I want to share some observations on conquest in the endgame. I can imagine, that many players have not progressed till the end of the game yet and might be surprised by the behaviour of MWIF as I was.
But on the map these neutral countries (and territories like Crete) are shown still with German hex control flags and Japanese (ex-German) ships in port.
I am wondering, should these ships not also be eliminated during the Rebase Overrun Disgression upon conquest, like the ships, which were in German ports in the moment of conquest? What happens to these ships, if SU or CW declares war on a neutral Norway?
Should neutral Denmark and Norway not be displayed without any hex control flags, exactly like neutral Sweden?
Attachments
stillGEc..JPfleet.jpg (261.01 KiB) Viewed 485 times
Now to the important part: The VP objectives Stockholm and Oslo are still counted for Germany, which is completely conquered, but seems still to be in the game?
Note that Stockholm has an asterisk, while Oslo has not. But at this point in time, the status of both neutral countries should be exactly the same, not?
So this means, in order for other Major Powers to get control of VP objectives, they always have to be taken by force. It is not enough to eliminate/conquer Germany to get Stockholm counted as a VP, as Berlin is still nearest Major Power capital, even after conquest?
This implies, in a competitive game there might be seen a race for VP like Oslo and Stockholm between CW and SU, while they are still fighting Germany or immediately after Germany is conquered?
I have to say, to discover Germany can still get VP after conquest at first put me off, but now, the more I think about it, the more I can see the sense in it and start to like it. It will give a totally new dynamic to the endgame between WAllies and SU!
Taking into consideration bids for countries at game start, it can lead to interesting constellations and can even increase the chances of the Axis to survive till game end in JA45!
On the other side of the globe Manchuria got conquered in MJ45, too.
At conquest, all empty hexes in Manchuria reverted to SU control, as Manchuria was conquered by CC/Mao, directed by SU. Besieged Japanese units in Manchuria were magically teleported to the nearest Japanese controlled hexes (in China and Korea), which would not have been possible by regular game means, as no Japanese TRS/AMPH are still on map.
I would have expected these units just to stay, similar to CW units in occupied France, after Vichy is declared. Any comments, advice, hints?
Also, the VP objective Port Arthur is still counted for Japan in the turn of conquest. Of course CC can easily march in now, but it will be converted to SU control only one turn later ...
Same for the ressource in Tsitsihar, which could not be used for production by CC in MJ45.
Summary is:
Each VP objective, both in Europe and in Asia, needs to be directly conquered/assaulted in the end game. If such VP objective becomes neutral again because of its conquering Axis Major Power is conquered itself, it would still count as an Axis VP because of distance to capital.
Any comments?
I think, I like the concept. I just wish, I would have known earlier.
One more question regarding VP objectives: Why is Istanbul counted for SU and not for IT? IT is a completely conquered Major Power, same as GE. Why is Germany still be shown with two VP in neutral countries because of distance to capital, but Italy not?
Now we have played JA45, the last turn of the game. CW has captured Tokyo, US and CW have taken all factories in Japan. So in EoT, Japan is conquered.
Three new homelands are offered, so the Tenno can continue the war: Korea, French Indo China, Siam. The Tenno flees to FIC. Only one factory in Seoul remains under his control.
Summary:
So there is indeed the strategic option of going to conquer the evil Axis home countries. But the Allies will be officially granted the VP's only at the very end of the game.
In general, I only record bug reports from Tech Support and the general MWIF forum. I much prefer reading about them in Tech Support - I am less likely to absentmindedly forget those posted in the MWIF general forum.
Thank you for taking note, Steve.
In the beginning I was not sure, if the described behaviour of the program is a bug or not, only for this reason I did not post it in Tech Support.
I will post possible bugs in the future in Tech Support as requested.
I don't know how to move this thread to Tech Support now. Maybe a moderator/admin of this forum can do this? Or somebody instructs me to do it by myself, if possible at all.