What kind of manual(s) should we ask for?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

Shannon,

In regards to #1, a minor country can be conquered and still be 'at war' ala the Netherlands, Belgium, etc... 

You're right. Thanks.

I have to read through the (CWIF) code on this again. As I recall (having read this a couple of days ago), in the code the potential need to rebase overrun units is a function of the country becoming neutral. If it doesn't, then the overrun units aren't overrun. The might cause a bug to occur under some circumstances.

The code had a hole in what to do with enemy naval units when control of a hex changes "underneath the units" due to incomplete conquest. For example, what to do with CW naval and air units (no land unit present) in Rotterdam if Germany conquers The Netherlands. If a CW land unit is present, then the hex stays controlled by the CW. Without the land unit, the hex becomes German, and the CW units have to rebase. This is processed in a slightly different place in the code for incomplete conquest versus complete conquest. The code was already correct for complete conquest.

I made the changes to the code today to fill this hole.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Perhaps consider taking out the wording about the scrap digession in 7.13.2 and 7.13.3 and just keep the wording that units may be destroyed in certain cases. Then 7.13.4 covers the Scrap digression.

Perhaps in 7.13.5 it is worth mentioning this is RAC, not RAW, so the WiF guru new reader doesn't overreact.

Last line of 7.13.6 should read: "Naval combat abort digressions continue executing until there are no longer any units in the Naval Abort Queue."

Just curious - when I read 7.13.6 I'm getting the impression I cannot move my aborting units (same combat round voluntary plus involuntary) as separate naval moves if I want? I can do so by RAW.

In 7.13.8, Vichy can collapse in either an Axis Rail or an Axis Land Movement phase.

Ok, thanks.

I'll change "is able" to "has the option of" which should make it more obvious that combining units into a group is up to the player.

No new text today for the Player's Manual. Instead I am catching up on all the suggested changes provided by various readers.

Here is a revised paragraph.
===
7.13.6 Naval Combat Abort Digression

MWIF ‘s sequence of play for naval combats and naval combat aborts differs from RAW. The rest of this section is how MWIF does it.

Naval Combat Abort digressions only occur when processing the Naval Abort Queue. That queue is maintained by the program and has naval units added to it when either an abort result is received during a naval combat round or a voluntary abort by an entire side at the end of a naval combat round.

The units in the Naval Abort Queue are sometimes moved as individual units or a as group of naval units. A player has the option of combining two or more naval units in the Naval Abort Queue if those units started in the same sea box section and aborted from the same naval combat during the same round. That happens most often when an entire side voluntarily aborts at the end of a combat round. However, it can also occur if there was more than 1 naval unit aborted during a single combat round as a result of die rolls.

Note that if a combat result precipitated an abort and then the player decides to voluntarily abort at the end of the same round, the combat abort(s) is( are) merged into the voluntarily abort and the naval units are all considered equivalent a s far as moving them is concerned.

If the player decides to move a group of aborted naval units, then they must have started in the same sea box section. If two or more units move as a group, they are required to return to the same port.

Naval combat abort digressions continue executing until there are no longer any units in the Naval Abort Queue.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

OK, I was not shred to pieces by posting my take at 3.4.3, so here is my take at 3.4.2.

3.4.2 Action Choice
Patrice Forno – Version 1.0

Action Types
Action choices are the heart of the game system of MWiF. I think that your overall action choice during the game will give you victory or defeat. You will have about 125-126 impulse per side for the whole 39-45 game (which make it a global average of 3,5 impulses per side per turn over the course of the 36 turns of the whole 39-45 game), so that’s about 120-130 action choices you will have to do.

There are 5 types of actions that you can choose during each impulse.

• Land action gives you some air missions (from 1 to 4), unlimited land moves and land attacks and no naval move.
• Naval action gives you some air missions (from 1 to 3), no land move and land attacks and unlimited naval moves.
• Combined action gives you a large number of air missions (from 3 to 7, China excepted), some land moves (2-6), few land attacks (1-3) and few naval move (1-3). It is a bit of everything.
• Air action gives you unlimited number of air missions, no land move and land attacks, no naval move.
• Pass action gives you no air missions, no land move and land attacks and no naval moves.

Action choice also has an important impact on reorganization. Reorganization is cheaper for units that match the action type. For example, it costs the normal amount for air units if you choose an air action, otherwise it is twice the normal cost.

The action types the most chosen usually in the game are the land, naval and combined actions. The air action is very infrequently used, and the pass action is only used when you would like the turn to end (by the allies in the first half of the war, and by the axis in the late part of the war). Basically you do nothing military, and the turn has more chances to finish. My WiFZen for this action is that your country is conducting actions that are not represented and have no effect on the game. Maybe they are secret (or not) meetings, secret (or not) negotiations, whatever. Generally the land powers (Germany, USSR) use a lot of land actions, some combined actions, a few naval actions and a few air actions. IMO they only use air action as an opening for a large scale offensive, or when they have nothing to do and want to rebase a lot of planes. The naval powers (USA, CW, and Japan) generally use 1 naval impulse per turn, and a lot of combined actions in the game. Land actions and air actions are fewer.

Scheduling
You need to think about your action choices wisely and have a vague idea of the types of actions that you will need during the whole turn (they depend on your grand strategy), and schedule them for the better result, taking into account the expected number of impulses for that turn, the present weather and also the weather forecast. The weather forecast is indicated by the modifier to the weather dice, and can also be known in advance using intelligence. The expected number of impulses per turn is given in following chapters.

Example : If you want to conduct a large scale summer offensive, it might be a good idea to start the game turn by an air action, so that you can use your air force widely and without restrictions, so that the enemy is softened for future impulses. It might look like a wasted impulse because there will be no land action or land attack, but it may pay off during next impulse, providing you’ve restricted the enemy’s reorganization capacity so that he does not nullify your results. On the plus side, an air action let you reorganize using your full reorganization capacity.

Example : If you are playing a naval power (USA, CW or Japan), you will be obliged to choose one naval action almost every turn. This will be either to cover your convoys routes (CW & USA), or to carry on your offensives across the oceans, or to defend against the probes and offensives of your enemies. For the CW it is generally chosen as the first impulse to ensure the best convoy protection for all the turn, but it may be delayed depending on the weather, or never be done under exceptional circumstances. So as you know you must do it, schedule your other naval needs so they happen during that impulse.
Dispersion
One thing that is easy to have wrong with action choices is to choose a combined action too often. You need to realize that you will do fewer things by choosing 3 combined actions in a row, versus choosing one of the main arms’ actions in each of the 3 impulses. For me, combined actions are dispersion of military power for mediocre results. Specialized action choices (air, naval and land) are concentration of military power for the best results.

For example, with the CW, 3 combined actions give you 6 naval moves, 15 air missions, 9 land moves, 3 land attacks and 3 rail moves. If you had done 1 naval, 1 air and 1 land actions, you’ll have had an unlimited number of naval moves, an unlimited number of air missions, an unlimited number of land moves, an unlimited number of land attacks and 6 rail moves (rail moves are limited whatever your action choice).

The difference is timing and scheduling. You will choose a combined action if you think that you can’t wait for a future land action to move land units, that you need to move them now, or that you can’t wait for a future air action to move air units, etc…

But when choosing a combined action you should always ask yourself : “Do I really need to move all these different arms’ units at the same time ?, Can’t some of them wait for next impulse ?”. Unavoidably, you’ll choose combined actions a lot, the main good reason for that choice is for having a lot of Air Missions in the first place, because except for the air action, the combined action is the one with the most air missions, and you do a lot of air missions in MWiF.

Offensive Chits
You can have super versions of the regular action choices by having an offensive chit expended.

A Land offensive chit allows you to fight 1-3 land battles at much higher odds than you would normally have had.
An Air offensive chit allows you to bomb a whole area of the frontline (4-8 hexes across) with a much higher efficiency than you would have had. Obviously, you need to have a fighter force that make your bombers clear through, because air-to-air combats are not affected by air offensive chits.
A combined offensive chit allows you to have unlimited air, land and naval actions. You can do everything at the same time.
A naval offensive chit, depending on the option you choose, allows for better efficiency at sea. The old version allows you to reorg a lot of ships to use them again. The newer version allows you better search rolls in a few sea areas.

Also, and maybe most importantly, offensive chits allows for cheaper (halved) reorganisation costs for units reorganized by the offensive chit HQ. So the offensive chit allows for a big blow, and then allows you to use most of the disrupted units later again.

Offensive chits are few in the game. Germany begins the game with 2 of them, Japan with one. Germany is likely to build a couple (1-3) more during the course of the war, while Japan usually only builds 1 more but not much due to smaller production. The USSR begins the game with 1 too, and is the only country on the allied side to have one. The USSR can generally have about 1-2 offensive chits per turn during 1-2 turns per year from 1942 to the end. The CW generally manage at having 2 offensive chits per year from 1942 to the end of the war, maybe less in 1942 (only 1 for the year) and slightly more in 1944-1945. The USA usually will have a huge lot of them in 1943-1945, increasing year after year. It is not uncommon to have the USA use 1 offensive chit per impulse for each impulse of the M/J and J/A 1945 turns. It is not uncommon to have them have 2 offensive chits per turn in M/J and J/A of 1944, and maybe 1-2 spare for S/O and N/D 1944. The power of the USA comes a lot from the Offensive Chits that they are able to field, contrarily to the other countries. The USA army is not very strong, nor very numerous, it is numerous and armoured enough to stand the enemy, but the offensive chits gives them what they lack to crack the Axis lines.

Teaming
When choosing action types, you need to know how to work as a team with other major powers on your side. The major powers known to be able to do that are : The Western Allies (the CW, the USA and Free France for a little part) famous for their Super Air / Super Land sledgehammer, but also for normal action choice combinations, and the Euro Axis (Italy & Germany). This teaming works better if both Major powers cooperate.

Euro Axis. Germany is a strong land power, and a moderate sea power. Italy is quite a good sea power, and a mediocre land power. One good scheme for running a good Battle of the Atlantic with the Euro Axis, is to have Germany sails its SUBs early in the turn (either with a naval action, or with a combined action as all SUBs leaving the same port count as only 1 naval move even if they sail into dozens of different sea areas) while Italy does something else, initiate its own searches and fight any naval battle. And then during the following impulse Italy chooses either a combined or a naval action to move its SUBs so that they join with the German ones, and do their searches. The German SUBs will participate in each naval battle thus started along with the Italian SUBs. Italy will do that each subsequent impulse and initiate new searches and fight new combats alongside with the Germans. Germany will be able focus on land wars in distant lands while Italy initiates the searches in the Atlantic and helps the U-boots wrecking havoc.

CW & USA (Western Allies) : The USA are a sub-strong land power, a very very strong naval and air power. The CW are a moderate land power, a very very strong naval and air power. One good teaming that they can setup is for example to have one of them choose a naval action while the other chooses a land action. This allow for all the fleets of the former to move, load the land units of the later, and then have all the land units of the later able to unload, invade, move, attack, without limit. This team can (and must) be backed up from the mid game to the end by the Free French that will be able either to choose a naval, or a land or an air action, what will be the most convenient for the other members of the team.

Another teaming action that both the Euro Axis and the Western Allies can use is for one member of the team to choose an air action while the other chooses a land action. This allows for unlimited air strikes on the enemy (plus lots of reorganisation for future air use), plus unlimited land moves and land combats (and lots of reorg of land units too). It looks like a big combined action from the team. This is generally most often seen with the Western Allies, who can also use it in its Super version, which is an offensive chit on an air action for one member of the team and an offensive chit for a land action for the other member. This later combination is ultimately powerful and can crack the most powerful German defence, especially if the Western Allies dominate the skies.

Disturb the enemy’s plans
You must try to force the enemy to choose an action choice that he would not have wanted to choose at this moment. As I already said somewhere, MWiF is a game against the clock, more than against the other side, so making the enemy waste precious impulses doing something else than what really bother you is good.

For example, try force the German to choose a combined or naval or air action when he is trying to conduct a land war in Russia. This will give Russia a delay, which can help save her. This is not easy to achieve.

Another example is as the Axis to force the Western Allies to choose a naval action when they would have been able to choose a combined action. Choosing a naval instead may make them late in their planned land action. It is easy to achieve, just sink a few more convoys than what they were ready to loose for example.

Initiative and flip-flops
In MWiF, a side is not required / guarantied to play the same number of impulses as the other side per turn. At least half of the time (more or less a few percents), one side will have one more impulse than the enemy. It will play the first impulse, and the last. If that happens on two subsequent turns, this is called (in French) a flip-flop, and this is a very powerful effect as you can act twice in a row without your opponent reacting. This is especially powerful, as reinforcements will have arrived in between the 2 turns maybe giving you (or the enemy) an extra power. Flip-flops have small chances of happening, as the game has a mechanic that helps the side that did not move first in a turn, to move first in the subsequent turn (this mechanic is the initiative track).

So, beside action choices, choosing who plays first is important. As I have already said, playing first also gives chances for an extra impulse (about 50% chances). But also, the more you play second in a series of turn, the more chances you’ll have to play first in a given turn you chose in advance. For example, the Germans that chose a Barbarossa 41 strategy like to play first in M/J and J/A 41. To have the best chances of this happening, they would better let the Allies play first for the 1-3 previous turns. Playing first have a tendency to push the initiative toward the other side – initiative track – so when and when the initiative is pushed in one camp, this camp have more chances to win the initiative roll, and the side that wins the initiative roll decide who plays first. So, it is usual to have a side winning the initiative roll, and have the other side play first, as a mean to play first later, when the turn will be best for their war plans to be executed.

Gambles
The more impulses you play during a turn, the more chances this turn have to end. See the statistics at the end of this chapter for information about the expected number of impulses per turn.

When it is late in the turn, you can try a gamble. A gamble here is betting that the turn will end to try actions that you would not have tried at another moment, or actions that would be less damaging at another moment.

It can happen in Russia for example that a city is besieged by 2-3 hexsides by the enemy. A dangerous gamble for the defender is to have one of the city’s defending units to move out of the city, hoping for the turn to end and a reinforcing unit to take its place. The risk is that if the turn does not end, the city may be easier for the enemy to conquer. The less this city is threatened, the less dangerous this gamble is. The interest is to have a quick reinforcement, which may be the difference between life & death for that city.

Another gamble, that has no risks in itself but is not doable all the time because often the units able to do it are already disrupted, is to attack the enemy convoy lines late in the turn, hoping for the turn to end so that the enemy has no opportunity to send reinforcing convoys to re-establish his supply and production lines. One more dangerous version of this gamble is to not attack the convoys in some sea area for the whole turn, hopping that the enemy will not go reinforcing them, and attack them late in the turn.

Another gamble would be for units to advance to areas where they are out of supply during this bad weather turn, hoping that the turn ends so that the enemy does not counter attack them, and be in supply next turn to advance even deeper.

Also, you’ll often see German (or Russian) units advance in the difficult terrain of the Pripet Marshes (that makes them disrupt and be immobilized for the rest of the turn) when the end of the turn is nearing, because they hope for the turn to end and so they think that their units would not have advanced anymore anyway.

Obviously, the end of the turn is also the moment for “desperate attacks” (ones that have high risks of disruption), that you would not have done earlier because you would not have liked to have your units disrupted for whatever reason.

Statistics about numbers of impulses
Here are my own statistics, accumulated over 8 completed 39-45 games. This is 48 J/F game turns, 48 M/A game turns, and so on.

Average number of impulse per side, per game turn :
J/F : 2,5 impulses per side per turn
M/A : 2,9 impulses per side per turn
M/J : 4,2 impulses per side per turn
J/A : 4,7 impulses per side per turn
S/O : 3,5 impulses per side per turn
N/D : 2,9 impulses per side per turn

For an average of 125-126 impulse per side per whole 39-45 game (which make it a global average of 3,5 impulses per side per turn over the course of the 36 turns of the whole 39-45 game).

Maximum observed number of impulse for a side during a game turn :
J/F : 4 impulses for a side
M/A : 4-5 impulses for a side
M/J : 6-7 impulses for a side
J/A : 7-8 impulses for a side
S/O : 5 impulses for a side
N/D : 2 impulses for a side

Minimum observed number of impulse for a side during a game turn :
J/F : 1 impulse for a side
M/A : 1 impulse for a side
M/J : 1-2 impulses for a side
J/A : 2-3 impulses for a side
S/O : 1-2 impulses for a side
N/D : 1 impulse for a side

To sum up, a J/A game turn will have an average of 4,7 impulses (say 5 for the side that plays first, and 4 for the other side), and have a maximum of 8 impulses, and a minimum of 2 impulses.

Let’s be clear that :
• The minimum and maximum are sometimes one time occurrences over the whole 8 games.
• The minimum observed number of impulse is for the side that moved last. The other side will have experienced an extra impulse generally.
• The maximum observed number of impulse is for the side that moved first. The other side will have experienced an impulse less generally.

Statistic about the expected number of impulse per game turn
Some other statistic that I had from another source, obtained after simulating 100,000 years of WiF game turns :

Probability of turn ending after impulse J/F M/A M/J J/A S/O N/D
3 5,60% 2,50% 0,10% 2,60%
4 23,40% 11,80% <0,1% <0,1% 3,70% 12,70%
5 32,80% 24,90% 3,50% 0,50% 13,40% 24,50%
6 24,30% 27,10% 7,80% 0,80% 20,60% 25,10%
7 9,90% 18,80% 16,50% 10,80% 22,60% 18,10%
8 3,00% 9,90% 20,90% 18,30% 18,50% 10,30%
9 0,70% 3,50% 20,00% 21,10% 11,70% 4,50%
10 0,20% 1,20% 15,10% 19,70% 5,80% 1,60%
11 <0,1% 0,30% 9,30% 14,60% 2,50% 0,50%
12 <0,1% <0,1% 4,70% 8,50% 0,90% 0,10%
13 1,50% 3,90% 0,20% <0,1%
14 0,50% 1,40% <0,1%
15 <0,1% 0,30%
16+ <0,1%

Expected # of impulses: 5,2 6,0 8,7 9,5 7,2 6,0

Probability of odd number of impulses 49,10% 50,10% 50,90% 51,20% 50,50% 50,20%

Probability of even number of impulses 50,90% 49,90% 49,10% 48,80% 49,50% 49,80%

Ppatrice,

Could you please send me a TXT file of this? That is easier for me to integrate into my existing file.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Initialy my remark was about this part of RAW :
******************************************
Now, place in the force pools all French controlled ‘Res’ and ‘Mil’ units and half their other land and aircraft units (taken together) from Metropolitan Vichy France and each administration group controlled by Vichy France. The player running Vichy France can choose which to remove.
******************************************

That you translated to :
******************************************
7.12.12 Remove French Units from Map (RAC 17.3 paragraph 7)

During this subphase the program goes through each of the countries controlled by Vichy France, other than Vichy Metropolitan France, and lets the Axis major power that declared Vichy France decide which of the land and air units in those countries should stay on the map. Half, rounding down, have to be removed. Those go into the Free French force pool. After every Vichy controlled country has been processed, the game advances to the next subphase.
******************************************

For example, if there are 1 unit in each of Tunisia, Morocco & Algeria, under your wording the Vichy establishing power will remove the 3 units, as half of 1 is 1 under WiF FE roundings (by the way you wrote "Half, rounding down", it is wrong, it is "Half, rounding up").

Under RAW, as Tunisia, Morocco & Algeria are a single Administrative group, you total the 3 units, and remove half of them that is 2. So 1 is left.

This is the point I argued.

Rounding up is correct. That is how the code is written (my text was wrong).

The militia and reserve units are removed earlier in 7.12.10 (to get them out of the way).

Yes, but my point is not about MIL & Res, it is about the difference in treatment whether you deal with countries or administrative groups. With your wording, you remove all units from Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria if each of them has 1 unit, and with RAW wording you only remove 2 of them, the 3rd is left in the administrative group.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I do see one 'hole' in the rules though. Nothing is explicitly said about countries that France has conquered. For instance, if France had conquered Libya. What the program does currently is have countries conquered by France 'remain' controlled by Free French (more or less by ignoring them).

Good point. Might be worth taking to the Rules Clarification group. For a minor country, some would say: "FF must exist, they automatically get the conquered country at least."

Others would say: "Roll for it under 'All other territories & minors' ".

For a territory, it only matters if FF exists, but also I think still ambiguous.

I think that the answer lies in the RAW.

17.1 says that "French territories and minor countries already conquered by the Axis remain conquered by them.
All other French territories and minor countries may be aligned with either Vichy France or Free France."

All Territories & Minor Countries conquered by France before Vichyfication, are "French territories and minor countries". "French territories and minor countries" are all Territories & Minor Countries conquered or aligned by France.

So they are dealt with by 17.2, and they are rolled as one administrative group "All other territories & minors".

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Oh well, try and try again.[:@]

RAW is somewhat ambiguous as to whether (1) the totality of the land and air units is to be counted and then half of them removed, or (2) each administrative group is to have its total land and air units counted, halved, and then removed, before going onto the next administrative group.

The code (from CWIF) executes the latter. Since it is already written that way, I'll leave it as is.

This means the text for section 7.12.12 should be:

During this subphase the program goes through each of the administrative groups controlled by Vichy France and lets the Axis major power that declared Vichy France decide which of the land and air units in those administrative groups should stay on the map. Note that all the on-map French reserve and militia units were removed earlier (see section 7.12.10). Half of the remaining land and air units, in each administrative group, rounding down, have to be removed. The removed units go into the Free French force pool. The administrative groups are processed individually, without regard for removals in other administrative groups. After every Vichy controlled country has been processed, the game advances to the next subphase.

For me it is clear that RAW is saying (2) each administrative group is to have its total land and air units counted, halved, and then removed, before going onto the next administrative group.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

Shannon,

In regards to #1, a minor country can be conquered and still be 'at war' ala the Netherlands, Belgium, etc... 

You're right. Thanks.

I have to read through the (CWIF) code on this again. As I recall (having read this a couple of days ago), in the code the potential need to rebase overrun units is a function of the country becoming neutral. If it doesn't, then the overrun units aren't overrun. The might cause a bug to occur under some circumstances.

The code had a hole in what to do with enemy naval units when control of a hex changes "underneath the units" due to incomplete conquest. For example, what to do with CW naval and air units (no land unit present) in Rotterdam if Germany conquers The Netherlands. If a CW land unit is present, then the hex stays controlled by the CW. Without the land unit, the hex becomes German, and the CW units have to rebase. This is processed in a slightly different place in the code for incomplete conquest versus complete conquest. The code was already correct for complete conquest.

I made the changes to the code today to fill this hole.

A CW air unit by itself will also keep the hex CW controlled in a conquest control situation. Weird - but RAW.

Another check to look at with air units - should an air unit by itself in a hex, but in an enemy ZOC, be able to fly a mission? No, because it is out of supply.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I do see one 'hole' in the rules though. Nothing is explicitly said about countries that France has conquered. For instance, if France had conquered Libya. What the program does currently is have countries conquered by France 'remain' controlled by Free French (more or less by ignoring them).

Good point. Might be worth taking to the Rules Clarification group. For a minor country, some would say: "FF must exist, they automatically get the conquered country at least."

Others would say: "Roll for it under 'All other territories & minors' ".

For a territory, it only matters if FF exists, but also I think still ambiguous.

I think that the answer lies in the RAW.

17.1 says that "French territories and minor countries already conquered by the Axis remain conquered by them.
All other French territories and minor countries may be aligned with either Vichy France or Free France."

All Territories & Minor Countries conquered by France before Vichyfication, are "French territories and minor countries". "French territories and minor countries" are all Territories & Minor Countries conquered or aligned by France.

So they are dealt with by 17.2, and they are rolled as one administrative group "All other territories & minors".

There is one problem with that. A conquered country is not eligible to be an alternative home country. If FF manages to roll only to control the "others" and the only country in the "others" was conquered by France then there is no FF.

Also it is unclear if "all other French territories and minor countries" was written contemplating that it could refer to a minor country conquered by France. It may merely have been written with the assumption that it is referring to the more normal situation of what to do with the "others' originally possessed by France.

[micheljq]

Maybe it's me but I do not like the way the WiF board game manual is done. I am using it since many years and I often have difficulty finding what I am looking for in it. I mean often I do not know in what topic to look.

If another manual is to be done, it could inspire itself from the manual of the board game Empire in Arms, where the topics are clearly segmented and easy to find, according to me. With the WiF manual I always have the feeling that everything is mixed up.

[Ohio Jones]

Being able to search the manual online will help in that regard, Michel, but I know what you mean. There's also the opportunity within the online text to hotlink related topics, as well as sections of the player guide that help explain the rules and what they mean.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: micheljq

Maybe it's me but I do not like the way the WiF board game manual is done. I am using it since many years and I often have difficulty finding what I am looking for in it. I mean often I do not know in what topic to look.

If another manual is to be done, it could inspire itself from the manual of the board game Empire in Arms, where the topics are clearly segmented and easy to find, according to me. With the WiF manual I always have the feeling that everything is mixed up.

Yeah, tell me about it.[:D]

I chose to not try to rewrite RAW completely. RAC is based on RAW and contains a lot of edits, mostly as inserts for: clarifications/corrections from Harry and deviations from RAW in MWIF.

I am hoping that the Player's Manual will overcome a lot of the deficiencies of the structure of RAW.

For example, in the Player's Manual the optional rules have their own section and everything about each optional rule is in the subsection for each optional rule. I also see section 7 (Sequence of Play) letting players find something quickly, and the title of each subsection of section 7 contains the reference to RAC. So, if you are wondering about how divisional units invade, you can look at the section on invasions, in general, cross reference to the entry in RAC, and read more specifics in the optional rule for divisions.

[Grapeshot Bob]

ORIGINAL: micheljq
If another manual is to be done, it could inspire itself from the manual of the board game Empire in Arms, where the topics are clearly segmented and easy to find, according to me.

Possibly, but please note that the Matrix version of the EiA has a manual that is quite scattered in my opinion.

There are references to poorly-defined variables throughout. There are a confusing array of tables in the appendix which are not well documented. The manual could use a tutorial because there is no in-game tutorial.

An in-game tutorial is pretty much a vital necessity and MWiF should not be released without one. Several other Matrix games have tutorials that take small parts of the game and run the player through each in chapter format.


Mark

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: paulderynck





Good point. Might be worth taking to the Rules Clarification group. For a minor country, some would say: "FF must exist, they automatically get the conquered country at least."

Others would say: "Roll for it under 'All other territories & minors' ".

For a territory, it only matters if FF exists, but also I think still ambiguous.

I think that the answer lies in the RAW.

17.1 says that "French territories and minor countries already conquered by the Axis remain conquered by them.
All other French territories and minor countries may be aligned with either Vichy France or Free France."

All Territories & Minor Countries conquered by France before Vichyfication, are "French territories and minor countries". "French territories and minor countries" are all Territories & Minor Countries conquered or aligned by France.

So they are dealt with by 17.2, and they are rolled as one administrative group "All other territories & minors".

There is one problem with that. A conquered country is not eligible to be an alternative home country. If FF manages to roll only to control the "others" and the only country in the "others" was conquered by France then there is no FF.

Also it is unclear if "all other French territories and minor countries" was written contemplating that it could refer to a minor country conquered by France. It may merely have been written with the assumption that it is referring to the more normal situation of what to do with the "others' originally possessed by France.

Look, I knew I had read that from Harry already :
This is from the 1996 / 1999 Q & A, from which we dug out many of the first questions of the FAQ (this one was not included, but we can add it if you think it is worthwhile) :

******************************************
Suj : Re: more clarifications
Date : 23/01/97 02:22:36
From: 100400.1103@compuserve.com (Harry Rowland)
Resent-from: wif@list.digivis.com
Reply-to: wif@list.digivis.com
To: wif@list.digivis.com (WiF Players)

(...)

Q5> At the moment the rules on what happens to minors controlled by France when she goes Vichy seem to be. If the minor was aligned with France (ie. After taking Belgium the Belgian Congo is still aligned with France) the country stays Free French. If the minor was captured by the French (eg. Libya, say) it goes via a roll on the "other territory or minor" row. Is this right?

Ans> No. You roll on the other territory/minor table for all controlled (aligned AND conquered) minors.
******************************************

You should trust me more often... [:(]

PS : You can find in included in the PDF file that is available at our rule discussion group. Page 63, top left column.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: micheljq

Maybe it's me but I do not like the way the WiF board game manual is done. I am using it since many years and I often have difficulty finding what I am looking for in it. I mean often I do not know in what topic to look.

If another manual is to be done, it could inspire itself from the manual of the board game Empire in Arms, where the topics are clearly segmented and easy to find, according to me. With the WiF manual I always have the feeling that everything is mixed up.

Me on the contrary LOVE the RAW and how it is done. [:D]

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Here is my edit of input from Christopher and Patrice. [Let me know if my edits distorted what you meant.]
===
3.4.10 Production

Production is one of the most interesting facets of game play in MWIF. Production strategy is at least as important as military strategy. Without a successful production strategy, your major power will be without key units at key times, the consequences of which can range from your offense running out of steam, through to outright defeat.

The Production Plan
You should always have a production plan, which is a more-or-less structured idea of what you are going to build and when. Your production plan is influenced by:

1. Your strategic plan, which should drive your production priorities. Your production plan must enable you to accomplish your strategic objectives.

2. Your opponents’ activities. Early on, the Allies mostly react to the actions and plans of the Axis, and their production should reflect this. Later, the tables are turned.

3. The major power for which you are building. Each major power has its own unique characteristics and requires certain unique production elements. The CW and US, for example, usually need many sea-lift units to transport their units overseas. China never builds a navy.

Qualities of a Good Production Plan
A good production plan, one that assists a major power in achieving its strategic objectives, has several qualities: focus, flexibility, redundancy, and discipline. It must also account for timing and shortfalls. Certain major powers and situations call for the possession of a greater degree of some of these qualities than others.

Focus
Your production plan must be focused on fulfilling the requirements of your strategic plan. Avoid the temptation to “get a little of everything”, unless that is all you need to do. For example, a German production strategy for Barbarossa requires cheap land units, blitz units, engineers, and HQs, and must eschew excessive investment in the navy, higher-cost air units, and the like.

Flexibility
It is also important to be flexible. Remember “no plan survives contact with the enemy” - changing tactical and strategic conditions will punish a rigid production plan. You want to be able to react to unexpected opportunities or dangers, both at the tactical and strategic level.

For example, if the Axis are not defending their home country factories from air attacks, the Allies should build strategic bombers to launch more aggressive air raids. Another example is: while preparing for the war against the CW and US, Japan must keep an eye out for an opportunity to attack a weak USSR or the need to defend against a Soviet invasion.

Redundancy
Luck can lay waste to the best-laid plans. Your production plan must enable you to bounce back rapidly from a sudden reverse. In addition, your production in the present should anticipate future losses.

Some examples are:
• A bad combination of surprise die rolls may see an otherwise inferior enemy naval force sink or damage 1 to 2 AMPH as you are getting ready to invade. If you built redundancy in, you will have some uncommitted, spare AMPH and land units to bring in next impulse.

• If using divisions, build your PARA and MOT divisions and keep them together. Any PARA corps lost due to bad luck in the air combat can be reformed immediately during the next production step from the PARA and motorized divisions. Don’t forget to build extra air transports (always useful) and immediately rebuild the divisions.

• Germany and the USSR must maintain high rates of infantry production while at war with one another, to make up for turn-to-turn losses.

• After the fall of France, the Commonwealth should start building spare convoys before it starts losing them in large numbers.

Discipline
Certain units are easy to overlook. When preparing your production plan, be aware that both ‘workhorse’ units (convoys especially) and ‘chrome’ units (artillery and offensive chits in particular) have their place, and build them at the appropriate time.

Making the effort to properly lend to your allies is often very difficult. The USSR, Free France, China, and Italy are all likely to require a constant flow of lending from their allies to survive and/or thrive. Overlooking this aspect of production will weaken your side overall.

Keeping Italy propped up and building SUB units, even in the midst of a Barbarossa campaign, can serve Germany well, by keeping the Western Allies busy fighting U-boats and naval air instead of landing in Italy or France.

Timing
The trickiest element of the production plan is timing. Units take anywhere from one to twelve turns to build. For powers such as the US, there is often a further 1 to 2 turn delay before they are shipped to their destined theatre of operation. A good production plan will take these factors into account.

For example, if the CW wishes to take part in a strategic invasion of Italy by July/August 1942, it will require some combination of sea-lift, paratroopers, marines, regular army, and long-range fighters and bombers arriving on the map by May/June, so that they can be deployed to the Mediterranean in time.

Shortfalls
Frequently, you will not be producing up to your full potential: seizure of your territory, sinking of your convoys, or bombing of your factories will reduce your production. You must prioritize carefully in the event of production shortfalls.

Suggested Guidelines

Here are some suggested guidelines for how to allocate your build points (BPs) between the service branches:

• At the start of the game, estimate your BPs for all the turns of the game (or at minimum 1 to 2 years in advance), and plan 90% of your builds. Keep 10% uncommitted. This last 10% is committed as each turn arrives, or a couple of turns earlier. You use that 10% to deal with necessary emergency builds/ repairs, or to provide flexibility should you need to adapt your production plan to a new strategic plan. Your planning here can range from excruciating detail, to a mere rough cut of what you intend to build. The big mistake that you need to avoid is: having each production phase arrive and you deciding what to build on the spur of the moment, as a response to recent events or whims.

• Plan all "must be built" units, based on when they become available; that is, annually, in the Jan/Feb game turns. These are the HQ, ENG, and other special land units that you know you will need. Always build HQs the first turn they are available, or at worse in the 1 to 3 first turns of the year (this assumes that you will need them, and rest assured, you will always need HQs). Also pre-plan all Offensive Chits, saving BPs in prior game turns if you're not a rich major power (that’s everyone except the USA). This is so the impact of their high cost on your other production is less severe when they are built. Plan them so that they arrive during the key game turns when you'll need them. In addition, preplan all Intelligence expenditures, as a regular expense item. This can be 0 to 1 BP per turn initially but can grow to 3 to 5 or more BPs per turns in the latter stages of the game, depending on the enemy's Intelligence expenditure. The Axis cannot let the Allies gain too large an advantage in Intelligence, so they must increase their BPs spent on Intelligence whenever the Allies do.

• Plan all the ships that you intend to build for nearly the full course of the war. This means all capital ships laid down or completed and TRS/AMPH laid down and completed. This especially true for the USA, Japan and the CW, and somewhat true for Italy, whose naval builds are only SUBs and TRS/AMPH. For major powers that need a powerful submarine force (USA, Japan, Germany, Italy), always devote a certain number of BPs each turn to building SUBs. Usually 2 to 3 BPs for the richer countries, and 1 to 2 for the poorest.

• Decide how to split the remaining BPs between the Air Force and Army (Land Forces). Usually 50/50 is reasonable, but this can vary from major power to major power, and also depends on the circumstances. For example, in Russia before 1941 it’s likely to be 95% Army, 5% Air Force (or even 100% Army). That’s because Russia starts with a rather large number of planes and pilots, while more land units are critically needed to stop the Germans.

• Given the amount of BPs allocated to the Air Force, evaluate how many Pilots can be built consistently from turn to turn, and always build about that number of pilots each turn. You also need to evaluate how many air units you will be able to build, and be prepared to build a few more air units than pilots. The logic here is that when playing with pilots, about 50% of the time you do not lose the pilot when the air unit is destroyed. Thus, fewer pilots need to be built. Never build fewer than 2 pilots a turn for big countries such as Germany, the USA or the CW. Neglecting pilots can have dire consequences later because of gearing limits. The exception is if you experience gargantuan air losses and are flooded with extra pilots. Even then, learn to count your pilot needs a few turns in advance.

• Use the remaining BPs allotted to the air force to build the air units you will need 2 to 4 turns in the future. Always build a minimum number of FTR per turn. Depending on the major power, this can be 3 to 6 for the USA (once they are in the war) or 2 to 3 for the CW and Germany, or even simply 1 per turn. Always build a minimum of carrier air units per turn for the CW, the USA, and Japan. This can be 2 to 4 for the USA and 1 to 2 for Japan and the CW. Sprinkle the most expensive units (LND4 & NAV4) over the course of the entire year, but be careful about when they will be completed. For example, a LND4 reinforcing the UK, or worse the USA, in Nov/Dec is quite useless, as it arrives in Jan/Feb when the turns are short and the weather bad. It’s better if it arrives in Sep/Oct or Mar/Apr, when it can be immediately put to use.

• With the allocated Army BPs, build the units you'll need 2 to 4 turns in the future. Sprinkle the most expensive units (armor, mechanized, expensive artillery) throughout the year, and fill in the holes with less expensive units. But try to build the best units so that they arrive when needed. For instance, it is useless to build a lot of armor without also building motorized and infantry to fight with them. And none of those units are of much use to the USA until they have successfully invaded somewhere. Try to create a balanced force of artillery that matches your strategic plan.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: paulderynck





Good point. Might be worth taking to the Rules Clarification group. For a minor country, some would say: "FF must exist, they automatically get the conquered country at least."

Others would say: "Roll for it under 'All other territories & minors' ".

For a territory, it only matters if FF exists, but also I think still ambiguous.

I think that the answer lies in the RAW.

17.1 says that "French territories and minor countries already conquered by the Axis remain conquered by them.
All other French territories and minor countries may be aligned with either Vichy France or Free France."

All Territories & Minor Countries conquered by France before Vichyfication, are "French territories and minor countries". "French territories and minor countries" are all Territories & Minor Countries conquered or aligned by France.

So they are dealt with by 17.2, and they are rolled as one administrative group "All other territories & minors".

There is one problem with that. A conquered country is not eligible to be an alternative home country. If FF manages to roll only to control the "others" and the only country in the "others" was conquered by France then there is no FF.

Also it is unclear if "all other French territories and minor countries" was written contemplating that it could refer to a minor country conquered by France. It may merely have been written with the assumption that it is referring to the more normal situation of what to do with the "others' originally possessed by France.

I was reading more in RAW on this subject and I feel I can withdraw the assertion that Libya could not serve as the FF home country. It is not an Incomplete Conquest situation - instead the special Vichy rules apply and nothing appears in them to prohibit choosing Libya, as far as I can see.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
I was reading more in RAW on this subject and I feel I can withdraw the assertion that Libya could not serve as the FF home country. It is not an Incomplete Conquest situation - instead the special Vichy rules apply and nothing appears in them to prohibit choosing Libya, as far as I can see.

I agree.

[sajbalk]

Can a French-conquered Libya go Vichy or Free France? I say no. Under 17.2, each hex that France controls in a territory or home country controlled by by another major power or minor country reverts to the control of the makor power occupying the hex, or if none, that other major power or minor country.

Despite its conquest by France, I think Libya is "controlled" by Italy for the purpose of this rule ... WiFZEN the Axis are not going to let the French hold on to Axis territory.

As such it is not available to go FF or VF.

It would defy logic (not necessarily indicative of RAW) that FF can operate out of Libya. Or, say, Lisbon.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Can a French-conquered Libya go Vichy or Free France? I say no. Under 17.2, each hex that France controls in a territory or home country controlled by by another major power or minor country reverts to the control of the makor power occupying the hex, or if none, that other major power or minor country.

Despite its conquest by France, I think Libya is "controlled" by Italy for the purpose of this rule ... WiFZEN the Axis are not going to let the French hold on to Axis territory.

As such it is not available to go FF or VF.

It would defy logic (not necessarily indicative of RAW) that FF can operate out of Libya. Or, say, Lisbon.

Please read post 273 for Hary's clarification about that, from 1997.

If Lybia is conquered by France, then Libya is not more controlled by another major power or minor country, so it reverts to no one. It is conquered by France, and being conquered is one of the 2 status of controlled countries (conquered or aligned).

It does not defy logic, and has very small chances of arriving, but it can.

[Mike Dubost]

Since nobody else has tried the section on HQ and ARM, I have made a first cut at it. My experience with Final Eddition is limited to CWiF, but this part of the rules does not appear to have changed significantly since the older versions, so my experience should still be of use.

3.4.5 Using HQs and Armor

These are the 2 most important types of land units. By proper use of HQs and armor (supported by other land units, air, and navy), you can control the pace of the game.

The use of headquarters is a trade-off between two competing needs: supply lines and reorganization.

It has been said that amateurs study tactics and professionals study logistics. Examine the rules for supply (insert section reference here), and you see that the “secondary supply source” is often an HQ. Unless you are fighting in or very near your home country, you will need to have an HQ within a few hexes of a ground or air unit in order to operate at full effectiveness. Thus you want to have your HQs keep up with your front-line combat units.

On the other hand, if your units are disrupted, they are through for the rest of the turn. The reorganization capacity of the HQ lets the units fight again. If you use the HQ to reorganize one or more units, the HQ is disrupted, and can no longer advance to supply your front-line units.

As a further consideration, one of the optional rules allows an HQ to improve odds in attack or defense. This use disrupts the HQ and prevents its use for either of the other purposes. If you play with this optional rule, you will also have to balance this need with the other two.

This is where the trade-off comes in. You will have to decide for yourself what the proper balance is between combat support, reorganization, and supply, but some general guidelines for the placement and use of HQs can be given.

If your opponent has superiority in ground forces at the front, avoid placing an HQ directly into the front line where it is vulnerable, unless the position is one which you must hold (for example, Gibraltar is often considered the most important hex in the game). By placing and HQ in or adjacent to such a hex, you can lower your opponent’s chance of taking it.

If your opponent has strong tactical air units, try to place your HQ in a hex beyond his air units’ ranges or in a terrain type that halves tactical air factors. If no such position is available (for example, France lacks “strategic depth”), assign a fighter or AA unit to defend the HQ if possible.

If you are playing with oil-dependent units, the reorganization of your HQ will burn oil that could have gone to other units or to your hungry factories. Sometimes, this is a necessary price, but consider the situation when choosing. Examine the weather chart and where you are in the turn. Use of the HQ for reorganization may have a prohibitive “opportunity cost” in poor weather or late in the turn. Weather is unpredictable, but the chart can give you an idea of probability of poor weather. Poor weather reduces the supply range, and requires your HQs to be closer to the front. If the turn is about to end, the reorganization will have been wasted.

If you manage to find the proper balance, your HQs can allow your units a second crack at a key point, or sustain a drive deep into enemy territory. When you do make that drive, you will find that the spearhead will usually be armored units.

The choice of combat table will often rest with the combatant with the most armor engaged in the battle. The choice of combat table will control the pace of advance. In addition, most armor has high movement and combat factors. The combination of these two effects allows an armored attack to rapidly advance to an enemy position and possibly breakthrough to cut off his units. Thus, the one with the most armor at the point of decision will determine if it is blitzkrieg or sitzkrieg.

Note where your opponent is massing his armor, and you will have an idea of his main front.

So, does this mean that you should always strive to have the most armor on all fronts? No. Note the phrase “at the point of decision”. If it is a secondary front (or area of one front) or a place in which you can afford to fall back, be willing to concede the advantage to your opponent in order to gain it elsewhere. Historically, in the summer of 1941, a small fraction of German and British armor was near the English Channel. The two sides considered France secondary, the Germans due to having conquered it and the British due to a calculation that they were not strong enough to invade. Both side sent their armor elsewhere to gain an advantage over their other foes.

Certain terrain types permit the defender to always choose the combat table. Their high combat factor will tempt you to use armor in attacks on enemy cities and mountains. Especially if playing with oil-dependent units, you should only do so if the position is important. A smart defender will see his chance to disrupt your critical armored units and use the assault table, especially since this will prevent breakthrough results. Sometimes, the position is important (e.g., an Allied attack on Berlin or counter-attack on Moscow), and armor may make the difference. If so, use it.