New to the game - Basic Questions

[rkr1958]

Hey guys, thanks! To sum up everything as I understand it,

(1) AX -> DX
(2) DX -> AA
(3) AA -> DA
(4) DA -> NE
(5) NE -> AC
(6) AC -> DC
(7) DC -> DC

And the PIL dies, or potentially dies, on any AX/PX result.

I guess the only confusion left for me is the NE result?

ORIGINAL: Centuur
DC doesn't change (the result is unaffected) and NE of course stays to be a NE result.

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio
NE becomes AC

[Courtenay]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Hey guys, thanks! To sum up everything as I understand it,

(1) AX -> DX
(2) DX -> AA
(3) AA -> DA
(4) DA -> NE
(5) NE -> AC
(6) AC -> DC
(7) DC -> DC

And the PIL dies, or potentially dies, on any AX/PX result.

I guess the only confusion left for me is the NE result?

ORIGINAL: Centuur
DC doesn't change (the result is unaffected) and NE of course stays to be a NE result.

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio
NE becomes AC

I would go with Joseignaio here.

[rkr1958]

I'll concede at this point that I'm just not finding it in the rules, but where in the rules am I prohibited from switching between major powers during the final reorganization step; specifically, use oil?

Let's say that Germany has 0.5 units that need oil to reorg and Italy has 0.45 units. MWiF forces me to reorg the German units first. Is this correct? If not, I'd like to switch to Italy, use a German saved oil to reorg the Italian units, meaning I still have 0.55 left of that oil point when I switch back to Germany. Then use 0.5 to reorg the German units effectively consuming that 1 German oil.

As it is now, since I can't switch between Germany and Italy, I have to either not reorg all the German units in order to only use 1 oil point or use 2 oil points to reorg everybody.

[Orm]

It should cost one oil either way. So it shouldn't matter who goes first.

The rules doesn't state which MP that reorganizes their units first. I suppose that MWIF doesn't allow it because there have not been perceived for the need to change it.

Germany reorg for 0.5 and use up an oil. If Italy then reorganizes for 0.45 and use German oil then that should not use up any oil in my humble opinion. If it does, then that sounds like a bug to me. In my humble opinion, of course.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Orm

It should cost one oil either way. So it shouldn't matter who goes first.

The rules doesn't state which MP that reorganizes their units first. I suppose that MWIF doesn't allow it because there have not been perceived for the need to change it.

Germany reorg for 0.5 and use up an oil. If Italy then reorganizes for 0.45 and use German oil then that should not use up any oil in my humble opinion. If it does, then that sounds like a bug to me. In my humble opinion, of course.

Don't be humble. It's a bug. But there's another rule regarding the use of oil which hasn't been coded.

RAW:
If 3 or more units trace a path to the same oil resource, you must
spend that resource. This may mean that you will have to spend
more oil resources than the minimum number.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Orm

It should cost one oil either way. So it shouldn't matter who goes first.

The rules doesn't state which MP that reorganizes their units first. I suppose that MWIF doesn't allow it because there have not been perceived for the need to change it.

Germany reorg for 0.5 and use up an oil. If Italy then reorganizes for 0.45 and use German oil then that should not use up any oil in my humble opinion. If it does, then that sounds like a bug to me. In my humble opinion, of course.

Germany uses 1 oil, regardless of which major power reorganizes units first.
Italy doesn't use any oil - provided there is an available oil point for Italy or a cooperating major power.

If both countries only have 1 oil point, then yes, the Italian units would not get reorganized. Of course, you could choose to only reorganize German units that require a total of .4 oil. Then the Italians could reorganize all .45 of theirs.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

ORIGINAL: Orm

It should cost one oil either way. So it shouldn't matter who goes first.

The rules doesn't state which MP that reorganizes their units first. I suppose that MWIF doesn't allow it because there have not been perceived for the need to change it.

Germany reorg for 0.5 and use up an oil. If Italy then reorganizes for 0.45 and use German oil then that should not use up any oil in my humble opinion. If it does, then that sounds like a bug to me. In my humble opinion, of course.

Don't be humble. It's a bug. But there's another rule regarding the use of oil which hasn't been coded.

RAW:
If 3 or more units trace a path to the same oil resource, you must
spend that resource. This may mean that you will have to spend
more oil resources than the minimum number.

I don't consider the original post to be a bug - see my immediately previous post.

---

As for the RAW rule about 3 or more units, ...

MWIF applies it if there are separate groups of units tracing to different groups of oil points.

A common case is when the NEI oil resources are cut off from convoys, but still usable for reorganizing units that are remaining at sea. The best way to process this situation is to identify all the units remaining at sea that require oil and reorganize them first - using the NEI oil resources. Then you can process the units on land that require oil for reorganization. Note that the program keeps track of the total oil used to reorganize units and forces the expenditure of an oil point if required. The instance I am thinking of here, is that you use .4 NEI oil to reorganize units and then use .4 oil from other sources to reorganize units on land. Although you will have .6 NEI oil 'remaining' and .6 other oil remaining, the program will require that one of those oil point be expended.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Centuur
But there's another rule regarding the use of oil which hasn't been coded.

RAW:
If 3 or more units trace a path to the same oil resource, you must
spend that resource. This may mean that you will have to spend
more oil resources than the minimum number.

It is coded. That is why you need to spend one oil when you reach 0.5 oil. 0.6 oil usage equals 3 units if you count in units. Three SCS ships, for example, does not count as three units in regards to that oil rule. The three ships only counts as 1.5 units.

1 ARM -> 1 unit -> 0.2 oil
1 HQI -> 2 units -> 0.4 oil
1 HQA -> 3 units -> 0.6
1 NAV3 -> 1 unit -> 0.2 oil
1 FTR2 -> 0.5 unit -> 0.1
1 SCS -> 0.5 unit -> 0.1 oil
And so on...
Note that playing with light cruisers modify the oil cost for both CA, and CL, but not for BB.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Hey guys, thanks! To sum up everything as I understand it,

(1) AX -> DX
(2) DX -> AA
(3) AA -> DA
(4) DA -> NE
(5) NE -> AC
(6) AC -> DC
(7) DC -> DC

And the PIL dies, or potentially dies, on any AX/PX result.

A subtly that I learned from MWiF. When flying as a bomber even in day against a "normal" fighter the twin engine air-to-air result is NOT reduced by 1. That is, no penalty applied to twin engine fighters flying as bombers in air-to-air.

[paulderynck]

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

Could be wrong but don't believe so ... well at least accroding to how MWiF is programmed.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

Could be wrong but don't believe so ... well at least accroding to how MWiF is programmed.

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see 1 result lower here?

[rkr1958]

Here's the game file for those who wish to check it out for themselves.

[paulderynck]

It's a bug then. Should be in tech support.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

It's a bug then. Should be in tech support.

No. It is not a bug. MWIF does it correctly. It is just a misunderstanding.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

Paul said it right.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Hey guys, thanks! To sum up everything as I understand it,

(1) AX -> DX
(2) DX -> AA
(3) AA -> DA
(4) DA -> NE
(5) NE -> AC
(6) AC -> DC
(7) DC -> DC

And the PIL dies, or potentially dies, on any AX/PX result.

A subtly that I learned from MWiF. When flying as a bomber even in day against a "normal" fighter the twin engine air-to-air result is NOT reduced by 1. That is, no penalty applied to twin engine fighters flying as bombers in air-to-air.

There is no specific penalty for twin engine fighters flying as bombers. Edit: That penalty is only applied when the FTR3 flies as a front fighter.

However, there is a penalty to all fighters flying as bombers. Their fighter value is reduced by one.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

Could be wrong but don't believe so ... well at least accroding to how MWiF is programmed.

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see 1 result lower here?

You should not see the result lowered. What you see is your fighter has one reduced in fighter value. The 5 strength German FTR3 had its value reduced to 4 (as shown by the counter).

Compare how it looks in my picture where it is in its fighter configuration.

[Orm]

And here are the two optional rules for reference.

Cut from RAC: 14.3.2 Combat
....
Option 53: (Twin-engined fighters) In air-to-air combat during the day, all front fighters with an orange air-to-
air rating achieve one result less than normal when the front enemy fighter in the combat does not have an orange
air-to-air rating. In these cases an AX result becomes a DX, a DX becomes an AA, an AA becomes a DA and so on.
A DC result is unaffected. [Clarification. The pilot death result is unchanged - Jan. 18, 2008.]

Option 54: (Fighter bombers) Reduce the air-to-air rating of the front bomber by 1 if it is a FTR.

Edit: Note that option 54 only affects FTR flying as a bomber. CVP is unaffected.

[Joseignacio]

Agree with Orm.

The Twin Fighters have a penalty that doesn't apply here because they are not Front Fighters in this case, but bombers. That one is the table penalty (one result less). So this is correct, we don't apply that result lowering.

However, as Any Fighter flying as a Bomber, it loses one A2A factor.

I see it correct.