Supply issues break the game

[PvtBenjamin]

So Algiers is the capital and they are connected by supplied ports.

Just take Strategic Bombers & Battleship's and drive supply in port & city to 0.

Whats the rules for not accepting Vichy (conquering Algiers) in WaW?

[Numdydar]

If Algiers is captured, then France falls.

Sorry but all my Strat bombers are in the shop. Germany nor Italy do not start with any.

It is obvious you have never played as the Axis and tried this different path. The Italian Navy has to contend with both the British and French navies. So sending out ships to get damaged bombing a lv 10 port (as once the capital is transferred the Algiers port instantly becomes a lv10 something else I strongly disagree with) is not a wise move.

But now I know what the mechanic is, I will obviously use it. But it is still so far beyond any reality, I might as well be playing a science fiction game.

[PvtBenjamin]

You sure you played the SC Europe?

The ONLY reason (my experience is in European game) people don't accept Vichy is to capture Algiers to get Spain to join the Axis and then take Gibraltar. In the European game experienced players almost never don't accept Vichy. Maybe its different here.

The problem is it gives the Allied an opportunity to set up defenses and control Oran & Casablanca ports so you need to do it quickly. The longer you are bogged down the stronger & better researched your opponents.

It is imperative you engage the overwhelming Axis airforce (Sardinia/Sicily w HQ's attached) to be successful in this strategy. Once you have deployed your airforce (w/Maritime Bombers) and bring some German subs you will control the seas East of Algiers. If you aren't buying Maritime bombers early you should, they are awesome. When the Allies commit to much Navy GB is wide open. It should only take a couple of turns to take Tunis


I will grant you with the smaller map the process seems much easier for Axis and agree that the Tunis port shouldn't be 10 str ( you graphic doesn't show port str).


enjoy the game.

[EarlyDoors]

Thanks for the information in this thread.
My initial attempts have been playing as UK (and British India) only - love the isolation AI btw - and my East Africa campaign attempts to prise the Italians out of Eithiopia have been fruitless.
I'd put it down to the rubbish early war morale but it looks like I can tactically starve them of supply
Love the game btw!

Just need an extra life to find the time to play it

[Hubert Cater]

Hi EarlyDoors,

Welcome aboard and glad to hear you are enjoying the game [:)]

Hubert

[Hubert Cater]

ORIGINAL: steevodeevo

Easy folks. The Supply rules have changed for this release, but in some ways are more straight forward, supply from an enemy port can be stopped with an adjacenr land unit. No longer needs a sea blockade. But it has changed, so let's be nice.

Thanks Steve and agreed. Even for me Bill reminded me of a minor change to some of the rules where I had to correct one of my posts above to 2 units and not 3 adjacent units. In beta we started with 3 adjacent units to minor capitals where now it is a more simple to remember 2 adjacent units across the board for these types of situations.

There is a lot to remember and one objective we have for the future is to try and streamline and simplify as many of these rules as possible. Goal is always to have a logical set of rules that don't get overcomplicated at the same time.

[PvtBenjamin]

ORIGINAL: EarlyDoors

Thanks for the information in this thread.
My initial attempts have been playing as UK (and British India) only - love the isolation AI btw - and my East Africa campaign attempts to prise the Italians out of Eithiopia have been fruitless.
I'd put it down to the rubbish early war morale but it looks like I can tactically starve them of supply
Love the game btw!

Just need an extra life to find the time to play it

Reducing port strength <5 will also prevent your opponents from moving in re reinforcements. Port supply needs to be at least 5 to move transports. Example: reduce Tobruk port supply <5 and your opponent will have to bring in reinforcements from Benghazi. Can make a big difference.


I've said this many times but easy game to start hard game to master (which I haven't).

[EarlyDoors]

Great stuff, i've laid seige to Addis Ababa and the Town has no supply and the Italian Corps has dropped from 5 to 1 supply
However, when i move a destroyer adjacent to the port of Benghazi it does not reduce the supply which remains at 5.

[sPzAbt653]

ONE to BLOCK, TWO to physically REDUCE [;)]

[sIg3b]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Thanks for the picture as this helps.

Normally you would simply need the two adjacent units to Tunis to slowly bring the strength of the city down by 1 point per turn in order to reduce supply to the French Corps. However since there is also a port at Tunis, this port can also provide supply to the French Corps as well.

Previous to this release you would need to bring a naval unit adjacent to the port to eliminate the port from providing supply (which is still an option in WaW), but as described above, a new addition for the WaW release is that if you also bring a land unit adjacent to that port, then the port will no longer provide supply.

The suggestion here is to bring at least one of those Italian ground units adjacent to that port, or an Italian naval unit adjacent to the port and the French Corps will quickly run out of supply and its ability to reinforce will degrade over time too.

Hope this helps,
Hubert

But, if Paris has fallen, as I assume happened here, to what does the port connect?

I think the issue here is that ports should not provide (much) supply at all when there is nothing overseas to get the supply from.

[Hubert Cater]

For now we simply abstract this by reducing the max strength value ports, towns, cities and so on if they are not connected to a primary supply source. Granted Algeria and Tunis already start disconnected and reduced and don't change in value even after the Fall of Paris, but as mentioned above there are a lot of methods/mechanisms available to further reduce supply as needed.

It might not be perfect in all situations but it gets things pretty close to where they need to be without added complexity and complication.

[Numdydar]

But the game has the port at Algiers turn into a lv10! when the French capital moves there.

To get around this, you need to keep Paris in French hands UNTIL Algiers is captured so you do not have to worry about this nonsense.

[griffon29200]

Unimportant and non essential for me

I like this game a lot !

[PvtBenjamin]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

But the game has the port at Algiers turn into a lv10! when the French capital moves there.

To get around this, you need to keep Paris in French hands UNTIL Algiers is captured so you do not have to worry about this nonsense.

One might also deduce there is a reason the Germans accepted Vichy in the real war and the next time I play I will accept Vichy because not doing so is a real headache.


If the Germans didn't accept Vichy and the French moved the Capital to Algiers isn't it quite possible the Allies would have considerably built up the port ability of Algiers and greatly increased troops & supply?

Allies control Gibraltar after all.

[Numdydar]

Sure but it would take a lot longer than a month to do that.

But it is pretty easy to get around this as I mentioned above. Of course its pretty gamey to keep Paris in French control while everything else is captured while you just wait for Algiers to fall. But hey, its just using one gamey trick to offset another so I am good [:)]

[PvtBenjamin]

It won't work in a PBEM game but whatever floats your boat

enjoy

[Numdydar]

Since I do not play PBEM, so it is not an issue for me. [:)]

I do agree though that against a human player this would be a lot harder to do. Especially if France took troops out of France to Algeria to prevent something like this from happening.

[Hubert Cater]

Sure but it would take a lot longer than a month to do that.

Thanks for the posts and we were looking into possibly slowing things down once a capital moves based on the converstation here, but in this example and in the case of the French capital moving to Algiers, since it starts at 5, it will only increase in strength, from 5 to 10, 1 strength point at a time and over 5 Allied turns.

10 game turns in total, which works out to about 5 months in game... so this doesn't feel all that offside does it?

[Numdydar]

Not really as you are talking about lots of resources and heavy equipment, including construction ships, Engineers, etc.. Getting all of that there while the Italian Navy is running around would be very difficult. Instead of the Tokyo Express you would have the Roma Express lol.

Plus from pictures the harbor does not look like it could be expanded that greatly. If it was such a great location for a harbor of that size, it would have been developed up long before WWII started [:)]

[Hubert Cater]

Perhaps but this is also a set of rules that apply across the board.

So the same rules apply if let's say the UK moves its capital to Egypt in War in Europe or to Australia here. At some point, and for game play reasons there is an argument to be made that a shifting in the location of the Capital will allow the major to eventually continue in a meaningful capacity thus the eventual return to strength 10 which allows for maximum supply, reinforcement and so on.

We can nitpick and apply special rules for situations like France and its move to Algiers, but do we really gain in terms of overall game play? Again, if we change it for Algiers, then it changes elsewhere in similar circumstances, or we introduce special rules that only then possibly get more confusing to remember etc.

The original concern was that Algiers jumped to strength 10 in one month, and after looking into it further, and seeing it is about 5 months, and that this gives an Axis player that planned accordingly to take into account the move to Algiers, enough reasonable time to continue to press France before it reaches full strength in North Africa, I think we are content to leave things as is considering all that I've noted just above.