What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game

[fallgelb]

An idea for MWIF Product 2:
A "Center for Strategic Studies" Form, activated per button or so. In the board game before important decisions you sometimes count ARM or FTR in some parts of the front. The Computer is good in counting, so it would be an advantage of a Computer WIF to have access to such date every time. In practice you could mark an area or choose a defined area and click the button and you get a form with the numbers of ARM-Type, INF-Type, TAC, FTR etc.
Example: 1942 J/A the germans have to decide if they want to play an O-Chit on Rundstedt north of the Pripjet-Marshes or on Manstein south of the Pripjet-Marshes. Important data is, which side has ARM-superiority or FTR-superiority at the time.
PS: Manstein was pre-built [;)]

[macgregor]

With the unwavering desire to improve ans embellish this game that I've seen in this forum combined with how good the game already looked and played as CWiF tells me that it has the potential to be a real blockbuster of a release. I'm not too clear on what makes a game desirable to a particular person so I'll stay away from predictions. But I will say that there are more people I've met who became hooked on boardgames by seeing WiF than any other game I've had in my arsenal.
My only hope, and I believe Steve said that indeed there were ways to change unit values and ranges(?) It would be interesting if one could change the map, at least insomuch as to be able to represent a different timeline. Defeating the reinforcement arrival may be yet another problem for would-be scenario designers. But even with the map at this scale...IMO the game engine of WiF can handle any technological advancements since, it would be nice if scenarios could be designed.

[Petracelli69]

Steve
 
Forgive me if this has already been answered but will the 3d10 conbat table be in MWIF?
 
cheers
 
Phil

[Maesphil74]

I read somewhere that an atlas of some sort should be included.
Will this be done?
If so, will it be for example in a pdf file so we can print the map?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Petracelli69

Steve

Forgive me if this has already been answered but will the 3d10 conbat table be in MWIF?

cheers

Phil

No. I do not know what that is.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Fleming

I read somewhere that an atlas of some sort should be included.
Will this be done?
If so, will it be for example in a pdf file so we can print the map?

This is not on my task list for the first release.

The idea of segmenting the map into 'pages', rather than trying for very large copies for table tops is a new idea (at least for me). I have Matrix looking into printing the map for over-the-board play but that requires 6 segments, with each segment roughly 5' by 6'. Using a smaller size per hex than what would be needed for over-the-board play could make an 'atlas' feasible.

As a crude estimate, say we made the hexes 1/4 the size used in WIF FE, that would cut the dimensions of each segment in half: 30" by 36". The world map would then be 150" wide by 72" high. Using 8.5" by 11" paper, 9*14 = 126 pages. A bunch of those pages would be pure blue (all sea) so say ~ 100 pages for the atlas.

If we cut the scale to 1/4 again, that would be a more reasonable 25 pages, but I don't know about the legibility of the map details.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Petracelli69

Steve

Forgive me if this has already been answered but will the 3d10 conbat table be in MWIF?

cheers

Phil

No. I do not know what that is.

This is a new optional land CRT in the 2008 Annual.
IMO interesting, but would require some work to include in MWiF.
Rather wait MWiF product 2.

[Mad Russian]

The ability to build airbases. As a house rule we allowed each nation to build 3 airbases. They had a 3 stacking capacity and had to be bought.
 
This allows for places like Malta, Guadalcanal, Norway, parts of Russia, etc. to have the air coverage they actually got during the war.
 
Good Hunting.
 
MR

[Zorachus99]

The two things about RAW that I feel is overlooked:

1) Damaged ships should be returned to a port and be bombable.
2) The change between USSR and German rail-gauge is not modelled at all.

[Jagdtiger14]

1. In the new FiF(Factories in Flames)...which is pretty awesome I might add. Damaged naval units stay on the map with a damage marker. They can be repaired on the map and must satisfy stacking. Every turn you can start or continue repairs on one naval unit per major port outside your home country. Naval units ARE included in port attacks.

2. I would like to see this too, but it could make Barb's even less attractive, so some game balance would have to come into play. Commandoes in Flames allows you to build new road and rail lines. Cost = motorized movement cost of the hex.
C
Miami Beach

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

The two things about RAW that I feel is overlooked:

1) Damaged ships should be returned to a port and be bombable.
2) The change between USSR and German rail-gauge is not modelled at all.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

The ability to build airbases. As a house rule we allowed each nation to build 3 airbases. They had a 3 stacking capacity and had to be bought.

This allows for places like Malta, Guadalcanal, Norway, parts of Russia, etc. to have the air coverage they actually got during the war.

Good Hunting.

MR

I have no trouble with not being able to build airbases. Each AC counter represents around 250-500 aircraft. The "free" stacking you get more than well represents several built airbases.

Malta can in WIF base 3 AC-counters and that represent 750-1500 aircraft. A number that was not even closed to be based on Malta during WWII. Henderson Field on Guadacanal holds 500-1000 AC and the other hex on Guadacanal 250-500. In Narvik you get to have 500-1000 aircraft.

I would say most (all?) areas in WIF can get the aircoverage they got during the war and then some.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

1. In the new FiF(Factories in Flames)...which is pretty awesome I might add. Damaged naval units stay on the map with a damage marker. They can be repaired on the map and must satisfy stacking. Every turn you can start or continue repairs on one naval unit per major port outside your home country. Naval units ARE included in port attacks.

2. I would like to see this too, but it could make Barb's even less attractive, so some game balance would have to come into play. Commandoes in Flames allows you to build new road and rail lines. Cost = motorized movement cost of the hex.
C
Miami Beach

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

The two things about RAW that I feel is overlooked:

1) Damaged ships should be returned to a port and be bombable.
2) The change between USSR and German rail-gauge is not modelled at all.

I feel that it is correct that there is no rule for changing the rail-gauge. The Germans had indeed supply trouble during operation Barbarossa but that was more because German planning had been optimistic and "normal" logistical problems rather than on that the conversion on the raillines was to slow. Remember that each impulse is almost a weeks time even during the summer.

The allies had supply troubles in France 1944 after their breakout of Normandy with its much better railway and road net and there it was no railway-gauge to consider.

On the subject of supply I consider unlimited seasupply and that even a minor port can support unlimited troops more troublesomme.

[Mad Russian]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

The ability to build airbases. As a house rule we allowed each nation to build 3 airbases. They had a 3 stacking capacity and had to be bought.

This allows for places like Malta, Guadalcanal, Norway, parts of Russia, etc. to have the air coverage they actually got during the war.

Good Hunting.

MR

I have no trouble with not being able to build airbases. Each AC counter represents around 250-500 aircraft. The "free" stacking you get more than well represents several built airbases.

So how do you explain when a HQ moves those represented several built airbases just disappear? To the point of even costing you any that are left overstacked. That doesn't work too well for me.

Malta can in WIF base 3 AC-counters and that represent 750-1500 aircraft. A number that was not even closed to be based on Malta during WWII. Henderson Field on Guadacanal holds 500-1000 AC and the other hex on Guadacanal 250-500. In Narvik you get to have 500-1000 aircraft.

That may be true now. It didn't used to be.

[quote}
I would say most (all?) areas in WIF can get the aircoverage they got during the war and then some.
[/quote]

Works for me. It was just a suggestion to get away from the unrealistic HQ magical airfield rules. Changes to the map and the rules may well have taken care of this. From what I'm being told a HQ can still do magic though and that's not realistic.

Good Hunting.

MR

[composer99]

I think someone else mentioned the grass-and-mesh temporary airfields in another thread. Engineer and HQ units may well represent the capacity to maintain such temporary landing strips over time.
 
That said, it's not often that the HQ/engineer overstacking of aircraft gets used for precisely the reason that (a) no one wants to lose planes and (b) it usually isn't necessary (though perhaps it can be for the Western Allies in 1944-45 with their enormous air forces...).

[bredsjomagnus]

I hope that FiF will be implemented in futher MWiF products. I like the new production, combat, damage, offensive point and manpower system.
 
Trying it out in a game now and it really makes combat and produciton more fun.

[Mad Russian]

ORIGINAL: composer99

I think someone else mentioned the grass-and-mesh temporary airfields in another thread. Engineer and HQ units may well represent the capacity to maintain such temporary landing strips over time.

That's fine except if they move away you can have 200-250 aircraft destroyed in overstacking.

That said, it's not often that the HQ/engineer overstacking of aircraft gets used for precisely the reason that (a) no one wants to lose planes and (b) it usually isn't necessary (though perhaps it can be for the Western Allies in 1944-45 with their enormous air forces...).

Historically there were several locations that were improved during the war to increase the air capacity. Many of those can be simply dispersed a single hex further out. Other places you don't currently have that ability.

It can get very important in places where there are islands, few cities or ports. Malta was one of the places that needed a larger airfield. A HQ was almost always sent there to improve the airfield capacity. How long do you think it would take to improve a locations ability to support more aircraft? And even more important why would a HQ leaving reduce that capacity?


Good Hunting.

MR

[Jagdtiger14]

Have you referred to "O" points as "crack" yet? Our group is playing FiF for the first time...we are in S/O'41. Production is much better, and everyone really likes shipyards.

ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus

I hope that FiF will be implemented in futher MWiF products. I like the new production, combat, damage, offensive point and manpower system.

Trying it out in a game now and it really makes combat and produciton more fun.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

It can get very important in places where there are islands, few cities or ports. Malta was one of the places that needed a larger airfield. A HQ was almost always sent there to improve the airfield capacity. How long do you think it would take to improve a locations ability to support more aircraft? And even more important why would a HQ leaving reduce that capacity?


Good Hunting.

MR

It is exceedingly unlikely that this rule will be changed because you don't like it. Here is the solution if you are concerned about losing those numbers of aircraft: Do not move the HQ away.

[gridley]

House Rules. We beefed up Malta too. We played many games before our Malta Change and many after...it wasn't a game breaker. The important thing it did do is make our player from Malta happy.[;)]

Weather you agree with Mad Russian and his airbases or the change we made, historically accurate or not, I will miss some of the house rules we generated over our years of playing. Most will now be taken over by the computer. That being said some of our house rules wouldn't be necessary anyway as many were just a way for us to understand odd rules or conflicting ones.

Some we can still incorporate in the computer game. We made one when retreating your opponents you had to retreat him to a hex that made sense. Even when using the four priorities outlined in rule 11.16.5, sometimes you could retreat a unit to a suicide hex when he could have also gone to a hex along the defending line or at least in the right direction.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: gridley

House Rules. We beefed up Malta too. We played many games before our Malta Change and many after...it wasn't a game breaker. The important thing it did do is make our player from Malta happy.[;)]

Weather you agree with Mad Russian and his airbases or the change we made, historically accurate or not, I will miss some of the house rules we generated over our years of playing. Most will now be taken over by the computer. That being said some of our house rules wouldn't be necessary anyway as many were just a way for us to understand odd rules or conflicting ones.

Some we can still incorporate in the computer game. We made one when retreating your opponents you had to retreat him to a hex that made sense. Even when using the four priorities outlined in rule 11.16.5, sometimes you could retreat a unit to a suicide hex when he could have also gone to a hex along the defending line or at least in the right direction.

Well, in this case you could still apply your house rule. You just need to get your opponent to agree.[;)] MWIF enforces the 4 priorities, but beyond that it is up to the attacking player.