AI for MWiF - USSR

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: MajorDude

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Extraneous



No, being on the same side has nothing to do with being a active/neutral major power.



What we are NOT dealing with the USSR needing permission to enter a country/power.

What we ARE dealing with is a neutral major power (the USSR) giving permission to any active major power to inter their country or its minors.

Warspite1

I must say looking at the rules I cannot see that you are wrong in what you say, other than it does not "feel" right that the CW or the French for example can enter the USSR when they are inactive. This is the way I have always played it (although that is no guarantee I'm right!!) and I guess trying to look at it purely from a historical perspective makes me think I'm correct. Stalin did anything - anything - not to upset AH and give him cause for war with the USSR. Allowing French and/or British troops on Soviet soil strikes me as being a reson to REALLY cheese Adolf off.

If I understand right, and if that is the case - ex: the U.K. (at war with Germany) moves military units into a neutral country that is adjacent to Germany -

imo it should most definitely affect the "tension" level as Germany would be beside itself to suddenly see hostile enemy units camping out on its border carrying these

under the "protection umbrella" of a "neutral" country's border guards.



Just take, for example, the Cold War the Cuban missile crisis as an example of the tension such moves can cause between countries that aren't even officially "at war". How do you think Adolf is going to react to seeing the British 8th Army suddenly digging for truffles in eastern Poland?

Warspite1

Exactement MajorDude, its just that I cannot locate the specific restriction on this in the rules - Froonp? Paulderynck? - or maybe I can't find it cos I'm talking %&@$%? [;)]

[hjaco]

Some relevant rules to this discussion.

2.4.2 Limits on supply paths

for any Soviet unit, into a hex controlled by any other Allied major power (and vice versa) unless the USSR is at war with Germany.

9.5 Effect of neutrality pacts

After you enter into a neutrality pact with a major power, units controlled by other major powers on your side cannot enter hexes that are part of your common border with that major power if they are at war with that other major power. If they are in the common border already, move them immediately to the nearest friendly hex not in the common border in which they can legally stack.

Your common border with another major power consists of every hex you (or your aligned minor countries) control within 3 hexes and/or hexdots of a hex controlled by the other major power (or its aligned minor countries). Hexes on the American, Asian or Pacific maps, and off-map hexes, still count as only 1 hex for this purpose.

11.11.5 Active major powers

You can move a land unit controlled by an active major power into any hex controlled by:
ï that major power and its aligned minors; or
ï another active major power on the same side (or its controlled minor countries); or
ï a major power or minor country it is at war with.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: MajorDude

ORIGINAL: warspite1


Warspite1

I must say looking at the rules I cannot see that you are wrong in what you say, other than it does not "feel" right that the CW or the French for example can enter the USSR when they are inactive. This is the way I have always played it (although that is no guarantee I'm right!!) and I guess trying to look at it purely from a historical perspective makes me think I'm correct. Stalin did anything - anything - not to upset AH and give him cause for war with the USSR. Allowing French and/or British troops on Soviet soil strikes me as being a reson to REALLY cheese Adolf off.

If I understand right, and if that is the case - ex: the U.K. (at war with Germany) moves military units into a neutral country that is adjacent to Germany -

imo it should most definitely affect the "tension" level as Germany would be beside itself to suddenly see hostile enemy units camping out on its border carrying these

under the "protection umbrella" of a "neutral" country's border guards.



Just take, for example, the Cold War the Cuban missile crisis as an example of the tension such moves can cause between countries that aren't even officially "at war". How do you think Adolf is going to react to seeing the British 8th Army suddenly digging for truffles in eastern Poland?

Warspite1

Exactement MajorDude, its just that I cannot locate the specific restriction on this in the rules - Froonp? Paulderynck? - or maybe I can't find it cos I'm talking %&@$%? [;)]

Warspite 1

Another rule in support of my thinking.

19.5 Nazi - Soviet Pact.
19.5.1 - .....Any Allied (except Soviet) units there are destroyed. They are removed from the game (internment) until Germany and the USSR are at war, at which point they are added to the Commonwealth force pool if the Commonwealth player so decides.

So this means that in the (albeit unlikely event) that CW go to the aid of Poland and some or all of their units are in Eastern Poland when the USSR exercise the secret protocol under the pact that gives them the Eastern part of Poland, then those units are interned.

If that is the case, with their fellow troops and airmen interned in the Soviet Union, how/why/under what possible circumstance would the USSR allow (or the CW wish to) send units to USSR?

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

What we are NOT dealing with the USSR needing permission to enter a country/power.

What we ARE dealing with is a neutral major power (the USSR) giving permission to any active major power to inter their country or its minors.

That is the point. Active powers may not enter neutral countries. That is what rule 11.11.5 says:
You can move a land unit controlled by an active major power into any hex controlled by:
• that major power and its aligned minors; or
• another active major power on the same side (or its controlled minor countries); or
• a major power or minor country it is at war with.

None of those bullet points apply to a neutral Russia.

Below those bullet points it says "there are some exceptions". The exceptions apply to the moves that are in the prior three bullet points. They don't mean they are permitted moves that are exceptions to the three bullet points. They mean they are additional constraints on making said moves.

I can understand how someone new to the game might read the exceptions to mean they are exceptions to all movement restrictions, but that is incorrect. The game is played the way I've explained it and MWiF is programmed the way I've explained it, so adding useless scripting to the USSR AI to cover moves that are:
a) not allowed by the rules, and;
b) not allowed by the computer code for MWiF

is... well... useless.

[warspite1]

So Paulderynck, just so I am crystal clear on this can you remind me please:

If the Soviets and Japan are at war, the USSR becomes an active Major Power (9.1). Understood.

However CW or French units cannot enter the USSR because they are still not on the same side i.e. CW and France are not at war with Japan and USSR is not at war with Germany. Is that right?

But:

If CW and Japan went to war while USSR and Japan are at war would they then be considered on the same side? So in theory the Soviets could give permission from CW troops to enter the USSR and attack Japan?

If that is right, what does that do to the relationship vis a vis Germany and USSR?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So Paulderynck, just so I am crystal clear on this can you remind me please:

If the Soviets and Japan are at war, the USSR becomes an active Major Power (9.1). Understood.

However CW or French units cannot enter the USSR because they are still not on the same side i.e. CW and France are not at war with Japan and USSR is not at war with Germany. Is that right?

But:

If CW and Japan went to war while USSR and Japan are at war would they then be considered on the same side? So in theory the Soviets could give permission from CW troops to enter the USSR and attack Japan?

If that is right, what does that do to the relationship vis a vis Germany and USSR?

The side for each major power is immutable and applies throughout all sceanrios and all turns. They are the historical sides.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So Paulderynck, just so I am crystal clear on this can you remind me please:

If the Soviets and Japan are at war, the USSR becomes an active Major Power (9.1). Understood.

However CW or French units cannot enter the USSR because they are still not on the same side i.e. CW and France are not at war with Japan and USSR is not at war with Germany. Is that right?

But:

If CW and Japan went to war while USSR and Japan are at war would they then be considered on the same side? So in theory the Soviets could give permission from CW troops to enter the USSR and attack Japan?

If that is right, what does that do to the relationship vis a vis Germany and USSR?

The side for each major power is immutable and applies throughout all sceanrios and all turns. They are the historical sides.

Warspite1

Steve, I understand that - I do not think what I am asking suggests that changes. As far as I recall, there is nothing to stop Japan declaring war on the CW early doors. If she does so whilst at war with the USSR, can the USSR (subject to troop commitments rule) call in the CW onto Soviet territory? What is the rule stopping that?

If the answer is yes, you then have a weird situation where:

One Side - Japan

Other Side - USSR, CW, France

and yet:

Germany is at war with CW and France, She has a pact with the Soviets and she is on the "side of Japan".

So unless I am being thick (always possible) my questions to Paul remain valid. Does Germany standby while a Soviet/CW/French force potentially whip Japans butt?

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Steve, I understand that - I do not think what I am asking suggests that changes. As far as I recall, there is nothing to stop Japan declaring war on the CW early doors. If she does so whilst at war with the USSR, can the USSR (subject to troop commitments rule) call in the CW onto Soviet territory? What is the rule stopping that?

If the answer is yes, you then have a weird situation where:

One Side - Japan

Other Side - USSR, CW, France

and yet:

Germany is at war with CW and France, She has a pact with the Soviets and she is on the "side of Japan".

So unless I am being thick (always possible) my questions to Paul remain valid. Does Germany standby while a Soviet/CW/French force potentially whip Japans butt?

Once Russia is active, France and the CW "could" move troops there subject to FTC. But if they don't stay on the coasts they will be out of supply because there is another rule under supply that says the Wallies and Russia can't trace supply through each other's territory until Russia is at war with Germany.

You don't see the CW and France getting adventuresome and involving themselves in a Russo-Japanese war by sending troops to Russia, regardless of whether Japan goes to war on them too. This is because (usually) they are too busy hanging on for dear life against the Germans and Italians at this time.

Anyway there are two and only two "sides" and the powers are on those sides for the duration whether they are neutral or active. This doesn't mean they don't compete for most victory cities, although in a 2-player game it is basically an Axis vs. Allies contest.

As for Germany not caring if Japan is at war with anybody while they have a pact with Russia? Well apparently they don't care about Russia infringing on the rights of Rumania or Finland either...

The rules of WiF allow you to play the second world war but they also allow players to try different strategies and explore many what-ifs. This is why you should not be outraged and mortified that the possibility exists for minor countries to align with France. If all playing the game did for me was recreate the destruction of the axis, I'd sooner just read a good book on the subject. Even the fact that game-wise, the Axis can win is already a huge what-if, right? So having other what-ifs is not such a big deal. Heck I bet there are games where even the Warspite gets sunk.

I may even have perpetrated this horrible outrage myself a few times with the Axis... (please forgive me )

Edit: And there is a big inhibitor to Japan DoWing the CW. Likely 3 US entry chits and then a chit more every turn.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Steve, I understand that - I do not think what I am asking suggests that changes. As far as I recall, there is nothing to stop Japan declaring war on the CW early doors. If she does so whilst at war with the USSR, can the USSR (subject to troop commitments rule) call in the CW onto Soviet territory? What is the rule stopping that?

If the answer is yes, you then have a weird situation where:

One Side - Japan

Other Side - USSR, CW, France

and yet:

Germany is at war with CW and France, She has a pact with the Soviets and she is on the "side of Japan".

So unless I am being thick (always possible) my questions to Paul remain valid. Does Germany standby while a Soviet/CW/French force potentially whip Japans butt?

Once Russia is active, France and the CW "could" move troops there subject to FTC. But if they don't stay on the coasts they will be out of supply because there is another rule under supply that says the Wallies and Russia can't trace supply through each other's territory until Russia is at war with Germany.

You don't see the CW and France getting adventuresome and involving themselves in a Russo-Japanese war by sending troops to Russia, regardless of whether Japan goes to war on them too. This is because (usually) they are too busy hanging on for dear life against the Germans and Italians at this time.

Anyway there are two and only two "sides" and the powers are on those sides for the duration whether they are neutral or active. This doesn't mean they don't compete for most victory cities, although in a 2-player game it is basically an Axis vs. Allies contest.

As for Germany not caring if Japan is at war with anybody while they have a pact with Russia? Well apparently they don't care about Russia infringing on the rights of Rumania or Finland either...

The rules of WiF allow you to play the second world war but they also allow players to try different strategies and explore many what-ifs. This is why you should not be outraged and mortified that the possibility exists for minor countries to align with France. If all playing the game did for me was recreate the destruction of the axis, I'd sooner just read a good book on the subject. Even the fact that game-wise, the Axis can win is already a huge what-if, right? So having other what-ifs is not such a big deal. Heck I bet there are games where even the Warspite gets sunk.

I may even have perpetrated this horrible outrage myself a few times with the Axis... (please forgive me )

Warspite1

Mmmm... thanks for the answer Paulderynck, although I think I must be pretty bad at explaining myself sometimes [&:].

What I was outlining was not something I think is likely or a good idea for any player, Japanese or otherwise. I was simply using an extreme example to ensure that I had the rules right e.g. I was right earlier about the Soviet permission issue, but not because I knew exactly which rule it was (I couldn't find the bloody thing [:(]) - just simply that's how I've always played it because it felt right and luckily it was. But that's an uncomfortable feeling, I like to understand the actual rules if possible [;)]

Having surmised right about the FTC, I wondered whether, with the complete hotch potch of who is at war with who and what-not in that extreme scenario, that there was nothing that said, the Germans (or Soviets) would be compelled to go to war with each other. That question did not come about because I want restrictions on the game.

I have always - I hope - evidenced my love for this game on these forums, and said as much to anyone and everyone who cares to listen - hell I even got a convert in Canoerebel earlier this week when discussing the game on the General Discussion forum. The fact that "what-ifs" are possible, within a reasonably historical framework is one of the many, many great things about WIF.

Yes, there is one caveat to that thought as you know from earlier posts - and that is the total dogs breakfast made of the Vichy rules but there you go and I won't go into that again - I just hope Steve will program that the French cannot align minors when the computer plays the AI (please god) [X(].

Anyway, thanks for your assistance as always and clarification of the rules that I was seeking. I will end with one final thing. HMS Warspite never gets sunk right?.... right?
Good, I'm glad that's sorted [:)].

[brian brian]

I can never sink the Warspite. The Rodney and Nelson, though, best watch out.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I can never sink the Warspite.

Warspite1

Of course you can't [:-]. Those that pretend they have are all liars, liars I tell you!! [;)]

[composer99]

To recap:

1 - While the USSR is neutral (that is, not at war with any Axis major power), no other Allied unit may enter hexes in the USSR, in its aligned minors, or other hexes it controls (e.g. East Poland).

2 - Once the USSR is active, any other Allied unit may enter hexes in the USSR (if they meet Foreign Troop Commitment requirements), in its aligned minors or other hexes it controls (with no additional restrictions on these two categories).

3 - While the Nazi-Soviet pact remains in effect, no Allied unit at war with Germany may move into the common border area between USSR and Germany.

Pertinent to point #3, if memory serves the Germans get a free pas on DoWing the USSR if any Allied unit based in USSR hexes attacks German hexes (e.g. a CW strat bomber based in USSR flying over the Baltic to avoid the common border restriction and bombing Berlin) while the Nazi-Soviet pact remains in effect (or vice-versa).

Edit: It may be the case that for the USSR there is a further restriction on friendly units entering it such that, as with transporting resources through USSR hexes, the USSR must be at war with Germany first. Would need to check the rules (when I get home rather than on lunch).

Edit #2: Item (2) should be appended by "as long as the USSR has given permission for the units to enter these hexes."

[Orm]

A while ago it was a discussion wether the USSR AI should be allowed to know the US entry level or not. I know found an clarification on this in FAQ so I suggest that all the Allied nations know the US entry all the time and takes its level into consideration when taking descisions that affect US entry.


Q13.2-1 13.2
13.3.1
Question:
You can't show pact values and entry
levels to anyone, but can you tell other
people the values?
Answer:
Yes of course, you may be lying (or got it
wrong) though. Date 23/12/2007
13.3.1: You can look at your own markers after you
have committed them to a particular entry pool but you
can’t show them to anyone else (even on your own
side).
23/12/2007

[Centuur]

As a Russian player, I always want Bessarabia, Eastern Poland and the Baltics. Even if I get an overwhelming attack away from my homeland, it are still more hexes for the Germans to enter. It therefore gives me more time to rail away factories. Finland was out of the question for me. However, now I'd seen the map, I think I would change my mind with this. The railroad to Moermansk is far to vulnerable with those three hexes close by...
Also: I always stuff the border with the Germans (but keep the most essential units as far away as possible and in wooded area's if possible). I Haven't done anything crazy like Persia or Iraq. I see the possibilities there, but I like to keep things as quiet as possible in the far east, and giving the Japanese the possibility to grab oil, and get war declared on for that (as the Japanese I would certainly try to capture oil...), even against an earlier US entry? I think I pass on that front...

[composer99]

USSR strategic bombing has come up in the context of making a claim against Bessarabia, but I would also like to bring up USSR strategic bombing in general.


Potential Targets

Germany: The closest and most prominent German-controlled target for USSR strategic bombing is Rumania, either the oil fields or the factory in Bucharest. Other targets, depending on the location of the front lines, include the red factory in Poland, the oil in Austria, factory cities in Germany, Austria & Czechoslovakia, and synthetic oil plants if these are placed in the centre or east of the country. German-controlled red factories in the USSR are also potential targets (although in this case the USSR no doubt will want to avoid destroying the factory).

Italy: I do not perceive there being much in the way of viable Italian-controlled targets for USSR strategic bombing. What does seem possible is either oil hexes in Italian-controlled Iraq or Persia (if Italy aligns or conquers either or both of these countries) or factory cities & synthetic oil in northern Italy if USSR bombers are in range (and either Italy remains in play by that time or the region is German-controlled).

Japan: Unless the Japanese take Vladivostok and other USSR cities in the Far East, the USSR has opportunities to strategically bomb Japanese factories in Manchuria and factories & synthetic oil plants in Japan. If they are on the map, the 17-range LND4 or 11-range extended range LND3 can reach every factory in Japan from Vladivostok.


Constraints
The USSR has a number of constraints which make a sustained strategic air campaign less feasible for the USSR than the other Allies, and perhaps even a long-term nuisance strategic air campaign (such as might be implemented by Japan vs. China or by the EuroAxis vs. CW) is also less feasible for the USSR.

Air Unit Availability
The USSR has quite a few air units with strategic air factors; however it has relatively few long-range, high-strat-factor units (1 on map & 1 in reserve at start of 1939 Global War campaign). Building air units specialized in strategic bombing is often contra-indicated by the strategic/tactical situation(s) the USSR finds itself in. The other availability constraint is not whether the USSR has air units on the map in range of targets, but whether it is has other, more important tasks for the air units on the map (e.g. ground strikes or defensive ground support). Building new long-range LND or replacing destroyed LND is often very expensive given shorter-term USSR production requirements during a German invasion.

Action Limits
The USSR often finds itself performing land actions, which are limited in air missions (3 to be precise); usually there are higher priority air missions (air rebases or ground strikes) to be undertaken given such tight constraints. This can be got round by performing combined, air, or supercombined actions, assuming the USSR can afford not to move many land units in the former two cases.

Territorial Limits
There are two sorts of territorial constraints to USSR strategic air bombing:
1- The USSR bombers are out of range of targets (whether due to intervening enemy-controlled hexes)
2- The USSR bombers, if used for the strategic bombing while in range, may find themselves overrun and destroyed if the strategic raid occurs during a turn with significant territorial loss by the USSR (summer 41/42, mainly)

Air Defences
The presence of Axis airpower to defend potential targets is often a strong constraint against USSR bombing, even if the USSR has the units & action limits available, since until the US-lent Black Widows are on the map USSR FTR are unlikely to have the range to accompany bombers to targets. On the other hand, forcing the Axis to commit FTR to defend strat bomb targets they might not otherwise have to defend is itself a goal of a USSR strategic air campaign.

Given the constraints involved, the USSR can probably only afford to have 1-2 bombers allocated to strategic air warfare, particularly if this entails keeping them away from principal theatres of land conflict. There are three areas where allocation of bombers makes most sense to me:
1- in Vladivostok. As noted above, a long-enough range bomber can reach almost every Japanese factory on the map. The USSR can bomb vulnerable hexes until the Japanese cover their factories & synthetic oil with FTR. Given a cost of 5-6 bp per USSR LND involved, this allocation is effective if the USSR does damage and/or forces commitment of defensive FTR equivalent to 7+ bp.
2- versus Axis-controlled Middle Eastern oil. There will likely be low to no FTR coverage, making for easy targets. It's probably not worth it unless an oil rule is in play.
3- versus Ploesti/Bucharest. If an oil rule is in play, the USSR should have a LND threatening the strategic air raid as long as it has hexes in range that are not liable to be conquered shortly. Long-range LND can reach almost all the rest of the Eastern Front as required, so LND based to threaten the oil bombing are not as far out of the way as LND targeting Japan or the Middle East.

[Red Prince]

If the USSR can afford to commit the LND to Strategic Bombing in the first place, Sevastopol is a very useful base for those initial on-map and reserve-pool bombers, in my opinion. They are very unlikely to be overrun there, and in an emergency can be put to other uses, too.

[Centuur]

There is something which the AI should take into consideration at setup, and I'm not seeing it in here...

If playing with the option of the Siberians, you have to choose:

1. Replace INF with Siberians (and those INF replaced aren't going back to the force pool...)
OR
2. Place the Siberians in the INF force pool.
OR
3. Replace some INF with Siberians and put the remaining Siberians into the INF force pool.

Now in early war scenario's, I'm not replacing anything, since I need every INF on the board when Barbarossa starts.
In late war scenario's, I'm replacing all, since those nice white prints are useful...
Is the AI going to take this into account?

[Orm]

We have always played that the INF replaced by the Siberians are placed in the force pool. I am pretty sure that MWIF works this way.

[Red Prince]

ORIGINAL: Orm

We have always played that the INF replaced by the Siberians are placed in the force pool. I am pretty sure that MWIF works this way.

I was under that impression, too, but we better check on it.

[paulderynck]

They go back to the force pool.It is a no-brainer.