PBEM Standing Orders

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Standing Orders

Background
In order to eliminate emails, most decisions by the non-phasing player are handled using Standing Orders (SO). Each player selects a specific standing order from a list and sets its parameters. When a player completes a phase, he is prompted by MWIF to review his SOs to make sure they are up-to-date. MWIF uses those SOs to make decisions when the opponent is the phasing player.

SOs occur in many places and the choices from which to choose will be different for each place. At this point, the choices and their parameters have yet to be worked out. The portion of MWIF which executes SOs is referred to as the AI Assistant (AIA). The AIA makes decisions on behalf of the player, but is indirectly under the control of the player.

There are many places where SOs will be used to reduce the number of emails required to play a game turn of MWIF. The following list has been culled from the draft PBEM Design of July 31, 2005 (see earlier post in PBEM for MWIF). The default is the choice implemented by the AIA if no standing order is found.

Language for Standing Orders (SOL)
There are times when the player needs to set standing orders that are more than simple yes/no decisions. In order to provide the flexibility the player needs to communicate what he wants to have happen, we have to have a language that the player can use to write SOs which the AIA can understand. Like other languages, SOL, has nouns and verbs. Because its purpose is to give directions, it also contains conditionals, boolean logic, and actions.

The nouns are aspects of the game that the AIA can measure. They can be simple absolute values: 4, current weather, year, month, impulse number, the Action taken by phasing player. They can refer to individual hexes and units. They can refer to hex and unit characteristics: forest hex, movement cost, armor unit, tactical bombing strength, unit type. They can refer to calculated values: total defensive strength of a hex, total attack strength (after allowing for terrain), number of enemy fighters in combat, distance to nearest port, closest source of supply. And finally, they can be ordered lists of nouns and verbs: hexes, units, unit types, actions to be taken.

The verbs are what the player wants the AIA to do. Generally, we can think of these as actions (not to be confused with Actions that the phasing player chooses at the start of an impulse). These are almost always simple things: fly this air unit to that hex, intercept that enemy task force, commit this HQ to the combat, place this fighter in the front during air combat, choose this type of naval unit for damage losses, use the assault table. At times they refer to groups: send all available naval air units, use all available shore bombardment points, send the 2 air units with the strongest tactical strength.

The grammar for the language is pretty basic. It consists of rules: IF ..., THEN .... The AIA evaluates the IF portion of the rule and when it is true, implements the THEN portion. The IF statement references nouns and uses boolean logic: =, <, >, AND, OR, NOT, parentheses. The THEN statement contains at least one verb and references one or more nouns. For example: IF (the weather is clear) AND (hex terrain NOT = forest), THEN fly this air unit to that hex.

In actual practice, the player will not be composing IF, THEN statements but will instead choose from a menu of available units, actions, and destinations. The SO interface should provide the player with the flexibility he needs without having to think about the SOL language at all. Indeed, the player should have no knowledge that SOL even exists. However, when we design the SO interface and menu choices, we should be aware of the SOL language elements so our thinking is clear on how the AIA will decide what action(s) to take.

Standing Order Interface
For each of the 22 standing orders listed below, there will be a separate window designed for that specific standing order. Of course, they will all be as similar as possible with common terminology and placement of panels, text, and so on. But, the key point here is to think of each of them as solving a unique problem. I want to isolate each SO and solve how the player chooses its setting and parameters, without confusing things by involving similar, but slightly different, SOs.

**************************************************************
Initiative
4.0 Initiative (Rules 6.0) - both players provide standing orders for rerolls and deciding who has the initiative to start the next turn.

Choices: Yes or No. Default is No.

**************************************************************
Control of Minors
7.1.4 Control new minor countries (Rules 9.7)

Choices: Any one of the Major Powers on the side that controls the minor country. Germany and CW are defaults.

**************************************************************
Setting Up Reserves
7.1.3, 7.3 Set up reserves (e.g., attacked minors such as Poland) and respond to Soviet border claims. In some cases standing orders are used.

Choices: Individual hexes in the country - one for each unit that arrives when war is declared on the minor. Units can be assigned to any hex that does not violate stacking limits. Default hex locations are the capital city (up to stacking capacity) and then the cities and ports nearest the capital are filled to stacking capacity. If still more units exist, then they are placed in hexes adjacent to the capital.
**************************************************************
Air Units
CAP (Combat Air Patrol)
X.1.1 Non-phasing player flies CAP to hex or sea box (Rules 14.2.1)


Defensive air support for land or naval units
X.1.3 Non-phasing player flies air units to hex or sea box (Rules 14.1)

Air combat
X.2.2 Non-phasing player arranges fighters and bombers (Rules 14.3.1)

X.2.4 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3)

X.2.6 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3)

X.2.8 Non-phasing player decides whether to continue (Rules 14.3.3)

X.5.2 Non-phasing player returns planes to base (Rules 14.3.2)
Default is to return to the hex from which it just came.

**************************************************************
Naval Action
Port Attacks
10.1.2 Surprise points

Naval Movement
10.3.3 Naval interception (Rules 11.4.6)
Choices: Yes or No. Default is Yes.

Naval Combat
10.4.9 Choose combat type (Rules 11.5.7)
Choices: Air, Surface, or Sub. Default is Surface.

10.4.15 Phasing player aborts naval combat (Rules 11.5.11)
Choices: Yes or No. Default is No.

10.5 Naval combat initiated by non-phasing player (Rules 11.6)
Choices: Yes or No. Default is Yes.

**************************************************************
Land Action
Overruns
11.2.2 Forced Air Rebase

11.2.3 Forced Naval Rebase

Retreats
11.2.4 Overstacked Losses (Naval)
Choices: Types of units that should be destroyed in priority order. For example, TRS, CV, CA, and so on. Default order is ?

Land Combat
11.7.2 Shore Bombardment D (Rules 11.16.2) Option 38

11.7.4 Emergency HQ Supply (Rules 2.4.2) Option 6

11.7.5 HQ Support Defender (Rules 11.16.3) Option 13

11.7.7 Ground Support (Rules 11.16.4) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action

11.7.8 Ignore Notional Unit
Choices: Yes or No. Default is No.

11.7.9.1 Choosing Tables
Choices: Assault or Blitzkrieg. Default is Assault.

11.7.9.3 Choosing Losses

Advance after Combat
11.7.9.6 Forced Air Rebase

11.7.9.7 Forced Naval Rebase

11.7.9.8 Overstacked Losses (Naval)
See Retreats 11.2.4 above.
********************************************************

This is as far as I have gotten. I thought I would give everyone an opportunity to comment and hopefully help fill in the numerous blanks.

[Cheesehead]

Hi Steve

Great job with everything! I wonder if it would be possible to have a SO to refere to human player IF such-and-such happens. In other words, there may be a situation during the battles for France in which the non-phasing player may simply want to call off all SO and make the decision with an extra e-mail because he feels there are too many variables and the situation is too crucial to be left to SO that may not take into the consideration the ebb and flow of the battle.

With that in mind, so as not to slow the game down too much, have a setting at the beginning of the game in which the players agree to a certain number of extra e-mails or number of times each player can "call off the SO" to deal with a more hands-on approach to a particular battle.

John

[Greyshaft]

**************************************************************
Control of Minors
7.1.4 Control new minor countries (Rules 9.7)

Choices: Any one of the Major Powers on the side that controls the minor country. Germany and CW are defaults.

QUESTION: Will we choose for each minor (Greece to CW, Turkey to USSR) or will it be a single choice (All minors to USA). Will MwiF use standard WiF rules for resolving disagreements between Allies as to who controls a minor?
**************************************************************
Setting Up Reserves
7.1.3, 7.3 Set up reserves (e.g., attacked minors such as Poland) and respond to Soviet border claims. In some cases standing orders are used.

Choices: Individual hexes in the country - one for each unit that arrives when war is declared on the minor. Units can be assigned to any hex that does not violate stacking limits. Default hex locations are the capital city (up to stacking capacity) and then the cities and ports nearest the capital are filled to stacking capacity. If still more units exist, then they are placed in hexes adjacent to the capital.

QUESTION: In cardboard Wif the defending player gets an advantage by seeing the attackers deployment at the point of the DoW. He can then deploy in response to this. A preprogrammed deployment removes this advantage and forces the defender to create a generic defence which inevitably weakens the defence. I don’t have an answer to this.


**************************************************************

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft
**************************************************************
Control of Minors
7.1.4 Control new minor countries (Rules 9.7)

Choices: Any one of the Major Powers on the side that controls the minor country. Germany and CW are defaults.

QUESTION: Will we choose for each minor (Greece to CW, Turkey to USSR) or will it be a single choice (All minors to USA). Will MwiF use standard WiF rules for resolving disagreements between Allies as to who controls a minor?
**************************************************************
Setting Up Reserves
7.1.3, 7.3 Set up reserves (e.g., attacked minors such as Poland) and respond to Soviet border claims. In some cases standing orders are used.

Choices: Individual hexes in the country - one for each unit that arrives when war is declared on the minor. Units can be assigned to any hex that does not violate stacking limits. Default hex locations are the capital city (up to stacking capacity) and then the cities and ports nearest the capital are filled to stacking capacity. If still more units exist, then they are placed in hexes adjacent to the capital.

QUESTION: In cardboard Wif the defending player gets an advantage by seeing the attackers deployment at the point of the DoW. He can then deploy in response to this. A preprogrammed deployment removes this advantage and forces the defender to create a generic defence which inevitably weakens the defence. I don’t have an answer to this.
**************************************************************

The players would write SOs that assign each minor to a major power on their side, in case the enemy should declare war on it. There are only a handful that need to be set specifically. The rest (say all of South America) could be simply assigned to, say, the USA. The players would have complete control over who gets which countries and they can resolve it howsoever they like. Since they are playing by email, arm wrestling probably won't be used.

I originally had setting up reserves (e.g., Poland) as a separate email. In the case of some minors (e.g., Iran) it is pretty obvious where the unit(s) are placed and doesn't warrant an email. This standing order is for those countries where the players do NOT want to bother with another email exchange to handle a trivial task. For minors that have a lot of units, or are critical in some other way, the players can simply mark them as requiring an email.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead
I wonder if it would be possible to have a SO to refere to human player IF such-and-such happens. In other words, there may be a situation during the battles for France in which the non-phasing player may simply want to call off all SO and make the decision with an extra e-mail because he feels there are too many variables and the situation is too crucial to be left to SO that may not take into the consideration the ebb and flow of the battle.

With that in mind, so as not to slow the game down too much, have a setting at the beginning of the game in which the players agree to a certain number of extra e-mails or number of times each player can "call off the SO" to deal with a more hands-on approach to a particular battle.

This is an interesting idea and it is something I had not thought about.

I guess we have well defined places where the non-phasing player might want to do this. Specifically, the non-phasing player would indicate that one or more of the 22 possible SO locations would require an email in lieu of a SO.

This goes directly against the thrust of the design to eliminate as many emails as possible, but it doesn't make the programming any more difficult.

You have hit on the real sticking point: it can be very annoying to be playing a PBEM game and the opponent starts requiring emails for every little decision. When that happens, there is usually a desire to call on a higher authority to arbitrate. This is what you are proposing by setting limits on how often SOs can be replaced by requiring emails. I can see this drifting off into gamemanship. Choosing where to insist on emails instead of standing orders becomes a tactical decision in and of itself. That's not to my liking.

I'm coming to the conclusion that this is a question for the players to decide amongst themselves with no involvement by the MWIF program. It is akin to the situation where the German player, in the middle of moving all his land units in Russia durnig a summer turn, decides to take a break for lunch. ADG didn't write any rules to cover the situation (perhaps they should have).

So, let me propose the following:
(1) The capability to require an email instead of a SO will be part of MWIF.
(2) This capability can be turned on or off for each of the 22 SO locations.
(3) The on/off flags can be set either at the beginning of the game (like an optional rule), or dynamically modified during play.
(4) To modify the flags during play requires the unanimous agreement of all the players in the game.

Well, that's my instant analysis. Does it hold water or sink to the bottom like a concrete canoe?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Air combat
X.2.2 Non-phasing player arranges fighters and bombers (Rules 14.3.1)
-----------------------------------

This is a sorting problem. When there is only one fighter or one bomber, there is no decision to make. What the player needs is a way to sort his planes (fighters and bombers separately) according to some criteria.

In most cases the fighters are sorted in descending order by air-to-air factor. Given two or more fighters with the same air-to-air strength, we might sort his subgroup in ascending order by range (put the fighters with the shorter range at higher risk of taking hits). There are other criteria that the player might want to use (land based versus CVP, tank buster, night, twin engine, fighter-bomber, etc.). Let's just give the player a list of fighter capabilities and let him decide which criteria is used to sort the list. There could be sorts within sorts to handle ties - up to 5 levels is my standard for sorts.

Now the bombers are more difficult. We might want to do a sum of capabilities and sort on the sum. For example, (tactical + strategic + naval strengths) could be a good indicator of how valuable the unit is. We might want to sort in ascending order on that sum (so the least valuable units are at more risk). Other factors are build point cost, time it takes to rebuild, and owning major power (kill off the Italian planes first).

In most cases, these decisions will be very simple and setting the SOs will be easy. However, we want the design to handle the difficult cases with some versatility. But I am NOT inclined to make the SO design so comlpex it can address situations involving 28 aircraft from 5 different major powers with the same fine tuning players would use when playing over the board. So, a few more options on how to sort but not a special language to handle the problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Feel free to write up your own suggestions for any of the other 22 SOs.

[Greyshaft]

Here's an idea with its logic based on the morale issues of being overrun. It probably will never suit the immediate tactical needs of the player but units being overrun rarely consult higher authority for where they should go.

11.7.9.6 Forced Air Rebase
Units will move maximum hexes in a direct line towards their Capital. Units being forced across water (Med, Baltic) will instead hug the coastline until they find a city/HQ/run out of movement points.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft
Here's an idea with its logic based on the morale issues of being overrun. It probably will never suit the immediate tactical needs of the player but units being overrun rarely consult higher authority for where they should go.

11.7.9.6 Forced Air Rebase
Units will move maximum hexes in a direct line towards their Capital. Units being forced across water (Med, Baltic) will instead hug the coastline until they find a city/HQ/run out of movement points.

Is this what you would like your units to do? Is it how you would move them if you were playing over the board? I would like to give the players the ability to have SOs do as close to what the player himself would do as possible.

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft
11.7.9.6 Forced Air Rebase
Units will move maximum hexes in a direct line towards their Capital. Units being forced across water (Med, Baltic) will instead hug the coastline until they find a city/HQ/run out of movement points.

Is this what you would like your units to do? Is it how you would move them if you were playing over the board? I would like to give the players the ability to have SOs do as close to what the player himself would do as possible.

OK. I was just suggesting a penalty (ie. possibly inconvenient but logically self-preserving movement) for letting your units be overrun. No I wouldn't want it to happen, but if I know that that is the penalty then I (as a user) can't complain. Just one mans idea [:)]

[Franck]

I personnaly think that the player should not have to give SO to individual units... It should give order to theater of operation ( that the player could himself select by selecting appropriate hexes or sea zone.) The SO should be based on ratio or value. Some exemple follow.

AIR SO for Common wealth in england and western africa:
It would be perfect if I could tell the AIA to intercept every strategic bombing mission against england if I can get a -1 air-to-air value and then if it can't intercept every strategic bombing mission whit this rating to concentrate on the strongest strat bombing bomber or those targeting mutiple factory hexe.

At the same time I should be abble to tell the AIA to intercept only ground strike, paradrops and ground support mission in Africa with a minimun value of -2 and a maximun of +2, setting a priority for each. so if I set ground strike lower than ground support the fighters will be saved first to defend against ground support if the computer calculate that it as enought to stop that ground support it will then spare the fighter to intercept the ground strike. I should also be able to give higher priority to all ground strike if it target any unit currently in an ennemy ZOC or a HQ than, second priority to ground support, than third priority to paradrops and 4 priority to any other ground strike. Unless I have alot more fighters than the ennemy in this theater I should'nt ever have fourth priority happen and almost never third priority.

Air SO for Russia in eastern europe:
intercept ground strike that target HQ not in air-to-ground advantagous terrain( swamp, mountain, forest etc.) highest priority, intercept ground support unit not in air-to-ground advantagous terrain second, intercept ground strike HQ in air-to-ground advantagous terrain terrain 3 priority, intercept ground support in air-to-ground advantagous terrain 4th priority. ( in this kind of setting the AIA would try to intercept high rating tactical bomber first.)
intercept air to air value : minimun 0 maximun +2

There should also be another option allowing me to tell the AIA how much is the maximun air-to-air value it should aim to obtain ( protection against a player sending only one bomber whitout escort and then all my fighters are turned face donw by this). Should also be able to tell AIA to send only one fighter if bomber not escorted.
The AIA would have to consider what is the amount of bomber (and transport) the ennemy as ( if it only have one bomber it can only try one mission so even if what the ennemy does is 4th rating priority what the heck AIA should intercept if I do not get out of the air to air value) and how many reorg points it as ( that same bomber should probably not be intercepted if by being reorg it can then commit itself to priority one )

I think this would be pretty could if the AI is not to bad...



Naval SO

You should tell the AIA how many colum higher or lower you have to be from the ennemy fleet to intercept.

exemple in atlantic ( sea zone 1-2-3-4-etc.) intercept if 2 colum higher in air to sea rating, and not lower in surface to surface combat. for the ennemy colum the cpu could calculate the % of chance the ennemy as to include some of if own unit already in sea zone ( in surprise roll ) and mutiply that by the value of the unit's ( graf zepelin and some surface ship in see zone when you try to intercept. graf zeppelin in fine wheter puts him in boxes 5 so it as 50% chance of beieng in combat so air-to-sea value and surface-to surface value halfed.
Or intercept at all cost if tf contains transport





Sorry don't know much about cpu bu that's the best I can do to help you... and i think this is really how I would like to set it... take an area and give orders to the area...

[Franck]

Just one more thing for air combat the maximun should only be used so the computer doesn't send mutiple plane if over this value if a single plane go over it it should still be used...

[c92nichj]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Standing Orders

Air Units
CAP (Combat Air Patrol)
X.1.1 Non-phasing player flies CAP to hex or sea box (Rules 14.2.1)

Default No

Defensive air support for land or naval units
X.1.3 Non-phasing player flies air units to hex or sea box (Rules 14.1)

Air combat
X.2.2 Non-phasing player arranges fighters and bombers (Rules 14.3.1)

Default Best fighters in front, cheapest & worst bombers in front.

X.2.4 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3)

Default Cheapest planes lost, best & most expensive bombers cleared through

X.2.8 Non-phasing player decides whether to continue (Rules 14.3.3)

Default continue of odds better than -2

X.5.2 Non-phasing player returns planes to base (Rules 14.3.2)
Default is to return to the hex from which it just came.

**************************************************************
Naval Action
Port Attacks
10.1.2 Surprise points

Default abort combat, otherwise increase decrese column

Naval Movement
10.3.3 Naval interception (Rules 11.4.6)
Choices: Yes or No. Default is Yes.

Default Yes if probability of victory greater than probability of loss. Define Victory generally for all naval units. For example CW can state that a victory is a battle where I inflict as much damage as I take, Italy maybe wants to define it as where I inflict more than 50% damge than I take

Naval Combat
10.4.9 Choose combat type (Rules 11.5.7)
Choices: Air, Surface, or Sub. Default is Surface.

Default the type of copmbats that gives highest possibility of victory

10.4.15 Phasing player aborts naval combat (Rules 11.5.11)
Choices: Yes or No. Default is No.

Default yes if probability of victory is less than probability of loss

10.5 Naval combat initiated by non-phasing player (Rules 11.6)
Choices: Yes or No. Default is Yes.

Default yes if probability of victory is less than probability of loss

**************************************************************
Land Action
Overruns
11.2.2 Forced Air Rebase

Default as close to my capital as possible

11.2.3 Forced Naval Rebase

Default as close to my capital as possible

Retreats
11.2.4 Overstacked Losses (Naval)
Choices: Types of units that should be destroyed in priority order. For example, TRS, CV, CA, and so on. Default order is ?

Default CP,CL, CA,TRS, BB, CV

Land Combat
11.7.2 Shore Bombardment D (Rules 11.16.2) Option 38

Default Maximum possible

11.7.4 Emergency HQ Supply (Rules 2.4.2) Option 6

11.7.5 HQ Support Defender (Rules 11.16.3) Option 13

Default yes

11.7.7 Ground Support (Rules 11.16.4) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action

Default yes

11.7.8 Ignore Notional Unit
Choices: Yes or No. Default is No.

11.7.9.1 Choosing Tables
Choices: Assault or Blitzkrieg. Default is Assault.

Default whichever goves the highest capability of victory

11.7.9.3 Choosing Losses

Default cheapest units


Some comments on the default actions.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Franck
At the same time I should be abble to tell the AIA to intercept only ground strike, paradrops and ground support mission in Africa with a minimun value of -2 and a maximun of +2, setting a priority for each. so if I set ground strike lower than ground support the fighters will be saved first to defend against ground support if the computer calculate that it as enought to stop that ground support it will then spare the fighter to intercept the ground strike.

I am working to integrate your suggestions into the next revision to SO. Probably I will finish it today.

In the meantime, ground support occurs in a subphase after ground strike. The player has to make decisions about sending fighters against ground strikes before he knows what ground support missions the opponent is going to fly. Therefore, the SOs will not have any information about ground support missions when decing whether to intercept ground strikes.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

C92nichj,

I have integrated your suggestions into the next revision to SO. Probably I will finish it today.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Here is a revised description of standing orders that incorporates the first 2 days posts. About 1/3 of this is new. Blue indicates choices, red is the interface design, and green is for defaults.

Standing Orders
(as of August 11, 2005)

Background
In order to eliminate emails, most decisions by the non-phasing player are handled using Standing Orders (SO). Both players select settings for each standing order from a list. When a player completes a phase, he is prompted by MWIF to review his SOs to make sure they are up-to-date. MWIF uses those SOs to make decisions when the opponent is the phasing player.

SOs occur in 22 locations in the sequence of play and the choices from which to choose are different for each location. The portion of MWIF which executes SOs is referred to as the AI Assistant (AIA). The AIA makes decisions on behalf of the player, but is indirectly under the control of the player. through the settings of the SOs. The default setting/choice is the one implemented by the AIA if no standing order is found.

Optional Use of SOs
There may arise situations where the non-phasing player wants to make a decision with an extra e-mail instead of having a SO applied by the AIA. This might be because he feels there are too many variables or the situation is too crucial to be left to SOs. To accommodate these circumstances, the player has the ability to indicate that one or more of the 22 possible SO locations require an email in lieu of a SO.

This goes directly against the thrust of the design to eliminate as many emails as possible and can be very annoying when an opponent starts requiring emails for every little decision. Be that as it may, whether SOs or emails are used is a question for the players to decide amongst themselves. It is akin to the situation where the German player, in the middle of moving all his land units in Russia during a summer turn, decides to take a break for lunch. Note that Australian Design Group didn't write any rules to cover such situations in WIF.

Therefore, use of SOs is optional, even in a PBEM game. The capability to require an email instead of a SO will be part of MWIF and it can be turned on or off for each of the individual 22 SO locations. Furthermore, the on/off flags can be set either at the beginning of the game (like an optional rule), or dynamically toggled during play. However the flags are set at the beginning of a game is their setting unless the players unanimous agree to change them during a game.

Standing Order Language (SOL)
There are times when the player needs to set standing orders that are more than simple yes/no decisions. In order to provide the flexibility the player needs to communicate what he wants to have happen, a language was created to write SOs which the AIA can understand. Like other languages, SOL, has nouns and verbs. Because its purpose is to give directions, it also contains conditionals, boolean logic, and actions.

The nouns are aspects of the game that the AIA can measure. They can be simple absolute values: 4, current weather, year, month, impulse number, the Action taken by phasing player. They can refer to individual hexes and units. They can refer to hex and unit characteristics: forest hex, movement cost, armor unit, tactical bombing strength, unit type. They can refer to calculated values: total defensive strength of a hex, total attack strength (after allowing for terrain), number of enemy fighters in combat, distance to nearest port, closest source of supply. And finally, they can be ordered lists of nouns and verbs: hexes, units, unit types, actions to be taken.

The verbs are what the player wants the AIA to do. Generally, we can think of these as actions (not to be confused with the Action that the phasing player chooses at the start of an impulse). These are almost always simple things: fly this air unit to that hex, intercept that enemy task force, commit this HQ to the combat, place this fighter in the front during air combat, choose this type of naval unit for damage losses, use the assault table. At times they refer to groups: send all available naval air units, use all available shore bombardment points, send the 2 air units with the strongest tactical strength.

The grammar for the language is pretty basic. It consists of rules: IF ..., THEN .... The AIA evaluates the IF portion of the rule and when it is true, implements the THEN portion. The IF statement references nouns and uses: boolean logic, parentheses, =, <, >, AND, OR, NOT. The THEN statement contains at least one verb and references one or more nouns. For example: IF (the weather is clear) AND (hex terrain NOT = forest), THEN fly this air unit to that hex.

In actual practice, the player does not compose IF, THEN statements but instead chooses from a menu of available units, actions, and destinations. The SO interface provides the player with the flexibility he needs without him having to think about SOL at all. Indeed, the player can play the game with absolutely no knowledge about SOL. However, when designing the SO interface and menu choices, the SOL elements were taken into consideration so the communication to the AIA would clearly reflect the player’s intentions.

Standing Order Interface
For each of the 22 standing orders listed below, there is a separate window designed specifically for that standing order. Of course, they are as similar as possible with common terminology and placement of panels, text, and so on. The key point here is to think of each of them as solving a unique problem.

Standing Order Locations
**************************************************************
Initiative
4.0 Initiative (Rules 6.0) - both players provide standing orders for rerolls and deciding who has the initiative to start the next turn.
Reroll choices: Yes or No.
Default is No.
Take initiative choices: Yes or No.
Default is Yes.
**************************************************************
Control of Minors
7.1.4 Control new minor countries (Rules 9.7)
Choices: Any one of the Major Powers on the side that controls the minor country.
The interface lists all the minor countries and lets the players set which major power controls the minor country if the opponent declares war on it.

Defaults are Germany and CW.
**************************************************************
Setting Up Reserves
7.1.3, 7.3 Set up reserves (e.g., attacked minors such as Iran and Poland) and respond to Soviet border claims. In some cases standing orders are used. For some minors (e.g., Iran) it is pretty obvious where to place the unit(s) and for these minors a SO can be used instead of an email. To make the point clear, this standing order is only for those countries where the player does not want to bother with another email exchange to handle a trivial task. For minors that have a lot of units (e.g., Poland), or are critical in some other way, the player can simply mark them as requiring an email.
Choices: Individual hexes in the country - one for each unit that arrives when war is declared on the minor. Units can be assigned to any hex that does not violate stacking limits.
The interface displays a map that shows the entire minor country and a list of units (by unit type, not specific units, since they are randomly selected when war is declared). The player places each unit on the display map. The units aren’t placed on the game map until the opponent declares war on the minor country (if ever).

Default hex locations are the capital city (up to stacking capacity) and then the cities and ports nearest the capital are filled to stacking capacity. If still more units exist, then they are placed in hexes adjacent to the capital.

The players write SOs that assign each minor, in case the enemy should declare war on it, to a major power on their side. There are only a handful that need to be set specifically. The rest (say all of South America) could be simply assigned to, say, the USA. The players would have complete control over who gets which countries and they can resolve it howsoever they like amongst themselves. Since they are playing by email, arm wrestling probably won't be used.
**************************************************************
Air Units
CAP (Combat Air Patrol)
X.1.1 Non-phasing player flies CAP to hex or sea box (Rules 14.2.1)
Choices: CAP can be flown to defend against: port attacks, naval air combat, strategic bombing, carpet bombing, ground strikes, air transported land units, paradrops, ground support, air resupply (ATR reorganization of land units).

The interface displays a map that lets the player indicate which fighters are going to fly CAP to which hexes against which missions. Note that there are 3 elements to each CAP SO: the air units, the target hex, and the enemy air mission. The fighters are not flown unless the opponent has selected an Action where the mission could be flown. For example, SOs for CAP against port attacks are not implemented if the opponent chooses a Land Action. In that situation, any fighters assigned SO CAP against port attacks would still be face up.

Default is no CAP for any hexes against any enemy air missions.

Defensive air support for land or naval units and factories
X.1.3 Non-phasing player flies air units to hex or sea box (Rules 14.1)
Choices: Sending fighters as interceptors to defend against: port attacks, naval air combat, strategic bombing, carpet bombing, ground strikes, air transported land units, paradrops, ground support, air resupply (ATR reorganization of land units), or as fighter escort for bombers (see below).

Choices: Sending bombers to participate in naval combat or to provide ground support against land attacks.

Fighters and Bombers

There are four decisions the standing orders need to address: (1) go or no go decision, (2) priority destination when more than one destination is possible, (3) how many fighters/bombers go if more than one is within range, and (4) who goes if the number available exceeds the number to send.

(1) Go or no go decision
Criteria for sending a fighter can depend on type of mission and air-to-air odds. For example; “intercept strategic bombing missions where we have -1 or better air-to-air odds.” It can also depend on the number of uncommitted enemy bombers or ATRs: keep 1 fighter in reserve for each uncommitted enemy ATR.

(2) Priority destination
Criteria can depend on friendly units in destination: # of factories, # of ships, # of land units, HQ present, TRS present, carrier present, in an enemy ZOC. It might also depend on the strength of the enemy bombers: # of bombers, total tactical/strategic/naval strength (depending on mission). Or the strength of the enemy fighters: # of fighters, air-to-air combat odds. The terrain in the destination can be used to set priority: do not intercept ground strikes against forest or swamp hexes.

(3) How many to send
Criteria is the same as for prioritizing destinations.
Here the goal would be to either match the number of enemy air units: 1 fighter for every enemy bomber, 1 fighter if enemy bombers have no escorting fighters, 1 fighter for every enemy fighter, the number of fighters equals the sum of the enemy fighters and bombers. This could be given an offset instead of equal: 1 more fighter than the enemy sends. The number to send can be restricted depending on phase: no more than 2 for port attacks, no more than 3 for strategic bombing. Or by hex: no more than 1 per hex. It can also depend on the number of uncommitted enemy bombers or ATRs: keep 1 fighter in reserve for each uncommitted enemy ATR.

(4) Who goes if the number available exceeds the number needed.

Air combat
X.2.2 Non-phasing player arranges fighters and bombers (Rules 14.3.1)
Choices: A criteria for sorting air units (fighters and bombers have separate criteria).

When there is only one fighter or one bomber, there is no decision to make. In most cases the fighters are sorted in descending order by air-to-air factor. Given two or more fighters with the same air-to-air strength, the player might sort his subgroup in ascending order by range (put the fighters with the shorter range at higher risk of taking hits). There are other criteria that the player might want to use (land based versus CVP, tank buster, night, twin engine, fighter-bomber, etc.). The player has a list of fighter capabilities and decides which criteria is used to sort the list. There can be sorts within sorts to handle ties - up to 5 levels.

The bombers are more usually more difficult to sort. The player might want to do a sum of capabilities and sort on the sum. For example, (tactical + strategic + naval strengths) could be a good indicator of how valuable the unit is. He might want to sort in ascending order on that sum (so the least valuable units are at more risk). Other factors are build point cost, time it takes to rebuild, and the owning major power (e.g., kill off the Italian planes first).

In most cases, these decisions are very simple and setting the SOs will be easy. However, the design handles more difficult cases with some versatility. It was not intended to be so complex that it can address situations involving 28 aircraft from 5 different major powers with the same fine tuning players use when playing over the board.

Default is to put the fighters with the highest air-to-air strength in front and the rest in descending order by air-to-air strength. In case of ties, put the cheapest (lowest build point cost in front).

Default is to put the bombers with the worst tactical/strategic/naval strengths in front (depending on mission being flown) and the rest in descending order by the same criterion. In the case of ties, put the cheapest (lowest build point cost) in front.

X.2.4 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3)

Air combat results are:
DX - Defender (player not rolling dice) destroys own front fighter or bomber
AX - Attacker (dice roller) destroys enemy’s front fighter or bomber
DA - Defender aborts own front fighter or bomber
AA - Attacker aborts enemy’s front fighter or bomber
DC - Defender clears through any one of his own bombers
AC - Attacker clears through any one of the enemy’s bombers

Default for DX is to destroy the cheaper (lowest build point cost) of the two air units.
Default for DC is to clear through the bomber with the highest tactical/strategic/naval strength (depending on mission being flown)
Default for AX is to destroy the more expensive (highest build point cost) of the two air units.
Default for AC is to clear through the bomber with the lowest tactical/strategic/naval strength (depending on mission being flown)

X.2.6 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3)
Same as for X.2.4

X.2.8 Non-phasing player decides whether to continue (Rules 14.3.3)

Default is to continue if the air-to-air combat odds are -2 or higher; to abort if the odds are -3 or less.

X.5.2 Non-phasing player returns planes to base (Rules 14.3.2)

Default is to return to the hex from which it just came.
**************************************************************
Naval Action
Port Attacks
10.1.2 Surprise points
Choices: Avoid combat, [Choose combat type], [Select enemy target], [Increase your column in naval combat], Decrease Opponent’s column in naval combat, Increase your air-to-air combat value, Decrease opponent’s air-to-air combat value, [Decrease opponent’s anti-aircraft fire column]. Items in [] are not applicable to defending player in a port attack.

Default is (1) to abort combat if possible; (2) if too few points to abort, then increase your column for the air-to-air combat; (3) if you do not have any air units, then decrease your opponent’s air-to-sea combat odds.

Naval Movement
10.3.3 Naval interception (Rules 11.4.6)
Choices: Yes or No.

Default is Yes if probability of victory is greater than probability of loss. Victory is defined by each Major Power for all of its naval units. For example, the CW can define victory as a battle where its losses equal its kills. Italy might want to define it as where its kills are 150% of its losses. Losses and kills are measured in build points.

Naval Combat
10.4.9 Choose combat type (Rules 11.5.7)
Choices: Air, Surface, or Sub.

Default is the type which gives the highest probability of victory

10.4.15 Phasing player aborts naval combat (Rules 11.5.11)
Choices: Yes or No.

Default is No.

10.5 Naval combat initiated by non-phasing player (Rules 11.6)
Choices: Yes or No.

Default is Yes.
**************************************************************
Land Action
Overruns
11.2.2 Forced Air Rebase

Default is as close to own capital as possible

11.2.3 Forced Naval Rebase

Default is as close to own capital as possible

Retreats
11.2.4 Overstacked Losses (Naval)
Choices: Types of units that should be destroyed in priority order.

Default order is CP, CL, CA, TRS, BB, CV.

Land Combat
11.7.2 Shore Bombardment D (Rules 11.16.2) Option 38

Default is maximum possible.

11.7.4 Emergency HQ Supply (Rules 2.4.2) Option 6


11.7.5 HQ Support Defender (Rules 11.16.3) Option 13
Choices: Each HQ either provides support or not.

For each HQ that is in the front line, or adjacent to a friendly unit that is in the front line, the player indicates whether the HQ will provide support when it or one of the occupied adjacent hexes is attacked. When more than one hex might be given support, the player indicates their priority order.

Default is Yes.

11.7.7 Ground Support (Rules 11.16.4) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action

Default is Yes for artillery.

11.7.8 Ignore Notional Unit
Choices: Yes or No.

Default is No.

11.7.9.1 Choosing Tables
Choices: Assault or Blitzkrieg.

Default is Assault.

11.7.9.3 Choosing Losses

Default is cheapest units (defined by build points).

Advance after Combat
11.7.9.6 Forced Air Rebase
See Overruns 11.2.2 above.

11.7.9.7 Forced Naval Rebase
See Overruns 11.2.2 above.

11.7.9.8 Overstacked Losses (Naval)
See Retreats 11.2.4 above.
********************************************************

[Franck]

Now maybe I am asking for to much but this is the way I see it( I don't know anything about programing so I apologize if I'am asking for the moon). If it is the case just pleaseread this whole post and tell me, I will stop bothering you on this subject if you tell me.

Thanks in advance...


In my current WIF game I am playing the Commonwealth (It is our first game by the way) and germany has decided to try and remake the battle of England. In this theater my objective is to kill as many ennemy aircraft as possible ( since I have a slighty better airforce than germany) so I can get a better advantage. Now what happen in my head everytime I get a airmission coming my way is can I get some kills? For me the way to get this would be to have +8 air to air value. But if I do this I will let a hell of alot of bomber come threw wich is gona cripple my economy way to much. So what I aim at doing is obtaining +2 air to air value in each and every air combat in wich I fight. even if it means some enemy aircraft will come threw...

Now this is how I see the computer should think about it:

Mission type: A
Unit concerns: B
Area: C
Air-to-air value aim: D
Intercept against which mission priority: E1, E2 etc...
Wich kind of aircraft to destroy (or abort) first: F
When to call off the mission: G
Which aircraft to lose first: H

The capital letter in the SOL refers to the answer to the above parrameters

In my perspective SOL should thus look like this :<< IF ennemy E1 in area C and D can be obtained, then B should A . If the ennemy lose an aircraft then aircraft's destroyed should be F. If own aircraft is destroyed then it shoud be H. If air-to-air value drop below G call off the mission. If ennemy E2 in area C and D can be obtained and the above parameters could still be respected if E1 happen then B should A .>>

real life exemple with my Uk exemple:
Mission type: Intercepts
Unit concerns:Fighters
Area: England ( wich I would have predefined )( meaning all mission targeting this area )
Air-to-air value aim: +1 or +2
Intercept against which mission priority: All (my aim is to kill ennemy bomber and fighter)
Wich kind of aircraft to destroy first: Highest cost bomber with the highest value associated with mission type (tactical, naval or strategic)
When to call off the mission: When the air-to air value drop below -1
Which aircraft to lose first: Fighters ( the choice is easy there is only fighters )

In SOL this means: << If there is any air mission against england, THEN fighters should intercept all airmission that they can aiming for a air-to-air value of +1 to +2. If you destroy any aircraft, then destroy highest cost bomber with highest value associated whit the mission type first. If you lose any aircraft, lose fighters first. If air-to-air value drop below -1 call off the mission.>>



Now where it gets a bit more complicated ( as you pointed out...)

this exemple is using my Uk in algeria exemple:
Mission type: Intercepts
Unit concerns: Fighters
Area: Eastern africa
Air-to-air value aim: -8 to +3 ( the ennemy only has bombers and I have two fighters so not to high so I can intercept more air mission if there is 2 mission)
Intercepts againts wich mission priority: 1-Ground strike angainst HQ
2-Ground support (you should be able to say againts hexe???? and Hexe ???? etc.. )
3-Anyother air mission
Wich kind of aircraft to destroy first: Any ( cpu will automatically pick bomber since there is nothing else )
When to call off mission: -8 (I think it is lowest air-to-air value posible alternatively you could scrap the last sentence in my SOL for intercepts by entering <<never>> here)
Which aircraift to lose first: Fighters

Now saddle in.
In SOL: <<If ennemy Ground strike angainst HQ in area Eastern africa and -8 to +3 Air-to-air value can be obtained, then Fighters should Intercepts. If the ennemy lose an aircraft then aircraft's destroyed should be Any. If own aircraft is destroyed then it shoud be Fighters. If air-to-air value drop below -8 then abort(or if <<never>> used scrap this sentence). If ennemy ground support in area Eastern africa and -8 to +3 Air-to-air value can be obtained and the above parameters could still be respected if ground strike against HQ happen then Fighters should Intercepts. If ennemy fly any air mission in area Eastern africa and -8 to +3 Air-to-air value can be obtained and the above parameters could still be respected if ground strike against hq and ground support happen then Fighters should Intercepts.>>

With this simple formula I think I can get almost every type of non-phasing player air mission done.For what you told me about different phase here is how I think about it when I play:
Hmmm, he ground strike me now, but I really need that fighter if that other bomber ground support against me... So I'll skip on the intercept. If my opponent doesn't do a land attack or use ground support I still have my fighter then next turn, when my opponent ground strike again whit it's last bomber I will go in because I know he doens't have any other bomber in range too ground support.

The computer can do just the same thing whit the exeption that it should consider the amount of bomber that could be close by if using a rebase mission ( can't it ?)


Now I guess we could always ask for wich kind of bomber the player wants in front , wich kind of fighter the player wants in front, wich one should be cleared threw first etc... But I personnaly think that all those should be default ( I almost always use best fighter first, worst bomber first, clear best bomber). DAMN there is a new problem that just sprouted in my mind what to abort first fighter or bomber I will look at that tomorow if you think that this has some kind of sense ...

This would surely really be hard for players to get a good feel of it and learn how to use the system properly. But I would love such a system way more than having to say fighter A intercept against bomber B or fighter A intercept over hexe B because you cannot know how the ennemy will use is bomber or wich hexe he will target and what you really aim at is getting an air ratio to do the job. and this way huge amount of orders could be given by giving it to a whole theater...


One last thing... I don't quite picture the way you would do intercepts and such air mission could you please tell me if it's not to long???

[c92nichj]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The fighters are not flown unless the opponent has selected an Action where the mission could be flown. For example, SOs for CAP against port attacks are not implemented if the opponent chooses a Land Action. In that situation, any fighters assigned SO CAP against port attacks would still be face up.[/color]

You are allowed to fly Port attacks in a Landimpulse as long as you have air missions, the rule should probably be don't fly cap if the enemy have run out of airmissions. All air missions can be flown in all impulses in WIFFE, in WIF version 5 this worked differently.

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
10.4.15 Phasing player aborts naval combat (Rules 11.5.11)

Choices: Yes or No.

Default is No.

10.5 Naval combat initiated by non-phasing player (Rules 11.6)
Choices: Yes or No.

Default is Yes.
**************************************************************

If you do implement the functionality of probability of victory I think it would be little additional work to set the default abort to if probability of defeat is greater than 50%, the three possible outcomes victory, no new naval combat round, defeat.

And initiate Naval combat only of probability of victory greater than probability of defeat.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

My reply here is going to be a little round about, but if you bear with me, I will get to answering the questions you posed in your post.

What you describe first is an overall goal of stopping strategic bombing (of England by Germany). Your second example has fighters pitted against bombers that have no escorts.

I can think of at least 4 ways to use my fighters against a strategic bombing campaign:
(1) Kill the enemy fighters so that the bombers will have to fly unescorted next turn. This is a good plan if the enemy doesn't have very many fighters. A corollary of this is to abort the enemy bombers so the fighters can be killed in the next round of air combat.
(2) Kill the enemy bombers so the opponent has nothing to perform strategic bombing with next turn. This works well when the enemy only has a few strategic bombers. Again, the corollary is to abort the enemy fighters so the bombers can be killed in the next round of air combat.
(3) Kill the long range fighters. The idea here is that if the opponent can only provide escorts for strategic bombers for a short distance into the country, then he has to either fly the strategic bombers unescorted on long range missions or concentrate all his strateigc bombing on the nearest factories - which makes defense easier.
(4) Go after the enemy's best planes: the fighteres with high air-to-air strengths and the bombers with high strategic bombing strengths. Concentrate a lot of fighters against those units so that his next round of strategic bombing is either poorly escorted, or very weak even if the bombers get through.

Other concerns I have when playing England at this time (1940?) is that Germany might send a group of naval air units against the fleet I have blockading in the North Sea. If I do not have fighters (or carriers) to defend against naval air attacks, I can lose a lot of expensive naval units while the German risks almost nothing. This means that I would want some of my fighters kept in reserve as long as Germany has naval air units that can reach the North Sea.

The SO system has to accommodate all these possibilities for how the non-phasing player wants to allocate his fighters. There are dozens of other situations that occur in WIF: Germn/Russian land war, Chinese/Japanese land war, German attack on Maginot line, Italian/CW naval combat for control of the Mediterranean, USA/Japanese combat for control of major ports in the Pacific, defense against the Allied invasion of Europe. The system should handle all of these well.

Tactical considerations are also numerous. Who has air superiority? What are next turn's air unit reinforcements? How are our allies doing (can they help)? What other problems does the enemy face (does he have to change tactics next turn)?

Basically, there are a zillion possibilities. That is why WIF is such an interesting game to play. There are also many different ways to solve problems, as shown by the above 4 ways to defend against strategic bombing.

My solution to this is to give the non-phasing player the ability to solve the puzzle piece by piece. He sets SOs for interceptions, for taking losses, for inflicting losses, and for aborting separately. They do not have to be linked. If the player wants to use my #1 approach, then he can set the different SOs to accomplish that. Likewise for #2, #3, and #4. Or any other plan that he can think of.

Your approach, to have several comprehensive (integrated) plans from which the player chooses, seems more restrictive to me. I want to give the player a lot of flexibility for how he uses his air units. Ideally, he will have almost as much flexibility as if he were giving the orders directly, instead of through the AIA using SOs.

To accomplish this, I see the player having the ability to reference the characteristics of: his fighters, the enemy's fighters and bombers, the target hex, and the un committed air units (both his own and his opponent's). You mention the air combat table odds, which would be an important factor at the player's disposal (e.g., when the odds are -2 or better). Your other comment about checking on air units that might join the battle by rebasing is another good example of what the player should be able to refer to when writing a SO that decides whether to send a fighter to intercept or not.

In summary, I prefer SOs that are fragmented with the player providing the linkage between them by how he writes the SOs.

[Froonp]

The interface displays a map that shows the entire minor country and a list of units (by unit type, not specific units, since they are randomly selected when war is declared). The player places each unit on the display map. The units aren’t placed on the game map until the opponent declares war on the minor country (if ever).

Minor country units that are set up are never randomly chosen.
They are set up following stricts rules that use the date written on the back of the counter, and for planes whether they come from WiF FE or from PiF.
Regards

Patrice

[Froonp]

The interface displays a map that lets the player indicate which fighters are going to fly CAP to which hexes against which missions. Note that there are 3 elements to each CAP SO: the air units, the target hex, and the enemy air mission. The fighters are not flown unless the opponent has selected an Action where the mission could be flown. For example, SOs for CAP against port attacks are not implemented if the opponent chooses a Land Action. In that situation, any fighters assigned SO CAP against port attacks would still be face up.

Port attacks are allowed during LAnd Action.
In fact any Air mission can be flown during any impulse, only the limit number of missions varies.