Lebensraum - an After Action Report

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
If playing with pilots, keep any zero-costing CVPs. You don't have to put them any closer to the map then the reserve pool and they come in handy for manipulating/maintaining aircraft gearing limits.

I'd say that we do not all agree to that judgement.

If all 0 cost CVP were as useless as the Osprey, I would agree, but there are some 0 cost CVP that I definitively want to use on the map, as the CW, Japan or the USA. The CW have those excellent 3 strength Gladiators, Japan have these Claudes and Kates, and the USA have those early F4F-3. All of these have 3 factors only, for 0 BP, and I need them on my carriers.

So I usualy scrap all planes that have a total of factors less than 3 at the start of the game. I even sometime keep some of the ones that have 2 naval factors.

I found out other ways to deal with aircraft gearing limits, and rarely need 0 cost CVPs. Only once or twice during a complete game do I use 0 cost CVP for that.

[composer99]

In games such as Lebensraum, which start in 1941, or even later scenarios, there is even less incentive for the CW to keep the Ospreys, as there will be a plentitude of vastly superior carrier planes that can actually fit on their carriers.

[Greyshaft]

Undo... a handy feature

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

Undo... a handy feature

There are some exceptions to when Undo is permitted. For example, if you overrun an enemy air or naval unit and it rebases, then undoing previous moves is not allowed.

The basic rule is: if your opponent made a decision, then you do not get to undo any moves prior to his decision. This comes up a lot with naval moves where the opposing side has to decide whether to intercept or not.

[Gresbeck]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

The basic rule is: if your opponent made a decision, then you do not get to undo any moves prior to his decision.

And what if a moving unit spots an enemy that was in fog of war and couldn't be seen before? An undoing would seem unfair.

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: Gresbeck

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

The basic rule is: if your opponent made a decision, then you do not get to undo any moves prior to his decision.

And what if a moving unit spots an enemy that was in fog of war and couldn't be seen before? An undoing would seem unfair.

There is no fog of war in MWiF version 1.

If there was Fog of War and you revealed an enemy unit then IMHO you wouldn't be able to undo that move.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Gresbeck

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

The basic rule is: if your opponent made a decision, then you do not get to undo any moves prior to his decision.

And what if a moving unit spots an enemy that was in fog of war and couldn't be seen before? An undoing would seem unfair.

Fog of war (FOW) is not part of MWIF product 1.

There was a long discussion on this many moons ago. The main point to come out of it was that given the scale of the game (90 KM per hex, 2 month turns), FOW would require a lot of assumptions and cleverness to become a viable optional rule.

[undercovergeek]

so you can see all the moves of opponents all across the globe?

[JudgeDredd]

Bit disappointed with no Fog of war. I understand your reason...but still a bit disappointed.
 
I don't think it will affect my purchase decision, but I like surprises on the battlefield.

[micheljq]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Bit disappointed with no Fog of war. I understand your reason...but still a bit disappointed.

I don't think it will affect my purchase decision, but I like surprises on the battlefield.

That would drastically change the game. I think it would be interesting in another version.

[composer99]

You might be surprised at the surprises you can still face despite knowing where all of your opponent's forces are (I speak from bitter personal experience).

[Mike Parker]

And unless WiF has changed enormously since I played in the mid to late 80's when I was in college (egads I am old!) there is still plenty of uncertainty even with the units in view.
 
The Strategic objectives for certain, just because you know where the units are, you don't know for sure where your opponent placed his emphasis before the game starts, and hence there is alot of uncertainty in that.
 
Also in the scale of corps and 2 months of time, its debatable if FoW is even very appropriate for land forces.   The Naval forces its a little harder to justify but I think the whole seazone approach helps mitigate that somewhat.
 
In short rememeber this is faithful adaptation of a board game.  And getting more complex than 'Battleship' with Fog of War in a tabletop game is problematical.

[micheljq]

That's a point, i have a recent bitter experience myself, faced a '42 Barbarossa as soviet player, lost 78BP worth of troops in may/june '42 alone.

ORIGINAL: composer99

You might be surprised at the surprises you can still face despite knowing where all of your opponent's forces are (I speak from bitter personal experience).

[Ullern]

ORIGINAL: Mike Parker

And unless WiF has changed enormously since I played in the mid to late 80's when I was in college (egads I am old!) there is still plenty of uncertainty even with the units in view.

The Strategic objectives for certain, just because you know where the units are, you don't know for sure where your opponent placed his emphasis before the game starts, and hence there is alot of uncertainty in that.

Also in the scale of corps and 2 months of time, its debatable if FoW is even very appropriate for land forces. The Naval forces its a little harder to justify but I think the whole seazone approach helps mitigate that somewhat.

In short rememeber this is faithful adaptation of a board game. And getting more complex than 'Battleship' with Fog of War in a tabletop game is problematical.

Well I think that choosing strategic objectives are a ghost of WIF4....
(But I think that was better than the victory cities rule they had since version 5.)

"Enormously" depends on the point of view. A lot of rules has changed, but did they really change the concept of the game?

[undercovergeek]

ORIGINAL: micheljq

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Bit disappointed with no Fog of war. I understand your reason...but still a bit disappointed.

I don't think it will affect my purchase decision, but I like surprises on the battlefield.

That would drastically change the game. I think it would be interesting in another version.

is fog of war represented in the actual board game - if not i suppose it makes sense - you would see all your players counters on the board

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

ORIGINAL: micheljq

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Bit disappointed with no Fog of war. I understand your reason...but still a bit disappointed.

I don't think it will affect my purchase decision, but I like surprises on the battlefield.

That would drastically change the game. I think it would be interesting in another version.

is fog of war represented in the actual board game - if not i suppose it makes sense - you would see all your players counters on the board

WIF FE (the board game version of WIF) does not have fog of war. It is something introduced as an optionla rule in CWIF but, as I have said before, there are a lot of problems with figuring out how to implement it, much less what it really represents.

MWIF and WIF FE do not contain fog of war but that does not mean the game plays like chess. The order in which a player chooses to move his naval units and which air missions he chooses for his bombers (especially the multi-purpose bombers) is always unknown. The movement allowance for land units (especially armor and mechanized units) is so great that it if possible to shift a significant portion of your attack (or defensive) strength 500 miles in one impulse, and there are numerous impulses in a 2 month turn.

I could go on and mention another dozen ways in which you do not know what your opponent is going to do in WIF. I've always considered this a reasonable way to model fog of war.

[undercovergeek]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

ORIGINAL: micheljq




That would drastically change the game. I think it would be interesting in another version.

is fog of war represented in the actual board game - if not i suppose it makes sense - you would see all your players counters on the board

WIF FE (the board game version of WIF) does not have fog of war. It is something introduced as an optionla rule in CWIF but, as I have said before, there are a lot of problems with figuring out how to implement it, much less what it really represents.

MWIF and WIF FE do not contain fog of war but that does not mean the game plays like chess. The order in which a player chooses to move his naval units and which air missions he chooses for his bombers (especially the multi-purpose bombers) is always unknown. The movement allowance for land units (especially armor and mechanized units) is so great that it if possible to shift a significant portion of your attack (or defensive) strength 500 miles in one impulse, and there are numerous impulses in a 2 month turn.

I could go on and mention another dozen ways in which you do not know what your opponent is going to do in WIF. I've always considered this a reasonable way to model fog of war.

its cool, no worries - im entirely new to this game, boardgame and all - it wasnt until i was posting that it occured to me that as a true representation of the boardgame you wouldnt have FOW in the game no more than you would in the basement or the garage on the massive maps, i think i and a few others are just used to a game with FOW - but as your reply suggests, the different permeatations of each turn pretty much make up for that - still got my pounds stirling on release day!!

[Larac]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Blind Sniper

Thanks Greyshaft, I will look closely at it.

Is possible rename the counters?

Yes.

There are a few that cannot be renamed because of their special capabilities (e.g., Stilwell). Also, renaming units would have to be done for each new game, since determining which units are to be setup (and where) requires many units to not have their names changed. For example, all the capital ships are referenced by name for which ones set up where (and the same for HQ units).

A more elaborate system could be developed, but that falls into my category of WIF design kit - not part of MWIF product 1.

Would it not be better to assign each Unit a Number or Code, and leave the name for display only?

Lee

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Larac

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Blind Sniper

Thanks Greyshaft, I will look closely at it.

Is possible rename the counters?

Yes.

There are a few that cannot be renamed because of their special capabilities (e.g., Stilwell). Also, renaming units would have to be done for each new game, since determining which units are to be setup (and where) requires many units to not have their names changed. For example, all the capital ships are referenced by name for which ones set up where (and the same for HQ units).

A more elaborate system could be developed, but that falls into my category of WIF design kit - not part of MWIF product 1.

Would it not be better to assign each Unit a Number or Code, and leave the name for display only?

Lee

The data file has both a number and two names: (1) for reference internally in the setup lists and (2) for display on the screen (i.e., the counter).

Many units are generated as the game progresses (partisans, convoys, divisions), so absolute unit numbers are open ended. Relying on assigned numbers is fooolish anyway, since the addition or removal of a unit could mess everyting up. It is hard enough to do the setup just using the names.

Here is a sample of the code for setup (one of the two small scenarios):

Code: Select all

 // ****************************************************************************
 // Second scenario
 // ****************************************************************************
       scGuadalcanal:
       begin
         case MCIndex of
           mcCommonwealth:  // Guadalcanal
           begin
             AddGroupCountry(['South Africa'], ['[South Africa]', 'MI 1',
               'TE 1', '[United Kingdom]', 'CN 1', 'CN 1']);
 
             AddGroupCountry(['Italian Somaliland'], ['[United Kingdom]',
               'IN 1', 'CN 1']);
 
             AddGroupCountry(['Australia'], ['[Australia]', 'MO 1', 'IN 1',
               'MI 1', 'TE 1', '[United Kingdom]', 'CN 1', '[Commonwealth]',
               'OI 1']);
 
             AddGroupCountry(['Burma', 'India', 'Ceylon'],
               ['[India]', 'IN 1', 'MI 1', 'GA 1', 'TE 2',
               '[United Kingdom]', 'HQ Wavell', 'IN 1', 'AT 1',
               'CS Formidable', 'CS Illustrious', 'CS Indomitable',
               'CS Resolution', 'CS Revenge', 'CS Warspite', 'CS Ramillies',
               'CS Renown', 'CS Royal Sovereign', 'CS Hawkins', 'CS Birmingham',
               'CS Devonshire', 'CS Frobisher', 'CS Glasgow', 'CS Mauritius',
               'CL Ceres', 'CL Danae', 'CL Emerald', 'CL Caledon', 'CL Capetown',
               'CL Dragon', 'CL Enterprise', 'CL Phoebe', 'NT 1',
               'CN 1', 'CP 5/3',
               '[Australia]', 'CS Australia', 'CS Canberra', 'CL Adelaide',
               'CL Hobart',
               '[New Zealand]', 'CS Gambia', 'CL Achilles', 'CL Leander',
               '[Netherlands]', 'CS Sumatra', 'CL Jacob van Heemskerck',
                 'CL Tromp',
               '[Commonwealth]', 'ASW 1', 'OI 1']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tJulAug, 1942, False, ['[United Kingdom]',
               'F2 1', 'PI 1', 'CL Durban']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tSepOct, 1942, False, ['[United Kingdom]',
               'CS Sussex', 'AM 1', 'SU 1']);
           end;
 
           mcJapan:         // Guadalcanal
           begin
             FormosaMilitiaOK := True;
 
             AddGroupCountry(['Japan'], ['IN 1', 'MI 2', '[Div]', 'AT 1', 'EN 1',
               'N2 1', 'PI 1', 'OI 8']);
 
             AddGroupCountry(['Siam'], ['[Siam]', 'MI 1']);
 
             AddGroupCountry(['Burma'], ['HQ Yamashita', 'IN 1', 'F2 1',
               'PI 1']);
 
             AddGroupSimple(lPacificAsia, ['HQ Yamamoto', 'IN 2', 'MA 2',
               '[Div]', 'AT 1', 'MA 1', 'F2 1/1', 'L3 1/1', 'N2 1/1',
               'N3 1/1', 'A3 1', 'PI 5', 'CS Akagi', 'CS Hiryu', 'CS Junyo',
               'CS Kaga', 'CS Ryujo', 'CS Shokaku', 'CS Soryu', 'CS Zuikaku',
               'CS Fuso', 'CS Hiei', 'CS Ise', 'CS Kongo', 'CS Nagato',
               'CS Yamato', 'CS Atago', 'CS Kako', 'CS Mogami', 'CS Myoko',
               'CS Tone', 'CS Hosho', 'CS Shoho', 'CS Taiyo', 'CS Unyo',
               'CS Zuiho', 'CS Haruna', 'CS Hyuga', 'CS Kirishima',
               'CS Mutsu', 'CS Yamashiro', 'CS Aoba', 'CS Ashigara',
               'CS Chikuma', 'CS Chokai', 'CS Furutaka', 'CS Haguro',
               'CS Idzumo', 'CS Kinugasa', 'CS Kumano', 'CS Maya',
               'CS Mikuma', 'CS Nachi', 'CS Suzuya', 'CS Takao', 'CL Katori',
               'CL Natori', 'CL Oi', 'CL Sendai', 'CL Tenryu', 'CL Yura',
               'CL Abukuma', 'CL Isuzu', 'CL Jintsu', 'CL Kashii', 'CL Kashima',
               'CL Kinu', 'CL Kiso', 'CL Kitakami', 'CL Kuma', 'CL Nagara',
               'CL Naka', 'CL Ping Hai', 'CL Tama', 'CL Tatsuta', 'CL Yubari',
               'ASW 1', 'NT 3', 'AM 1', 'SU 4', 'CN 24', 'CP 17/12']);  
 
             AddGroupRepairPool(['CS Asama']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tJulAug, 1942, False, ['IN 1', 'F2 1', 'PI 1',
               'CS Hiyo', 'CS Musashi', 'CP 1/1']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tSepOct, 1942, False, ['CL Agano', 'IN 1',
               'N3 1', 'PI 1', 'CP 1/1']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tNovDec, 1942, False, ['IN 1', 'CS Chuyo',
               'CS Ryuho', 'CN 1', 'CP 1']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tJanFeb, 1943, False, ['IN 1', 'CS Oyodo']);
           end;
 
           mcUnitedStates:  // Guadalcanal
           begin
             AddGroupSimple(lUSAEastCoast, ['L3 1', 'PI 1', 'CS Hornet',
               'CS Washington', 'CS North Carolina', 'CL Columbia']);
 
             AddGroupSimple(lUSAWestCoast, ['MO 1', 'IN 1', 'MA 1', '[Div]',
               'EN 1', 'CS Saratoga', 'CS Colorado', 'CS Louisville']);
 
             AddGroupSimple(lPacificAmerica, ['HQ MacArthur', '[Div]', 'AT 1',
               'MA 1', 'F2 2/1', 'L3 1',	'N3 1', 'PI 4', 'CP 6/4',
               'OI 2', 'CS Lexington', 'CS Yorktown', 'CS Chicago',
               'CS New Orleans', 'CS Portland', 'CS Salt Lake City',
               'CS San Francisco', 'CS Vincennes', 'CL Brooklyn', 'CL Omaha',
               'CL San Diego', 'CL Helena', 'CL Juneau', 'CL Marblehead',
               'CL Phoenix', 'CL Raleigh', 'CL Richmond', 'ASW 1', 'NT 1',
               'SU 1', 'CN 10']);
 
             AddGroupCity('Honolulu', EmptyStr, ['HQ Nimitz',
               'CP 2/1', 'CS Enterprise', 'CS Maryland', 'CS Mississippi',
               'CS Pennsylvania', 'CS Pensacola', 'CS Idaho', 'CS New Mexico',
               'CS Astoria', 'CS Chester', 'CS Indianapolis', 'CS Minneapolis',
               'CS Northampton', 'CL Atlanta', 'CL St. Louis', 'CL Boise',
               'CL Detroit', 'CL Honolulu', 'CL Nashville', 'CL San Juan',
               'NT 1', 'SU 1']);
 
             AddGroupRepairPool(['CS Tennessee', 'CS Nevada']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tJulAug, 1942, False, ['IN 1', 'N2 1', 'PI 1',
               'CP 1/1']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tSepOct, 1942, False, ['L3 1', 'PI 1', 'AM 1',
               'CL Denver', 'CL Montpellier', 'CP 1']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tNovDec, 1942, False, ['CS Essex', 'CP 1/1']);
 
             AddGroupProduction(tJanFeb, 1943, False, ['CS Lexington II',
               'CL Birmingham', 'CL Santa Fe']);
           end;
         end;
       end;
 

And no, trying to do this using a spreadsheet style data format would be vastly harder.[:)]