occurs automatically (because of the on-going combat). If the interception fails, #1 occurs. If the interception succeeds, #2 occurs.

4 - the opposing side to the aborting naval unit may attempt to intercept, with outcomes the same as in #3.
===
My uses of queues is an attempt to avoid the situation where an on-going naval combat has newly aborting naval units arrive.

[:)]Just to really mess with your mind, it could have been the original aborting unit F that aborts from the second naval combat in sea area T and then decides to abort back through sea area S. Just when you throught you had seen the last of that carrier, here it comes again![:D]

EDIT: Upon rereading my answer I see that I did not address the possibility of a new naval combat (#3) occuring in sea area S if a naval combat is still in progress (#1). I find that quite unattractive for several reasons.

I agree you have to handle this in the code but it will occur very rarely, because getting caught when you have to fight through usually involves a lot of surprise points against the moving force, players will do everything possible to abort their units thru the safest route possible. Also if combats go badly and you decide to abort the sea zone, you must abort all committed units. This raises the very real possibility that you must have your aborting units stay until they are sunk, rather than have to abort your strong forces in say the three box, which you are unable to roll to get included in the combats.

But of course the code has to handle it because it is "possible". I agree with Patrice's comments that you must complete the last abort result first, then the next last etc. "Wheels within wheels" as he said or perhaps the analogy is nested Do loops. The trick is, you don't know how many levels of nesting will occur until each abort gets resolved.

As for the ships that started it all off, if they are fighting through, they are unlikely to be in a box above the zero box. When you are intercepted and choose to fight through, you must pick a box. Sometimes the choice of moving to a higher box and fighting through is even accepted by the moving player to the extent of expending all the moving forces movement points because the whole reason for moving was to suck-in the opponent to intercepting. But usually a moving force trying to fight through will be in the zero box.

Anyway this all has to be handled, so to make a long comment even longer, I would say that what should happen when H re-enters S, and the opposing side chooses to intercept and is successful, is that a new combat is fought as per the interception rules. After one round of combat, if the owner of H does not abort with all his committed (not necessarily included ones, all the committed ones), then another normal combat round begins. The original combat that caused the whole mess is still suspended, waiting for all aborts to be resolved, although when it eventually resumes, the forces present might have changed drastically.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Well, it shuold simply be one side or the other. I'll make the side that initiated the combat abort their units first - and be consistent with that decision at all times.

This is not as much of a headache as the recursive nature of naval combat and aborts.

In RAW naval combat the active side must make the choice to stay or to abort first. I'd say the active (phasing) player would always decide first and then make his resulting move first.

[paulderynck]

Another tricky thing with all the interceptions is that you must keep track of which ship was flipped to initiate search. As long as it stays in the sea zone you don't have to flip any other ship to make a search roll this impulse - up to the "Other Players Naval Combat" step. (I believe if you later on in the impulse overrun a ship and force it to rebase, you must then flip a different unit to try and intercept it.)

But if the ship that was flipped to search gets aborted, then you must flip another to initiate search.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

The point you don't mention in your answer, (but you did in your email to Harry & others), is that if mandatory aborts take place before combat in a sea area is completed (to quiescience), then we could have a new unit (H) entering sea area S where combat 1 is in progress. Which leaves open the question:
What happens in sea area S, where a naval combat is in progress, if a naval unit belonging to either side, aborting from a naval combat in sea area T, enters the sea area? Reasonable choices seem to be:

1 - the aborting naval unit cannot be intercepted and gets a clean pass through the sea area.

2 - the aborting naval unit is temporarily halted in sea area S (section 0) and becomes part of the next round of combat in sea area S. However, note that the naval combat in sea area T is run to quiescience before the next round of combat in sea area S.

3 - an attempt to intercept the aborting naval unit occurs automatically (because of the on-going combat). If the interception fails, #1 occurs. If the interception succeeds, #2 occurs.

4 - the opposing side to the aborting naval unit may attempt to intercept, with outcomes the same as in #3.
===
My uses of queues is an attempt to avoid the situation where an on-going naval combat has newly aborting naval units arrive.

[:)]Just to really mess with your mind, it could have been the original aborting unit F that aborts from the second naval combat in sea area T and then decides to abort back through sea area S. Just when you throught you had seen the last of that carrier, here it comes again![:D]

EDIT: Upon rereading my answer I see that I did not address the possibility of a new naval combat (#3) occuring in sea area S if a naval combat is still in progress (#1). I find that quite unattractive for several reasons.

I agree you have to handle this in the code but it will occur very rarely, because getting caught when you have to fight through usually involves a lot of surprise points against the moving force, players will do everything possible to abort their units thru the safest route possible. Also if combats go badly and you decide to abort the sea zone, you must abort all committed units. This raises the very real possibility that you must have your aborting units stay until they are sunk, rather than have to abort your strong forces in say the three box, which you are unable to roll to get included in the combats.

But of course the code has to handle it because it is "possible". I agree with Patrice's comments that you must complete the last abort result first, then the next last etc. "Wheels within wheels" as he said or perhaps the analogy is nested Do loops. The trick is, you don't know how many levels of nesting will occur until each abort gets resolved.

As for the ships that started it all off, if they are fighting through, they are unlikely to be in a box above the zero box. When you are intercepted and choose to fight through, you must pick a box. Sometimes the choice of moving to a higher box and fighting through is even accepted by the moving player to the extent of expending all the moving forces movement points because the whole reason for moving was to suck-in the opponent to intercepting. But usually a moving force trying to fight through will be in the zero box.

Anyway this all has to be handled, so to make a long comment even longer, I would say that what should happen when H re-enters S, and the opposing side chooses to intercept and is successful, is that a new combat is fought as per the interception rules. After one round of combat, if the owner of H does not abort with all his committed (not necessarily included ones, all the committed ones), then another normal combat round begins. The original combat that caused the whole mess is still suspended, waiting for all aborts to be resolved, although when it eventually resumes, the forces present might have changed drastically.

When things get thorny like this, I try to go back to as simple an idea of what is being simulated as possible.

The original naval movement in sea area S was 'spotted' by the enemy and combat ensued. Historically, naval combats often had a hit-or-miss aspect to them, with enemy units losing track of each other and the combat abating without any one side "heading for home". Indeed, frequently, one of the opposing sides was actively trying to disengage, though they were not trying to flee to a home port. Units that are "fighting through" during naval movement are doing precisely this.

So, after the first round of combat, naval unit E aborts (most often a naval unit is an individual capital ship in MWIF). Off it goes, trying to reach a home port, probably because it is damaged to an extent that necessitates it retiring from the combat, though not severely enough to warrant a damage marker in WIF terms. As it wends its way homeward, it is 'spotted' by different enemy naval units far from the first combat (in a different sea area: T).

My logic for queueing aborts and completing the second round of naval combat in sea area S comes into play at this point. Ships move slowly, so the elapsed time (historical) for the aborted unit to reach sea area T would be non-trivial. To me, the continuing search and renewal (or not) of combat in sea area S seems likely to occur before the aborted unit E has found its way any significant distance into sea area T. This is even more true if sea area T is not adjacent to S but a couple of sea areas away (e.g., the Japanese aborting a unit from the middle of the Pacific and being intercepted by a submarine in coastal Japanese waters). Taking that example a little farther, the elapsed time for a naval unit to travel from the middle of the Pacific to Japan is many days, while the renewal of a naval combat was often the same day or within the next day or two of the first contact.

===
Queuing has the advantage from a programming point of view that each naval combat is 'completed' before a second naval combat commences. It also avoids the trickier aspects of aborting naval units being 'spotted' and starting/renewing a naval combat in a sea area already in the middle of a combat.

===
Given that we are all pretty much in agreement that these situations are a very rare occurences, I would prefer to go with something that is easy to program, rather than try to work out complicated contingencies just to deal with minutiae. [I'm beginning to like the word 'minutiae' more and more lately.[:D]]

[lomyrin]

While I think your reasoning is good and realistic, it does change the implementation of aborts and lets both sides have more information about what is about to occur than is true per RAW.
 
Personally I have no problem with this approach but some potential payers may claim this is not per RAW and claim a difference from WiFFE that is not good.
 
Lars

[Zorachus99]

I thought that the phasing player activated in each sea area sequentially, though all searches are declared simultaneously.  The phasing player does get to choose the order of combats, do they not?
 
Ships that are aborted as a result of combat all abort as a group at the end of that roud; and if the aborting player has chosen to abort everything from the sea zone, they all abort together at the end of that combat round. The abort then resolves any naval combats that it may activate as consequence of 'moving through' the sea area, which allows interception.
 
Depending on implementation, you should check if ships are no longer in the sea area to evaluate whether an activation has to be cancelled.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

When things get thorny like this, I try to go back to as simple an idea of what is being simulated as possible.[/u]

The original naval movement in sea area S was 'spotted' by the enemy and combat ensued. Historically, naval combats often had a hit-or-miss aspect to them, with enemy units losing track of each other and the combat abating without any one side "heading for home". Indeed, frequently, one of the opposing sides was actively trying to disengage, though they were not trying to flee to a home port. Units that are "fighting through" during naval movement are doing precisely this.

So, after the first round of combat, naval unit E aborts (most often a naval unit is an individual capital ship in MWIF). Off it goes, trying to reach a home port, probably because it is damaged to an extent that necessitates it retiring from the combat, though not severely enough to warrant a damage marker in WIF terms. As it wends its way homeward, it is 'spotted' by different enemy naval units far from the first combat (in a different sea area: T).

My logic for queueing aborts and completing the second round of naval combat in sea area S comes into play at this point. Ships move slowly, so the elapsed time (historical) for the aborted unit to reach sea area T would be non-trivial. To me, the continuing search and renewal (or not) of combat in sea area S seems likely to occur before the aborted unit E has found its way any significant distance into sea area T. This is even more true if sea area T is not adjacent to S but a couple of sea areas away (e.g., the Japanese aborting a unit from the middle of the Pacific and being intercepted by a submarine in coastal Japanese waters). Taking that example a little farther, the elapsed time for a naval unit to travel from the middle of the Pacific to Japan is many days, while the renewal of a naval combat was often the same day or within the next day or two of the first contact.

===
Queuing has the advantage from a programming point of view that each naval combat is 'completed' before a second naval combat commences. It also avoids the trickier aspects of aborting naval units being 'spotted' and starting/renewing a naval combat in a sea area already in the middle of a combat.

===
Given that we are all pretty much in agreement that these situations are a very rare occurences, I would prefer to go with something that is easy to program, rather than try to work out complicated contingencies just to deal with minutiae. [I'm beginning to like the word 'minutiae' more and more lately.[:D]]

If its realistic and historical then there's no way in the world that aborting naval unit is going to end up back in the same sea zone. And yet this is precisely what is possible under RAW (combined with some pretty suspect play on behalf of the player conducting the abort). I look at the naval combat as a fairly poor reconstruction of actual events and yet like the rest of WiF things work out to deliver a very historic feel to the overall ebb and flow of the conflict.

Why not forget about the time and motion study and just implement the game as per RAW? Naval Combat 1 is suspended while the combat abort is conducted. If that triggers Naval Combat 2 which causes an abort and that abort triggers Naval Combat 3 then Naval Combat 2 is also suspended... etc. etc.

Have you given this concept as much consideration as the queueing one? From way out here it actually sounds to me like it might be easier to program.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

When things get thorny like this, I try to go back to as simple an idea of what is being simulated as possible.[/u]

The original naval movement in sea area S was 'spotted' by the enemy and combat ensued. Historically, naval combats often had a hit-or-miss aspect to them, with enemy units losing track of each other and the combat abating without any one side "heading for home". Indeed, frequently, one of the opposing sides was actively trying to disengage, though they were not trying to flee to a home port. Units that are "fighting through" during naval movement are doing precisely this.

So, after the first round of combat, naval unit E aborts (most often a naval unit is an individual capital ship in MWIF). Off it goes, trying to reach a home port, probably because it is damaged to an extent that necessitates it retiring from the combat, though not severely enough to warrant a damage marker in WIF terms. As it wends its way homeward, it is 'spotted' by different enemy naval units far from the first combat (in a different sea area: T).

My logic for queueing aborts and completing the second round of naval combat in sea area S comes into play at this point. Ships move slowly, so the elapsed time (historical) for the aborted unit to reach sea area T would be non-trivial. To me, the continuing search and renewal (or not) of combat in sea area S seems likely to occur before the aborted unit E has found its way any significant distance into sea area T. This is even more true if sea area T is not adjacent to S but a couple of sea areas away (e.g., the Japanese aborting a unit from the middle of the Pacific and being intercepted by a submarine in coastal Japanese waters). Taking that example a little farther, the elapsed time for a naval unit to travel from the middle of the Pacific to Japan is many days, while the renewal of a naval combat was often the same day or within the next day or two of the first contact.

===
Queuing has the advantage from a programming point of view that each naval combat is 'completed' before a second naval combat commences. It also avoids the trickier aspects of aborting naval units being 'spotted' and starting/renewing a naval combat in a sea area already in the middle of a combat.

===
Given that we are all pretty much in agreement that these situations are a very rare occurences, I would prefer to go with something that is easy to program, rather than try to work out complicated contingencies just to deal with minutiae. [I'm beginning to like the word 'minutiae' more and more lately.[:D]]

If its realistic and historical then there's no way in the world that aborting naval unit is going to end up back in the same sea zone. And yet this is precisely what is possible under RAW (combined with some pretty suspect play on behalf of the player conducting the abort). I look at the naval combat as a fairly poor reconstruction of actual events and yet like the rest of WiF things work out to deliver a very historic feel to the overall ebb and flow of the conflict.

Why not forget about the time and motion study and just implement the game as per RAW? Naval Combat 1 is suspended while the combat abort is conducted. If that triggers Naval Combat 2 which causes an abort and that abort triggers Naval Combat 3 then Naval Combat 2 is also suspended... etc. etc.

Have you given this concept as much consideration as the queueing one? From way out here it actually sounds to me like it might be easier to program.

I'm sorry guys, but IMO you are falling into the same pit trap a lot of people fall when thinking and playing WiF : You forget the scale.

I mean that IMO, the Naval Combat 1 is a series of naval combats that occurs in sea area S over the timeframe of the 2 months of the turn (more likely during the time frame of the couple of weeks "simulated" by the impulse when this happens in game terms, but not necesseraly as this naval impulse can be considered WiFzenwise to occur more or less simultaneously with a land impulse that gamewise is played later or earlier).

IMO it is perfectly possible that many days separate the 1st round from the second (which can be separate naval battles in reality for me), so it is perfectly possible that the naval movement of ship E, which is not so slow as you say Steve, sailing about 20 knots 24 hours a day makes her run for about 500 nautical miles per day, which is is comparable to the size of a sea area.

If she sails for 3 days, she covers 1200-1500 nautical miles which is an enormous distance and can justify her being included in round 2 of Naval Combat 1.

[composer99]

So Steve is thinking of implementing a queue to sort out aborts while combats are underway, while others are suggesting that a stack (first-in-last-out, if I've got the name right), where any combats resulting from aborted units suspend previous combats until they are resolved (with resolution passing down the chain back to the original combat) is, by being closer to RAW, a better approach.
 
This low-probability naval combat stuff must be a pain to code.
 
At least, because all aborts are implemented at the end of the combat round, you have an easy spot at which to suspend the combat if any aborting ships inspire new combats elsewhere.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

When things get thorny like this, I try to go back to as simple an idea of what is being simulated as possible.[/u]

The original naval movement in sea area S was 'spotted' by the enemy and combat ensued. Historically, naval combats often had a hit-or-miss aspect to them, with enemy units losing track of each other and the combat abating without any one side "heading for home". Indeed, frequently, one of the opposing sides was actively trying to disengage, though they were not trying to flee to a home port. Units that are "fighting through" during naval movement are doing precisely this.

So, after the first round of combat, naval unit E aborts (most often a naval unit is an individual capital ship in MWIF). Off it goes, trying to reach a home port, probably because it is damaged to an extent that necessitates it retiring from the combat, though not severely enough to warrant a damage marker in WIF terms. As it wends its way homeward, it is 'spotted' by different enemy naval units far from the first combat (in a different sea area: T).

My logic for queueing aborts and completing the second round of naval combat in sea area S comes into play at this point. Ships move slowly, so the elapsed time (historical) for the aborted unit to reach sea area T would be non-trivial. To me, the continuing search and renewal (or not) of combat in sea area S seems likely to occur before the aborted unit E has found its way any significant distance into sea area T. This is even more true if sea area T is not adjacent to S but a couple of sea areas away (e.g., the Japanese aborting a unit from the middle of the Pacific and being intercepted by a submarine in coastal Japanese waters). Taking that example a little farther, the elapsed time for a naval unit to travel from the middle of the Pacific to Japan is many days, while the renewal of a naval combat was often the same day or within the next day or two of the first contact.

===
Queuing has the advantage from a programming point of view that each naval combat is 'completed' before a second naval combat commences. It also avoids the trickier aspects of aborting naval units being 'spotted' and starting/renewing a naval combat in a sea area already in the middle of a combat.

===
Given that we are all pretty much in agreement that these situations are a very rare occurences, I would prefer to go with something that is easy to program, rather than try to work out complicated contingencies just to deal with minutiae. [I'm beginning to like the word 'minutiae' more and more lately.[:D]]

If its realistic and historical then there's no way in the world that aborting naval unit is going to end up back in the same sea zone. And yet this is precisely what is possible under RAW (combined with some pretty suspect play on behalf of the player conducting the abort). I look at the naval combat as a fairly poor reconstruction of actual events and yet like the rest of WiF things work out to deliver a very historic feel to the overall ebb and flow of the conflict.

Why not forget about the time and motion study and just implement the game as per RAW? Naval Combat 1 is suspended while the combat abort is conducted. If that triggers Naval Combat 2 which causes an abort and that abort triggers Naval Combat 3 then Naval Combat 2 is also suspended... etc. etc.

Have you given this concept as much consideration as the queueing one? From way out here it actually sounds to me like it might be easier to program.

Yes, I have.

What you propose leads to sea area S experiencing naval combat #3 with combat rounds 1, 2, 3, ... And then quite possibly experiencing rounds 2, 3, ... of naval combat #1 in the same sea area. Despite the fact that naval combat #3 resulted in failed searches, we would be starting another round of searches in the same sea area with all the same units (except the one that was aborting through).

The other major problem I have with this is that some units in sea area S might still be waiting to abort when naval combat #3 starts up. For instance, if both sides have 1 unit to abort from naval combat #1's first round, we have only moved one of them so far. The second one, from the other side, is still in limbo. It can not be included in a future combat in sea area S, (since it is aborting), yet it hasn't moved into another sea area yet.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

1 - I thought that the phasing player activated in each sea area sequentially, though all searches are declared simultaneously. The phasing player does get to choose the order of combats, do they not?

2 - Ships that are aborted as a result of combat all abort as a group at the end of that roud; and if the aborting player has chosen to abort everything from the sea zone, they all abort together at the end of that combat round. The abort then resolves any naval combats that it may activate as consequence of 'moving through' the sea area, which allows interception.

Depending on implementation, you should check if ships are no longer in the sea area to evaluate whether an activation has to be cancelled.

#1 - The phasing side chooses whether to conduct a naval combat in any sea area of their choice during the Phasing side's Naval Combat Phase. Each naval combat is conducted to completion, and the ophasing side gets to chooses another sea area, if they so decide.

Once the phasing side gets bored with that activity, the non-phasing side has the same opportunity to initiate naval combats.

#2 - It is my understanding that each individual unit aborted as the result of a naval combat die roll, has to be immediately aborted. This takes place before the next combat round starts. The movement of that unit can be intercepted in other sea areas.

Voluntary aborts by an entire side at the end of a combat round are different, though a unit that had to abort as the result of a die roll in the current combat round are merged into the rest of that side's units if the side voluntarily aborts.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: composer99

So Steve is thinking of implementing a queue to sort out aborts while combats are underway, while others are suggesting that a stack (first-in-last-out, if I've got the name right), where any combats resulting from aborted units suspend previous combats until they are resolved (with resolution passing down the chain back to the original combat) is, by being closer to RAW, a better approach.

This low-probability naval combat stuff must be a pain to code.

At least, because all aborts are implemented at the end of the combat round, you have an easy spot at which to suspend the combat if any aborting ships inspire new combats elsewhere.

The real pain is writing all this stuff out to the saved game file.

[Orm]

We have always played it like this but fortunately with less abort chains.


There is a combat in Sea Area one (S1) in which both sides (a,b) have one abort. S1a begins its abort and enters area S2 where it fights a combat with new aborts on each side (S2a, S2b). After combat S1a continues its abort. When S1a has finnished its abort you go back to the first combat and starts the seconds sides S1b abort. S1b fights a combat in area S3 with aborts. S1b finnishes its abort. Then you move on to S2a and then S2b and countinue S3a, S3b and so on untill all aborts are done then you continue with new search roll in S1.