Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I tend to check everything, including code I have written ("What was I thinking when I wrote that?").

I hear you. Maybe you could show the simulated data to Harry and ask him if he actually wants the infinite chit pool approach with its added variance. Maybe he will have a "What was I thinking when I said that?" moment as well

I hear you. Maybe you could show the simulated data to Harry and ask him if he actually wants the infinite chit pool approach with its added variance. Maybe he will have a "What was I thinking when I said that?" moment as well

Knowing Harry a little, I'm quite sure he would say that [;)].

ORIGINAL: JanSorensen

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I tend to check everything, including code I have written ("What was I thinking when I wrote that?").

I hear you. Maybe you could show the simulated data to Harry and ask him if he actually wants the infinite chit pool approach with its added variance. Maybe he will have a "What was I thinking when I said that?" moment as well

The finite pool was due to the limitations of having to print counters. You can see this restriction affecting the design of WIF in numerous ways. MWIF does not have this restriction at all. For example, the size of the convoys being restricted to multiples of 5 when playing without Ships in Flames counters.

I am not going to argue tables or rules with Harry or anyone else.

The ability to change the US entry distribution and neutrality pact distributions will be available to the players through CSV files. That is the end of my involvement in this topic.

There are dozens if not hundreds of other such 'topics' associated with WIF. I certainly do not have the time to dig into them mentally or emotionally. Those are battles to be fought by others. I am going back to my bunker to work on code, leaving the discussion of the 'correct" of 'perfect' rules to players who want to engage in that conflict.

Getting option 34 in mar/apr of 41 (which I have seen a few times)

In a game I'm currently playing I geared up in J/F 40 and passed War Appropriations in J/F 41. Extraordinary draws in the beginning of the game, and I rolled low on all the USE actions, getting chit draws for Ge DOW Denmark, 2 for Poland, and at least 2 for Ge Aligns minor Allies. I also got most of the rolls for Japan conquering Chinese cities. Very remarkable, and my opponents are being excellent sports about continuing the game even though they know they are doomed.

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

Getting option 34 in mar/apr of 41 (which I have seen a few times)

In a game I'm currently playing I geared up in J/F 40 and passed War Appropriations in J/F 41. Extraordinary draws in the beginning of the game, and I rolled low on all the USE actions, getting chit draws for Ge DOW Denmark, 2 for Poland, and at least 2 for Ge Aligns minor Allies. I also got most of the rolls for Japan conquering Chinese cities. Very remarkable, and my opponents are being excellent sports about continuing the game even though they know they are doomed.

I would say that it is the variance that provides the spice in the game (any game). A good player adapts. My kids still talk about the Divine Right (TSR) game where I went into a game winning battle with a 3:1 advantage and with one of the most powerful magicians in the game. I lost, and my leader died. The power vacuum allowed my oldest son to sneak up the middle to win. I was only able to salvage third place.

As for the US, nobody at first including themselves really knew when or even if they would be in the war. I am not talking about total variance here, one should be able to make an intelligent assessment of their chances of success.

Critical Luck is a pain, but the war was full of it. Some historians assert that the Germans were very very lucky in Barbarossa.

The bottom line is that Steve is right. He just has to code this thing and he has met us more than half way with the CSV files. We can play with the numbers when we have it in our hot little hands.

Onward and upward Steve! I am dying to conquer the world!

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

Getting option 34 in mar/apr of 41 (which I have seen a few times)

In a game I'm currently playing I geared up in J/F 40 and passed War Appropriations in J/F 41.

I hear all the time about those extraordinary USE results, but in the games I play, War almost always break out close to the historic date(and close to the war option 34) with a variance of about two turns up or down. But maybe that's just what happens in my games.

ORIGINAL: dhatchen

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

Getting option 34 in mar/apr of 41 (which I have seen a few times)

In a game I'm currently playing I geared up in J/F 40 and passed War Appropriations in J/F 41. Extraordinary draws in the beginning of the game, and I rolled low on all the USE actions, getting chit draws for Ge DOW Denmark, 2 for Poland, and at least 2 for Ge Aligns minor Allies. I also got most of the rolls for Japan conquering Chinese cities. Very remarkable, and my opponents are being excellent sports about continuing the game even though they know they are doomed.

I would say that it is the variance that provides the spice in the game (any game). A good player adapts. My kids still talk about the Divine Right (TSR) game where I went into a game winning battle with a 3:1 advantage and with one of the most powerful magicians in the game. I lost, and my leader died. The power vacuum allowed my oldest son to sneak up the middle to win. I was only able to salvage third place.

As for the US, nobody at first including themselves really knew when or even if they would be in the war. I am not talking about total variance here, one should be able to make an intelligent assessment of their chances of success.

Critical Luck is a pain, but the war was full of it. Some historians assert that the Germans were very very lucky in Barbarossa.

The bottom line is that Steve is right. He just has to code this thing and he has met us more than half way with the CSV files. We can play with the numbers when we have it in our hot little hands.

Onward and upward Steve! I am dying to conquer the world!

First of all, I agree that Steve is right, in the sense that he should be conservative about including changes compared to the board game, that are not blatantly needed from his point of view.

When it comes to critical luck, I personally dont think it is good for the game, even when this can be backed somehow by history. I fully agree that the US could possibly be kept out of the war for another year if the Japanese did not attack, or they could perhaps join earlier if public opinion had reacted slightly different to world events. If this had also affected the rate of US armament, it would probably have changed the time that the war had ended by a simmilar amount.

The only other examples of critical luck that I can think of in wif, are:
- US Entry.
- Weather dice : This has already been decreased a bit by rolling for each impulse, and I still enjoy this unpredictability somewhat. Still, this is possibly the second larges luck factor in the game.
- Russian garrison : If russia tries to stuff, and fails, the game is often over. This luck element can be avoided, though, by not stuffing.
- Some very special/critical attacks. Most notably an invasion attempt at gibraltar. If, say, a +6 invasion assault on gibraltar in 1940 succeeds for italy, it will be very important for their survival. This is still a lot less important than US entry, though, in my opinion.

Now, the main issue I have with this kind of luck (and US entry to a much greater degree than the oters), is that I find it unsatisfying when a game that can take 150 hours to play is decided by a few lucky draws. Sure, Germany can adapt somewhat by an early US entry. A full Russian (or British) collapse in 41 or 42 can still decide the game, so the only possible adaption is taking a few extra chances during Barbarossa. If that doesnt work, however, you may as well start over.

When it comes to the spread of the US entry, 2 out of 3 games will probably be within the (too me) acceptable range of jul/aug 41 to mar/apr 42 for option 34. If you have played less than 10 games, you may have experienced several games outside of this range, or you may have experienced none outside of this range. And I dont know many people who have played much more than 10 full games of Wif FE.

ORIGINAL: hakon

Mziln:
Remeber that option 34 requires that both your entry/tension values are at least 34/17 IN BOTH POOLS. Since option 34 is the key to the US production gearing for the rest of the game, this is the number of critical importance. Most US players will aim at reaching this option as early as at all possible, and all other actions are taken primarlily to have JUST THE RIGHT tension level to take option 34 as early as possible. The exact turn that the US can declare war, matters much, much less.

Assuming an average value on the chits of 2.3, taking option 34 is optimized by having 8/8 chits int the entry pools and 4/4 in the tension pools, for a total of 24 chits.

26. The USA Relocates the Pacific Fleet to Pearl Harbor (Japan 6) ~ It is harder to declare war on Japan if you haven’t chosen this entry option. Until you choose it, the only naval units that may base at Honolulu or Pago Pago are TRSs and Convoys. After you have chosen it, any USA naval unit can base there.

To avoid the +2 modifier for declaring war on Japan, you need a fleet of at least 2 CV and 4 BB units (owner’s choice) in Honolulu when you attempt to declare war.

If you have that fleet there, you also have more control over the tension level for anti-Japanese entry options (see above).

If you are using Option 9: Replacement Naval Units, the fleet must be at least 8 SCS and 2 CV. A CV or SCS only counts if its first cycle cost is at least 2 build points and is not the Langley.

22. The USA Gears Up Production (9) ~ you need a tension level of at least 11 against all Major Powers on the Axis side before this option may be chosen. The USA production multiple increases by 0.25.

34. The USA Passes a War Appropriations Bill (13) ~ this can only be chosen after USA entry option: “22. Gear up production (9)” was chosen in a previous turn and have a tension level of at least 17 against all Major Powers on the other side. The USA production multiple increases by 0.25. Selecting option 34 removes the +3 penalty when the USA is rolling for a DoW.



8 tension chits (17/2.3) in each tension pool and 8 USA entry chits (34 entry points) in an entry pool for a total of 24 chits.

Which if no other chits are generated brings us into 1942 when you start drawing 2 USA entry chits per turn which would add 7 entry points (rounded) per turn to a entry pool.

When you DoW against the U.S.S.R.

13. Germany or Italy or Both Declare War on the USSR (Germany/Italy 8) ~ If both major powers declare war on the same major power in the same impulse, only roll once. In all other cases, roll once for each declaration of war. If it is an Axis declaration of war, any chits are placed in that Axis major power’s entry pool.

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

Getting option 34 in mar/apr of 41 (which I have seen a few times)

In a game I'm currently playing I geared up in J/F 40 and passed War Appropriations in J/F 41.

I hear all the time about those extraordinary USE results, but in the games I play, War almost always break out close to the historic date(and close to the war option 34) with a variance of about two turns up or down. But maybe that's just what happens in my games.

I believe that the range of when the US enters the war (and gears up) is dependent on 2 factors: (1) the luck of the draw, and the (2) the skill of the players.

When new comers (or experienced, poor players) play the game, it is #2 that dominates when the US enters the war. When good players play against each other, then the role of #1 becomes more important. As Mziln points out, there are many different controls available to both sides. However, skilled players assume that those controls are all being handled correctly to maximize the outcome in their favor. They therefore reduce the time of US entry and gear up to #1 exclusively.

That is the point where most of you start this discussion. I am comfortable with leaving the rules (and distributions) as they are for the default settings. It might be worthwhile to develop a 'standard' variation of the distributions for experienced players to use when they compete against each other.

But I am not in charge of that![;)]

ORIGINAL: Mziln

Which if no other chits are generated brings us into 1942 when you start drawing 2 USA entry chits per turn which would add 7 entry points (rounded) per turn to a entry pool.

In every game I have seen, there are more than the minimum number of chits. A typical game for us, runs something like this:

3 chits at startup
2 pulls at end of turn
+1.2 (avg) Axis dow poland
-0.9 Allies dow Germany
0.3 Axis Dow Yugoslavia
0.3 Axis Align Rumenia
0.3 Axis dow Denmark
-0.7 USSR Controls East Poland
0.4 Japan takes on Chinese city
Total 1939: 5.9 chits (avg)

1940:
6 at end of turn
- 0.4 USSR occupy baltics
- 0.8 USSR DOW Persia
0.8 Japan takes 2 chinese cities
0.7 Italy DOW UK or France
0.3 Germany DOW Holland
0.8 Germany DOW Belgium
0.3 Germany Align Hungary
0.3 Germany DOW Greece
1.8 Vichy
Total 9.8

1941
6 at end of turn
0.8 Germany + Italy dow USSR
0.7 Japan dow USSR
0.3 Germany align Finland
0.3 Germany Align Bulgaria
Total 8.1

Total: 23.8

Or just enough for option 34 with a little luck in nov/dec 41.

A more detailed average, assuming mwif (with my averages above):
1939: 5.9 * 2.26 = 13.3
1940: 9.8 * 1.87 = 18.3
1941: 8.1 * 2.22 = 18.0

Total : 49,6 Total chit points

Now, the total needed (MINIMUM) for option 34, is a total of 17/17 entry and 9/8 tension, or 51 total.

Getting totally average chits, option 34 could be taken an jan/feb 42 with these rules, provided they are perfectly distributed between the pools. Mar/apr would be just as likely, since pools are rarely that perfectly balanced. (The is slightly late compared to the boardgame, since mwif will have comparatively more 1940-chits drawn.)

The problem is that EVERY SINGLE DRAW has a standard deviation of about half a turn. If the draws are independant from each other, that means that the standard devation from 25 draws is about 0.5 * SQRT(25) = 2.5 turns (bi-directional). On top of this comes the random factor of the actual chit roll for 21 of those chits, which is about 2 more chits of uncertainty, for about 1 turn of added standard deviation. sqrt(2.5^2 + 2^2) = 3.2, or about 3 turns.

It should be possible to prove this (gu)estimated standard deviation with a simulation.

Note that some entry actions were left out, mainly:
- No french or UK dow on Italy. Italy is able to fight just one enemy until option 34.
- No Japanese aligning of minors prior to option 34.
- Only a limited japanese offinsive in china (Taking out either the communist chinese, or the southern resources, but not both.)

Now, with a conservative estimate of the value of 1 turn for option 34 of 50bp, this means a typical pure luck factor from US entry alone of about +/- 150bp, trying to be conservative.

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead



In a game I'm currently playing I geared up in J/F 40 and passed War Appropriations in J/F 41.

I hear all the time about those extraordinary USE results, but in the games I play, War almost always break out close to the historic date(and close to the war option 34) with a variance of about two turns up or down. But maybe that's just what happens in my games.

I believe that the range of when the US enters the war (and gears up) is dependent on 2 factors: (1) the luck of the draw, and the (2) the skill of the players.

When new comers (or experienced, poor players) play the game, it is #2 that dominates when the US enters the war. When good players play against each other, then the role of #1 becomes more important. As Mziln points out, there are many different controls available to both sides. However, skilled players assume that those controls are all being handled correctly to maximize the outcome in their favor. They therefore reduce the time of US entry and gear up to #1 exclusively.

That is the point where most of you start this discussion. I am comfortable with leaving the rules (and distributions) as they are for the default settings. It might be worthwhile to develop a 'standard' variation of the distributions for experienced players to use when they compete against each other.

But I am not in charge of that![;)]

the time of US entry and gear up to #1 exclusively.

That is the point where most of you start this discussion. I am comfortable with leaving the rules (and distributions) as they are for the default settings. It might be worthwhile to develop a 'standard' variation of the distributions for experienced players to use when they compete against each other.

But I am not in charge of that!

There is not much skill connected to US entry, except for one effect (which I will come back to).

EVERYTHING revolves around option 34, and most players are aware of that, at least if they have played the US at least once with the current entry system. ALL other options are taken to maximize when you can pick option 34.

So for the skill part: There is an asymmetry for when it is a good idea to make actions thay may cause chits. The most important assymmetry, is that if US entry is already late, actions matter much less, since the US can pick 2 chits per turn in 42, anyway. (The 1942 probability curve is half as wide as 1941 probability curve, so a chit to or from matters much less).

On the other hand, if US entry is just a little bit early, every chit counts A LOT. In that case, neither side should make _any_ actions that affect US entry. In particular, Japan needs to be careful in china in this case, and Germany can try to avoid being agressive in the balkans, and can delay aligning finland.

But the effect of this is pretty minor, partly because the cost of not taking those countries when you can, and partly because of the net effect is rarely more than 1 chit, assuming that both sides are aware of the effect.

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

But I am not in charge of that!

I am sure we all respect your position on this, and as long as the distributions are easily moddable, it doesnt matter much. And IF the wif community (or Harry) can come up a "standard" reduced variance distribution, this could easily be included as an official option in some patch, since it will in no way affect the main game engine.

In every game I have seen, there are more than the minimum number of chits. A typical game for us, runs something like this:

What is typical can always be discussed, I think you have outlined a fairly agressive Euroaxis combined with a passive wallies.
DOW Yugo and align Rumania in '39
DOW on Greece.
No DOW on Italy.
No DOW of Portugal.

ORIGINAL: hakon

Now, the total needed (MINIMUM) for option 34, is a total of 17/17 entry and 9/8 tension, or 51 total.

From the RAW FE (Rules As Wriiten Final Eddition)
you have 2 tension pools - a Japanese tension pool and a Germany/Italy tension pool. Your tension level against a major power equals 1.5 times the value of the markers you have in its tension pool plus half the value of the markers in the other tension pool.


If you have 4 tensions chits in each pool with an average of 2.3 per chit:

((4 chits x 2.3) x 1.5) + ((4 chits x 2.3) x .5) = 18.4 tension points in each tension pool.

Since you only need 34 entry points in a single pool to choose option 34:

(10 chits x 2.3) x 1.5 = 34.5 USA entry points

MINIMUM Toal Chits 18.


You guys are supposed to tell me when I make a mistake [8|]

Saving my spread sheet this time.

ORIGINAL: Mziln
...
Since you only need 34 entry points in a single pool to choose option 34:
...
You guys are supposed to tell me when I make a mistake [8|]

I havent played WiF in ages so I am slowly reading up on the rules. I am confused by your statement here though.

From the rule set I am reading (which may be the wrong one):

13.3.2 US entry options
The US entry options chart lists political choices available to you. Each option is targeted against Japan (Ja), Germany/Italy (Ge/It), or all three (if neither is specified).
If you want to choose an entry option, you must be at a high enough entry level to pick it. The entry level is marked on the left hand side of the entry options.
...
When picking an option, you must turn over enough markers to prove that you have reached the required entry level.

Admittingly it does not specifically state that you have to show the required entry level in both pools - but it certainly does not say that you only need to do so for one of the pools.

I am probably just overlooking something - so by all means please point me in the direction where I can see the rule you base your statement on.

Thanks

From the RAW FE

13.3.2 US entry options

The US entry options chart lists political choices available to you. Each option is targeted against Japan (Ja), Germany/Italy (Ge/It), or all three (if neither is specified).

If you want to choose an entry option, you must be at a high enough entry level to pick it. The entry level is marked on the left hand side of the entry options.

If the entry option is not aimed at any particular major power, you must move a randomly chosen marker from an entry pool of your choice to its corresponding tension pool.

Example the entry level is in red:

34. The USA Passes a War Appropriations Bill (13) ~ this can only be chosen after USA entry option: “22. Gear up production (9)” was chosen in a previous turn and have a tension level of at least 17 against all Major Powers on the other side. The USA production multiple increases by 0.25. Selecting option 34 removes the +3 penalty when the USA is rolling for a DoW.

Yes, I am with you that far.

But where does it say that you only need 34 in one of the two entry pools? When I am reading that passage I am reading that you need 34 toward both Japan and Germany/Italy.

Thats the part of your post that I do not follow.

Your right it should be 8 for tension and 16 for entry [:D]

4 in each tension pool and 8 in each entry pool.

Total 18.4 in each tension pool and 36.8 in each entry pool.

Total chits 24.


Thanks, this is why I need the game on the computer. [;)]

Its puzzling though.

In my WIFFE 1996 manual 13.3.2 includes this sentence: "If an entry option is not aimed at any particular major power, you have to show that your entry level against both major powers is high enough".

In the 2004 manual I am looking at, however, this particular sentence is missing - infact, there is no absolutely clear indication that its the case.

Maybe I am just overlooking something - but if someone with more recent experience with the rules could point to the exact sentence is the newest manual that covers this exact point clearly I would appreciate it. Ofcourse it may just the be the manual I am viewing in which case the mistake is all mine.

ORIGINAL: JanSorensen

Its puzzling though.

In my WIFFE 1996 manual 13.3.2 includes this sentence: "If an entry option is not aimed at any particular major power, you have to show that your entry level against both major powers is high enough".

In the 2004 manual I am looking at, however, this particular sentence is missing - infact, there is no absolutely clear indication that its the case.

Maybe I am just overlooking something - but if someone with more recent experience with the rules could point to the exact sentence is the newest manual that covers this exact point clearly I would appreciate it. Ofcourse it may just the be the manual I am viewing in which case the mistake is all mine.

The 1996 manual should not be used for MWiF. There was a major change to the USE in 2000 and a smaller one in 2003. ADG's official is RAW7m, I believe published in Jan 2005. It is available on their web site.

I have a 2003 manual updated to the latest official rules. That sentence is not in the rules anymore. RAW7m changed the 8th paragraph:

"If the entry option is aimed at a particular major power, you must move a randomly chosen marker from an entry pool of your choice to any tension pool"

now reads

"If the entry option is aimed at a particular major power, you must move a randomly chosen marker from an entry pool of your choice to its corresponding tension pool"

With this paragraph and the 4th paragraph that states simply that you have to show the required entry level, I would say that you choose a pool, reveal enough entry, and then move a marker from THAT pool to its tension pool if required. This is an opinion, of course, but is how I see it making sense.