New to the game - Basic Questions

[Angeldust2]

Extremely accurate analysis, Centuur, your analysing skill is amazing! Like you predicted, MWIF is indeed routing the Italian RES in Sardinia through WMed instead of ItaC, something I would have never thought. Why is MWIF not just keeping the convoy lines as it was before? I will test an optimised routing this new turn and will report back later in this thread.

[Orm]

Playing with Limited Overseas Supply, can
a neutral CP / TRS / AMPH provide supply
to friendly units of other major powers?
No.


If Italy is active, it can provide supply to friendly units. And Vichy is friendly to Italy. No bug. If there is no Italian convoy point in the Western Med, the BB is correctly stated to be out of supply, since an inactive major power cannot trace supply through friendly hexes it doesn't control.

RAW:

Active major powers may contribute to the convoy chain of any other
major power on the same side.

So if Italy is active, it can transport the Vichy resource according to the rules. This therefore is a bug, if the Italian convoy isn't transporting another Axis controlled resource.

No bug. Italy is active and that is enough to provide supply to the Vichy unit. However, for a resource to be transported both Italy and Vichy must be active.

Cut from RAC 13.6.1 Resources:
....
Active major powers may contribute to the convoy chain of any other active major power on the same side
[Clarification. but not to the convoy chain of a neutral major power - Dec. 28, 2007]. Neutral major powers can
only contribute to convoy chains with other major powers if the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1.1 and 13.3.2,
option 9). Neutral major powers’ convoys can not transport resources or build points to other major powers unless
the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1.1 Japan-USA, 13.3.2, options 9, 15, 17, 19, 27, 30, [Clarification. and 32 -
Dec. 23, 2007]).

[Centuur]

Playing with Limited Overseas Supply, can
a neutral CP / TRS / AMPH provide supply
to friendly units of other major powers?
No.


If Italy is active, it can provide supply to friendly units. And Vichy is friendly to Italy. No bug. If there is no Italian convoy point in the Western Med, the BB is correctly stated to be out of supply, since an inactive major power cannot trace supply through friendly hexes it doesn't control.

RAW:

Active major powers may contribute to the convoy chain of any other
major power on the same side.

So if Italy is active, it can transport the Vichy resource according to the rules. This therefore is a bug, if the Italian convoy isn't transporting another Axis controlled resource.

No bug. Italy is active and that is enough to provide supply to the Vichy unit. However, for a resource to be transported both Italy and Vichy must be active.

Cut from RAC 13.6.1 Resources:
....
Active major powers may contribute to the convoy chain of any other active major power on the same side
[Clarification. but not to the convoy chain of a neutral major power - Dec. 28, 2007]. Neutral major powers can
only contribute to convoy chains with other major powers if the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1.1 and 13.3.2,
option 9). Neutral major powers’ convoys can not transport resources or build points to other major powers unless
the rules specifically allow it (see 5.1.1 Japan-USA, 13.3.2, options 9, 15, 17, 19, 27, 30, [Clarification. and 32 -
Dec. 23, 2007]).

You are right. I didn't check the FAQ...

Can an Active country transport RP for a
neutral country?
No! Erratacised in the 2008 WiF Annual.

[Joseignacio]

A TRS is loaded with 2 divs.

Do they need to invade the same hex or they can invade diferent hexes? Dont know how it works in MWIF because I never thought about doing it, but in the board my group used to say that was not possible.

I believe the rationale would be that if you move 2 units to the same hex, kinda they move together and then the ship is disorganized, whereas if they go to different hexes I was told the first one goes to the first hex, then the TRS is disorganized and the second div cannot go to the second hex.

Makes no sense to me, how does it really go (which is how it will work in MWIF)?

[Orm]

No issue with invading different hexes from the same TRS. You just need to have the actions needed for the invasions (land moves, and land combat).

The TRS doesn't become disorganized until the end of the invasion step. Thus allowing both the opportunity to invade before the TRS becomes disorganized. Different hexes has no part in this.

[Joseignacio]

Thanks, Orm

[rkr1958]

I picked this game up in Feb 2014, promptly started this thread and learning/playing. As I continue to learn and play I'm constantly amazed by the things that I learn or didn't know. Sorry for using learn twice; but couldn't thing of a suitable word for either learn. I know there's a ton of threads on strategy, especially in the AI section, but what I was wondering is if there's a thread on tactics? If not, starting one?

I know I'd definitely benefit from the wisdom of the community in this regards. I've personally have had to learn some things (i.e., tactics) the hard way against more experienced and talented opponents. Also, I know there are things out there I need to know but don't.

Below are a few examples of things I've learned the hard way:

1. In naval combat if the enemy has air available you need fighter coverage over your fleet and naval air sufficient to contend with the opposing air; especially their fighters. If all you can get is support from land based fighters then you need to limit the box that you fleet operates in to the box the fighters can fly out to even if it's only to the 2-box or 1-box. Otherwise; you're asking for a beating! A corollary to this is that often times you only need to fly out your fighter during naval air; which uses 1 air mission per fighter, and can react your naval air units, which doesn't use an air mission, to the sea box with the fighter cover.

2. Even with superior numbers and firepower if you're conducting amphibious or transport naval operations do NOT search (i.e., try initiative naval combat) because there will be a time when you get a 10/1 search split and see your TRS w/marine corps, Amph w/elite inf corps or TRS w/HQ-A aborted, damaged or even sunk by the inferior fleet. I've had to relearn this one myself over and over. I do understand if the enemy (non-phasing) searches then that might still happen but it forces him to make the decision to risk search against a superior fleet versus you forcing him to do it.

3. Sometimes in land combat it's better not to use all available units to attack if your odds aren't automatic but are likely to eliminate the defender(s) and need a unit in your next impulse to continue on to an important objective. A corollary to this is if the defense has the choice of CRT (i.e., assault or blitz) be careful about including armor, mech or mot in your attack if you don't have one of those (types) you can afford to lose. For example, including a sole HQ-A in such an attack could send you out screaming to the world if your (blitz) land combat calls for a loss.

Anyway, I'm looking to see there's any interest in such a thread.

[Centuur]

Well, there's only one golden rule in this game:

If you can't handle the worst result possible, don't search or attack the enemy...

[rkr1958]

(1) Germany was completely conquered by the USA (last turn, Nov/Dec 1944).
(2) Italy was incompletely conquered by the USA (also last turn, Nov/Dec 1944). Italy's new home country in

Questions:
(1) Germany is still getting credit for 2 VPs (Olso, Norway & Stockholm, Sweden). Is this correct?
(2) Italy's new home country is Italian Somaliland. The distance based on the MWiF calculator from their new capital (Mogadishu) to Istanbul, Turkey is 48-hexes & to Athens, Greece is 45 hexes. The distance from Moscow to both is 29-hexes. Shouldn't the USSR be given the credit for Istanbul & Athens?
(3) What about Oslo & Stockholm, I would think the USSR should get credit of those two also?

[Angeldust2]

I did not finish a Global War scenario yet, so maybe I am not qualified enough to answer these specific questions. But I finished the Decline & Fall scenario and so I can confirm, that MWIF executes faithfully RAC 13.8 Automatic Victory:
If a side controls all of Berlin, London, Moscow, Paris, Pretoria, Rome, Canberra, Chungking, Delhi, Taihoku, Tokyo, this side wins an automatic victory.
If your side wins an automatic victory, each major power on the other side gains 0 objectives. Add up the objectives controlled by the major powers on your side. You do this normally treating all objectives controlled by the other side as neutral (i.e. the closest victorious major power counts those objectives).

In your current 6-player game it depends, if the Allies still manage to take the missing Axis objectives in Asia in time. If most likely not, The Western Allies might consider to attack Norway and Sweden in time, otherwise Oslo and Stockholm will still be counted as German controlled (or Soviet controlled, if automatic victory is achieved) at game end. And Soviet player might consider to declare war on them proactively in order to get control of them one way or the other. The Cold War has begun ...

So to answer your questions, it seems the rules are enforced correctly, the objectives mentioned are still counted as German/Italian controlled, unless an automatic victory will be achieved later.

[Orm]

(1) Germany was completely conquered by the USA (last turn, Nov/Dec 1944).
(2) Italy was incompletely conquered by the USA (also last turn, Nov/Dec 1944). Italy's new home country in

Questions:
(1) Germany is still getting credit for 2 VPs (Olso, Norway & Stockholm, Sweden). Is this correct?
(2) Italy's new home country is Italian Somaliland. The distance based on the MWiF calculator from their new capital (Mogadishu) to Istanbul, Turkey is 48-hexes & to Athens, Greece is 45 hexes. The distance from Moscow to both is 29-hexes. Shouldn't the USSR be given the credit for Istanbul & Athens?
(3) What about Oslo & Stockholm, I would think the USSR should get credit of those two also?

(1) No, this is a bug. Germany as completely con conquered gets no VPs at all. The rule states that "Add objectives in neutral minor countries to the total of the major power with the closest home country capital city (even if occupied by an enemy unit)." And since Germany is completely conquered it has no home country capital city to even consider as closest.
(2) Yes, USSR should be given the credit for Istanbul & Athens since Moscow is obviously closer than Mogadishu. So bug as well.
(3) No, USSR should not get credit for Oslo & Stockholm. CW should get that credit. London is after all closer than Moscow. (unless, of course, UK is conquered...)

Edit: Perhaps this should be posted as a bug? With a save?

[rkr1958]

Maybe this is obvious but I'll ask anyway.

What would happen to Japan if you played with Oil but did NOT play with Saving Oil and BPs?

Note the screen CAP below includes both oil & saving oil. But looking at the combo got me wondering about the above question.

[Orm]

Japan would be have no option but to build the synthplants so they are up an running before the oil supply is lost. And even with them build as early as possible it will be a challenging game. Especially is the limited supply rule is in play.

I suspect that I would find such a game a chore, rather than having fun.

Without synthplants, and without any saved oil, Japan is playing on the edge all the time. Losing the ability to reorganize its naval defences for even one end of turn, and there is a big risk that Japan will not recuperate.

[Courtenay]

Another way to drive the Japanese player out of his mind is to play with AMPHs and without SCS invasions

There are some optional rules combinations that just don't work.

[Mayhemizer_slith]

Axis and Allies both have units in West Med when they all at war. Allies don't add any units to the sea area, but 2 ships returns to ports.

Can Axis initiate combat?

[Mayhemizer_slith]

Answering to myself.

No they can't.

[rkr1958]

Supply Question.

Situation:
(1) USA neutral, CW (of course not).
(2) Limited overseas supply optional used.
(3) 2 CW CPs, but no USA CP/TRS, in Polynesia & (not shown) Clarion Sea Areas.
(4) USA P-40C FTR2 Pago Pago, American Samoa.

Question: MWIF shows this plane in supply using CW CP (Polynesia & Clarion) to Seattle. Correct?

[Courtenay]

Supply Question.

Situation:
(1) USA neutral, CW (of course not).
(2) Limited overseas supply optional used.
(3) 2 CW CPs, but no USA CP/TRS, in Polynesia & (not shown) Clarion Sea Areas.
(4) USA P-40C FTR2 Pago Pago, American Samoa.

Question: MWIF shows this plane in supply using CW CP (Polynesia & Clarion) to Seattle. Correct?

Correct.

SiF option 11: (Limited overseas supply) you can only trace a supply path overseas if each sea area you trace it through contains a friendly convoy, TRS or AMPH. Clarification: The convoy, TRS, and AMPH cannot be from an inactive major power, but they do not necessarily have to be from a country at war with the same countries with which the units being supplied are at war. However, if there are any enemy blocking units (CV, SCS, or aircraft with air-to-sea factors) in the sea area which are at war with the units being supplied, then the convoy, TRS, and AMPH cannot be used unless they too are at war with the blocking units.

In this situation, US CPs are from an inactive major power, and can not be used to supply CW units, but CW CPs are from an active major power, and can be used to supply US units.

If the Japanese were to declare war on the US and not the CW, and have CVs or SCSs in the sea zones, then the CW CPs could not be used to supply US units. If there were no Japanese CVs, SCSs, or air units in the sea zones, then the CW could still supply the US units.

[rkr1958]

I'm 90% confident that this is legal but I wanted to confirm with you rule experts.

Trade Agreement: CW 1 Oil to France.

I want to fulfill that agreement using a saved oil in Suez and shipping it through the Red Sea to Djibouti, French Somaliland. Legal or Not?

[Orm]

Sound legal to me.

I've have given the Trinidad oil to France a few times, to be saved on one of the French Caribbean islands. And that was allowed.