Option 47

[CrusssDaddy]

ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets



I quoted your entire post but made bold the portion to which I was replying. So the portion of my text in bold corresponds to the portion of your post in bold.

I sometimes do this by underlining the corresponding text portions - or by using color. I was lazy this time and just used bold.

Your response seems a little excessive.[8|]

You feel no urgency to accomplish the minor work required to fix this, is that what you are confirming?

CrusssDaddy, Steve stated (ie: confirmed) this is ON his list, it just is not a "super" high priority.

I like that Steve takes a few minutes to answer questions here periodically. I would rather he spend his time working on the game
instead of expending his limited time repeating an answer because you don't like his answer and then try to warp whatever he says into a negative.

I'm more interested in your opinion on the thread -- do you think 47 is important and creating some sort of workaround should be a priority?

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy




You feel no urgency to accomplish the minor work required to fix this, is that what you are confirming?

CrusssDaddy, Steve stated (ie: confirmed) this is ON his list, it just is not a "super" high priority.

I like that Steve takes a few minutes to answer questions here periodically. I would rather he spend his time working on the game
instead of expending his limited time repeating an answer because you don't like his answer and then try to warp whatever he says into a negative.

I'm more interested in your opinion on the thread -- do you think 47 is important and creating some sort of workaround should be a priority?

It's an important optional rule, that I agree on. But it's optional, so it comes behind the bug fixing of supply, production, naval and netplay. After that a new order of battle for MWIF will be decided on...

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Does the boldface type indicate you are shouting? Should your customers on this thread deploy boldface type to prod you toward elevating that task in importance on your list? Or should they use the more traditional ALL CAPS AND SUPERFLUOUS PUNCTUATION!!!!!!!!!?!?!?!?!!?!?

I quoted your entire post but made bold the portion to which I was replying. So the portion of my text in bold corresponds to the portion of your post in bold.

I sometimes do this by underlining the corresponding text portions - or by using color. I was lazy this time and just used bold.

Your response seems a little excessive.[8|]

You feel no urgency to accomplish the minor work required to fix this, is that what you are confirming?

warspite1

You just can't help yourself can you? You prove how you can be a positive contributor to this game - and then almost immediately revert to obnoxious, rude, twat territory . Well done.

[CrusssDaddy]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets



I quoted your entire post but made bold the portion to which I was replying. So the portion of my text in bold corresponds to the portion of your post in bold.

I sometimes do this by underlining the corresponding text portions - or by using color. I was lazy this time and just used bold.

Your response seems a little excessive.[8|]

You feel no urgency to accomplish the minor work required to fix this, is that what you are confirming?

warspite1

You just can't help yourself can you? You prove how you can be a positive contributor to this game - and then almost immediately revert to obnoxious, rude, twat territory . Well done.

This is such a minor fix, shouldn't you be more angry that Steve always has an excuse ready why the things that need doing can't get done? And that Matrix couldn't care less? I mean, those pictures and novel-length posts about the new sh!tter he's installing in his pad sure are entertaining, but couldn't that time be better spent?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy




You feel no urgency to accomplish the minor work required to fix this, is that what you are confirming?

warspite1

You just can't help yourself can you? You prove how you can be a positive contributor to this game - and then almost immediately revert to obnoxious, rude, twat territory . Well done.

This is such a minor fix, shouldn't you be more angry that Steve always has an excuse ready why the things that need doing can't get done? And that Matrix couldn't care less? I mean, those pictures and novel-length posts about the new sh!tter he's installing in his pad sure are entertaining, but couldn't that time be better spent?

warspite1

I cannot comment for sure on whether any fix is minor or not - since I know nothing about programming. However, I suspect from other related posts/threads/beta testing, that nothing to do with supply is a simple fix - far from it.

That being the case, and considering a) this is an optional rule, b) there are still other actual supply bugs that need fixing, Steve is prioritising accordingly.

Matrix couldn't care less? This old chestnut again, really? Listen, the game is what it is, the economics of the situation and Matrix's role is what it is. You cannot change this - no matter how much bitching and moaning you do.

[wworld7]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

I'm more interested in your opinion on the thread -- do you think 47 is important and creating some sort of workaround should be a priority?

I do think it is better playing with 47.

That said, I am in no position to start telling Steve how to order his priorities. He knows the big picture of this project and he stated that
this is on his list. Many people have different ideas on what should be the #1, 2, 3 etc. of priority to be fixed/programmed. This is totally up
to Steve and Matrix in reality (as it should be).

And I laugh anytime anyone (including myself) implies that ANY change to a software program is minor and or easy. There is always risk of unintended
consequences when dealing with software. But I believe you already know this.

Be well,

[wworld7]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

This is such a minor fix, shouldn't you be more angry that Steve always has an excuse ready why the things that need doing can't get done? And that Matrix couldn't care less? I mean,
those pictures and novel-length posts about the new sh!tter he's installing in his pad sure are entertaining, but couldn't that time be better spent?

I wish I had seen this post before I replied to your other.

"Minor fix", you used it. ROFL!!!!

Your critique on what Steve does with his time is also a riot.

I doubt you would be happy even if Steve programmed 24/7 52 weeks a year (which the finances of this project could never support).

Thanks for the LAUGHS.

[pzgndr]

ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish
And I laugh anytime anyone implies that ANY change to a software program is minor and or easy. There is always risk of unintended
consequences when dealing with software.

+1

And for THIS game, with its many optional rules that players could pick and choose from in an almost infinite variety of combinations and permutations, to run on various platforms and O/S's and device drivers, any regression testing of software changes to ensure EVERYTHING works perfectly for EVERYBODY is a daunting task. I give Steve credit for doing what he can; others should too. For a game, for our entertainment, for fun. We'll get there eventually.

[CrusssDaddy]

It's a wonder anyone else has made a working computer game in under 10 years.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

It's a wonder anyone else has made a working computer game in under 10 years.

warspite1

Why's that then?

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

It's a wonder anyone else has made a working computer game in under 10 years.

Much easier to create an OS without security flaws in that period!

[Zorachus99]

The battle of Stalingrad, Excerpted for MWIF, regarding option 47.

========================================================================

The German high command had realized by the Spring of 1942, that Operation Barbarossa had not made the Russians surrender as easily as the French. The despots on both sides of Russian Steppes had locked horns, and both had been gravely damaged.

Germany set it’s direction south in 1942, operations destined to be oil in the Caucuses.

“If I do not get the oil of Maikop and Grozny then I must finish this war.”
—Adolf Hitler

A bold offensive was launched, literally petering out on the face of the caucuses with a propaganda operation done with German mountaineers.

However, the Soviets were building up forces near Stalingrad, and Hitler was becoming obsessed in the day-to-day operations of capturing Stalingrad. So obsessed was Hitler, in fact, that Stalin knew exactly what to do in the oncoming winter.

After long bitter fighting, Germans had forced themselves between the Don and the Volga River into Stalingrad, and had the Romanian 3rd Army manning a front in the north along the Don River on the left flank, while the Romanian 4th Army covered the south on the right flank of Stalingrad.

The attack with 18 Russian infantry divisions and 6 armor brigades smashed the Axis defenders in the north and south, encircling the Germans in 2 days, by the 20th of Nov 1942.
Suddenly over a quarter million Axis troops were surrounded. Russians rushed to reinforce the newly occupied ground.

Immediately food, ammunition, and basic supplies were at a standstill. The very maximum amount of tonnage the air fleet was capable of was some 100 tons of daily airlift, but the troops easily needed 750 tons daily.

Troops began starving nearly immediately. Promises by Goering to provide supplies to the city resulted with over 500 transport aircraft damaged or destroyed beyond repair, and heavy losses to trained crews as well.
Manstein launched Operation Winter Storm to break through to Stalingrad, but failed some 40km from the occupied forces.

NOW TO MWIF

Thankfully, knowing the rules, Jan 1st came. All of the units surrounded, disrupted get their bi-monthly ration of supplies. All the surrounded non-oil dependent units become perfectly reorganized. Bullets are shipped in; men get all the food they need to fight like men again, and even better, some supply from ATR does get though, which is used to reorganize oil dependent armor units.

YaY! Now that all your units are face up, and its winter, nobody will attack you. The defensive effects are too serious for the Russians to do more than attrition with a bunch of poor odds attacks perhaps. At the very least those Russians will have to get extremely lucky to flip and re-attack all of your units in the bad weather. Who cares if one of your two ATR’s got shot down along with its pilot resupplying the armor units?

BACK TO REAL LIFE

Jan 1st came. The Germans were not only starving, but running out of ammunition and the necessities of war.

Vicious combat ensued before a quarter-million man army was completely removed from the Axis arsenal on February 1st.

The loss was a result of smart tactical doctrine by the Russians, and the simple fact that no army isolated from every source of supply has very long to live. Food, bullets, and fuel are simple facts that cannot be dreamt away.

SUMMARY

Clearly those units in the Stalingrad pocket were disrupted. The very description of the situation is similar to the description of what a disrupted unit is. In addition the description also seems to model disrupted and out of supply units. In WIF, out of supply, disrupted units are the *very best* units to attack. They are nearly worthless defensively and cannot move. If you have OOS and disrupted units to attack on the board, you are doing an extremely good job of being a general in WIF. Obviously a quarter million men were cleared from the board in less than 40 days. That is a LOT of units.

So, what’s the problem? In MWIF currently, surrounded units get reorganized. If fact, opponents will simply assume it is part of the game, and a numerous number of scurrilous and unrealistic moves have been opened up to exploit; simply because non-oil dependent units always reorganize. Chasing a non-supply dependent unit can sound challenging, but, is that realistic? I would ask you to consider how many ways you can exploit this rule, before brushing it away as trivial.

How option 47 or whatever became an optional rule is amazing by itself.

How hard could this be to fix? I don't know.

My understanding is that this rule is restricted solely to the end of turn, during the reorganization phase.
This phase only happens once a turn. I certainly wouldn’t mind a longish calculation if it is only once a turn. Throw up a screen that says ‘calculating’ or something even.

This phase does not require that supply be traced normally either. However, it can be complicated by overseas supply. But in the name of all that holy, can’t we have some limited form of it on a temporary basis that only traces a few hexes?

Now I understand that there are a lot of things to fix, but I would certainly like this to get onto the roadmap.

This is an important supply thing.

Please excuse the blurt of words, if incomprehensible, my apologies in hindsight.

[AxelNL]

it will come, in time.

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

I think 47 is an optional mostly because of a number of smaller theaters that isolated reorg doesn't handle all that well. The attack on British Somaliland, especially if you're playing with the larger maps, is completely impossible with Isolated reorg. Even if you assume those areas are completely undefended, the Italian inf walk up, flip, and never turn face up again.

You also have all those little Japanese islands in the Pacific, whose outlying garrisons were able to function even after being cut off for months.

WiF's a board game, and MWiF is modeled after the board game, and a board game is never going to be able to deal with an infinitely complex level of detail. What's so great about the day shifting from June 30th to July 1st that re-energizes the entire front on both sides and allows all those units that were too depleted and exhausted to move or attack suddenly tear into each other? Why can't WiF model something like the western desert campaign "properly"? I've had games where the Germans have 10 corps down there, and they'd never be ale to keep a force like that running in real life, but in WiF, as long as I've got a convoy in the sea zone, I'm in supply, no matter how many troops I stuff in. The Germans can advance endlessly as long as they keep their rearward lines of communications open in Russia; not having to deal with the trouble and expense of simply moving supplies to the front that gave them so much trouble in real life.



Option 47 is an option because supply in the game as a whole is somewhat of an abstraction. And I imagine that there's something else too, not wanting to force people to forge a link between re-organization and supply. If an HQ can reorg a bunch of units when everyone's out of supply, perfectly legal in all games, why is there suddenly this deviation from that standard when it comes to final reorg?

[paulderynck]

You could get a gamey effect with Option 47. Imagine Zhukov getting disrupted by an unlucky attack and then the turn goes longer than expected and ends with Zhukov behind German lines and disrupted. Or vice versa with Manstein behind Russian lines.

What gamer in his right mind would EVER attack them and put them out of their misery? Far better to leave your opponent as long as possible with the inability to build that unit back again. A good fix for that is to allow the owner the option to destroy isolated units after placing reinforcements each turn. BTW an O-chit ought to never allow isolated HQs to undisrupt, while we're at it. (An O-chit represents the accumulation of a huge amount of ammunition and POL and other supplies, so how would an isolated HQ get them?)

Any fixes to include Option 47 ought to add those two additions as well.

[Zorachus99]

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge
I think 47 is an optional mostly because of a number of smaller theaters that isolated reorg doesn't handle all that well. The attack on British Somaliland, especially if you're playing with the larger maps, is completely impossible with Isolated reorg. Even if you assume those areas are completely undefended, the Italian inf walk up, flip, and never turn face up again.

It has been this way for years, and actually makes sense. You see, Italy starts the war neutral with the CW, and has no problem at all placing convoy points in the Red Sea, supplying the Ethiopian troops. The real issue is, how soon will the CW be at war with Italy and close supply? I routinely rescue one or both the supply unit and the Italian infantry unit during the first four phases of a new game. Allies generally will not want to take a chance with US Entry chits so early in the game to declare war on one transport. You are gauranteed to be able to rescue one unit *for sure* before the Allies are even allowed to declare war on you as Italy.

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge
You also have all those little Japanese islands in the Pacific, whose outlying garrisons were able to function even after being cut off for months.

WiF's a board game, and MWiF is modeled after the board game, and a board game is never going to be able to deal with an infinitely complex level of detail. What's so great about the day shifting from June 30th to July 1st that re-energizes the entire front on both sides and allows all those units that were too depleted and exhausted to move or attack suddenly tear into each other? Why can't WiF model something like the western desert campaign "properly"? I've had games where the Germans have 10 corps down there, and they'd never be ale to keep a force like that running in real life, but in WiF, as long as I've got a convoy in the sea zone, I'm in supply, no matter how many troops I stuff in. The Germans can advance endlessly as long as they keep their rearward lines of communications open in Russia; not having to deal with the trouble and expense of simply moving supplies to the front that gave them so much trouble in real life.

Option 47 is an option because supply in the game as a whole is somewhat of an abstraction.

I'd have to say that the rules regarding overseas supply are almost entirely abstract; but so is naval combat, so far so, that I'm pretty comfortable with it. Have you noticed how abstracted Naval Combat is? Most of the strangest naval encounters in the war get reproduced right here in a wargame. Whomever thought the naval system up, really deserves some rich credit.

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge
And I imagine that there's something else too, not wanting to force people to forge a link between re-organization and supply. If an HQ can reorg a bunch of units when everyone's out of supply, perfectly legal in all games, why is there suddenly this deviation from that standard when it comes to final reorg?

Actually, you have to trace a path over friendly hexes to reorganize units with an HQ. The rules lawyers use this phrase, "The HQ's reorganisation range is equal to its reorganisation value in motorized movement points. The path from the HQ to the unit to be reorganised is traced exactly like a basic supply path, except its maximum length is determined by the HQ's reorganisation range, and it may not be traced overseas."

Specifically, a basic supply path does not allow you to trace over enemy owned hexes as you can see below:

ï into an enemy ZOC (unless the hex contains a friendly land unit); or
ï into a hex controlled by another major power unless it agrees; or
ï into a hex controlled by a neutral country (exception: Vichy territory ~ see 17.4 and Sweden ~ see 19.7); or
ï across an alpine hexside; or
ï across a lake hexside (except when frozen); or
ï across an all sea hexside that isn’t a straits hexside (except as an overseas supply path); or
ï 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.

You cannot legally reorganize isolated units with an HQ. If the game allows it, it is a bug.

[Zorachus99]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

You could get a gamey effect with Option 47. Imagine Zhukov getting disrupted by an unlucky attack and then the turn goes longer than expected and ends with Zhukov behind German lines and disrupted. Or vice versa with Manstein behind Russian lines.

What gamer in his right mind would EVER attack them and put them out of their misery? Far better to leave your opponent as long as possible with the inability to build that unit back again. A good fix for that is to allow the owner the option to destroy isolated units after placing reinforcements each turn. BTW an O-chit ought to never allow isolated HQs to undisrupt, while we're at it. (An O-chit represents the accumulation of a huge amount of ammunition and POL and other supplies, so how would an isolated HQ get them?)

Any fixes to include Option 47 ought to add those two additions as well.

You would seriously demand two house rules if we are to include an official optional rule? Awesome, I'm sure Steve has plenty of time for that.

First, you have an excellent point about not being able to remove isolated and disrupted units. Completely agree with you. It should be it's own optional rule, or optionally even, you could discuss it with your opponent, and come to an agreement. You can actually game around the issue. Reorganization of units is automatically done by the program. That cannot be gamed around.

Second, your proposal to change the rules to require supply during the use of an offensive chit is simply a house rule. An offensive chit is a build-up of supplies that is used entirely abstractly. Were the supplies there before the unit was isolated, and simply awaiting use? An offensive chit is extremely abstract in the actual fact that it is not placed on the map, and is therefore theoretically anywhere. Offensive chits do strange and wonderful things, and I certainly am satisfied with them the way they are; yes, even re-organizing out of supply and isolated HQ's. Saving 15 build points in some strange off-map supply depot idea doesn't make me roll over in my sleep, as not actually having option 47 does.

[paulderynck]

"Ought to" and "demand" do not mean the same thing, but those house rules may not be house rules much longer.

[Larry Smith]

I seem to remember an optional rule once wherein an HQ in a desert hex could only supply as many units as it had for a reorg value, so Rommel would be able to supply three other units. That would limit the forces in the desert.

As for a pause screen for end-of-turn supply calculations, maybe the guys who came up with that "Hot Army Nurses in Flames" mod could come up with an animated GIF for the pause screen.

Seriously, though, the computer already has to do the calculations to determine if oil dependent units are isolated, so the program is doing some of those long calculation cycles, regardless. There was a proposal to limit the checks to 20 hexes, and I think that's more than fair. Anyone who's got a unit that far from a supply source is either being silly, has a lot of long-range ATR's with nothing better to do, or just had bad luck.

And if that doesn't cut down on the cycles, perhaps shorten it to twelve hexes [about 3x the average movement allowance for units] and maybe add in a point at which the program simply asks the player if a unit is considered to be isolated. As long as the action is reported to the other players, I don't see why the program can't be set up to ask the humans for a little help now and then.

I think it would be worth it if it simplified the job for the programmers.

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

It has been this way for years, and actually makes sense. You see, Italy starts the war neutral with the CW, and has no problem at all placing convoy points in the Red Sea, supplying the Ethiopian troops. The real issue is, how soon will the CW be at war with Italy and close supply? I routinely rescue one or both the supply unit and the Italian infantry unit during the first four phases of a new game. Allies generally will not want to take a chance with US Entry chits so early in the game to declare war on one transport. You are gauranteed to be able to rescue one unit *for sure* before the Allies are even allowed to declare war on you

An interesting strategic digression, but not directly related to the point at hand. The Italians had roughly two divisions operating in East Africa, (Not counting the Askaris) and were able to make an attack against admittedly weak opposition, and occupy an area some 130,000 km squared in size. In WiF terms, they'd be isolated the second war broke out, flipped the first time they'd try to move, and never be able to turn face up again in option 47

And while it's an admittedly minor theater of the war, it's something that the game's all or nothing approach to supply does not model well; clearly the Italians were able to procure or manufacture enough stuff to keep them going, at least for the limited duties they were performing in that campaign. Here we have an example of Option 47 making the game less realistic, not more.

Actually, you have to trace a path over friendly hexes to reorganize units with an HQ. The rules lawyers use this phrase, "The HQ's reorganisation range is equal to its reorganisation value in motorized movement points. The path from the HQ to the unit to be reorganised is traced exactly like a basic supply path, except its maximum length is determined by the HQ's reorganisation range, and it may not be traced overseas."

True, but not what I was getting at. I slapped this picture together to get at what I was saying.


Bock and those three inf with him are all out of supply. He can still reorganize, and in doing so, can reorganize his out of supply buddies. Aside from 47, the concepts of "Supply or out of supply" and "reorganization" are not linked ones. I suspect for this more than any other reason is why it's an optional rule, to keep conceptual complexity to a minimum.