Matrix Games Forums

CVP costs when playing with pilots are either 0 or 1.

There are a lot of CVP who cost 2 BP to build. They should cost 2 BP in MWiF also. They are mostly US and Japanese late war planes.

I believe you mean air transported, not air rebased. Your point is a good one, nonetheless. I'll add something about this 'trick' so newbies aren't completely surprised when they first encounter it.

An Air transport requires an Air Mission and a Land Move, so this can't be performed in an Air Offensive.

Patrice had some comments about an HQ being designated for an Offensive Chit, but the chit not actually being applied until after the impulse is underway. Personally, I am a little fuzzy on all that.

"the chit not actually being applied until after the impulse is underway" ??? what do you mean here ?
Ah, ok, I think that I catch what you meant.

The thing is that, the OC provides benefits at different moments of the turn, and the HQ must not be embarked in a ship to benefit from those.
The case happens typicaly in Invasions, where the HQ is in a transport, and an OC is played on it. The HQ needs to be debarked to provides its benefits at the moment of Combat. If the HQ was not debarked, it could not benefit from the OC.

What is fuzzy for you ?

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

CVP costs when playing with pilots are either 0 or 1.

As Patrice mentioned already, some cost 2.

I believe you mean air transported, not air rebased. Your point is a good one, nonetheless. I'll add something about this 'trick' so newbies aren't completely surprised when they first encounter it.

Inaccuracy from my side. Should be transported, as u guessed.

I meant the disadvantages of depending on partisans to accomplish tasks. I'll look at that wording again (but 'restrictions' doesn't seem right to me either).

This could be something like "Compared to other units, partisans suffer from the following disadvantages:"

Like most units, having partisans is rarely a disadvantage. That is different from them being as good as regular units, though. I tend to value partisan units at about 1bp when considering the cost of taking them as losses in attack/defence, etc.

Patrice had some comments about an HQ being designated for an Offensive Chit, but the chit not actually being applied until after the impulse is underway. Personally, I am a little fuzzy on all that.

A HQ has to be designated for every kind of offensive chit use (except Super Combined). That does not mean that the HQ can actually perform land actions, except when you have land actions. (Land offensive, Super Combined).

HQ's MAY be used to reorg, though.

The obvious way that an HQ can move during for instance an AIR offensive, is by being transported by a TRS from port to port. F.ex. Free France can use their TRS to transport Alexander into Bordeaux, and if the CW played an air offensive on Alexander, all hexes attacked within 4 hexes of Bordeaux can then be ground struck/carpet bombed/industrial bombed at double strength by CW bombers, as well as reorg 8 aircraft at end of turn, within range of Bordeaux.

ORIGINAL: hakon
The obvious way that an HQ can move during for instance an AIR offensive, is by being transported by a TRS from port to port. F.ex. Free France can use their TRS to transport Alexander into Bordeaux, and if the CW played an air offensive on Alexander, all hexes attacked within 4 hexes of Bordeaux can then be ground struck/carpet bombed/industrial bombed at double strength by CW bombers, as well as reorg 8 aircraft at end of turn, within range of Bordeaux.

Yes, this was my 'fuzzy' area. It is when one major power provides transport for an ally's HQ which then uses an offensive chit. The combinations and permutations would have to be considered, as well as the sequence of play.

By the way, offensive chits can be played in 3 ways which do not require a designated HQ: reorg all HQs, supercombined, and create Ukraine.

Steve wrote :

Yes, this was my 'fuzzy' area. It is when one major power provides transport for an ally's HQ which then uses an offensive chit. The combinations and permutations would have to be considered, as well as the sequence of play.

Well, the rule just have to be implemented in the game, the result the rule have are not a problem for you, only a problem for the players who would not want to waste an OC by letting their HQ stay in a ship.

hakon wrote

The obvious way that an HQ can move during for instance an AIR offensive, is by being transported by a TRS from port to port. F.ex. Free France can use their TRS to transport Alexander into Bordeaux, and if the CW played an air offensive on Alexander, all hexes attacked within 4 hexes of Bordeaux can then be ground struck/carpet bombed/industrial bombed at double strength by CW bombers, as well as reorg 8 aircraft at end of turn, within range of Bordeaux.

Right.

(...) and create Ukraine.

Out of curiosity, did someone ever used an OC to do that ????
I would think of it as a waste of BP, but I may have missed something [:D].

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Yes, this was my 'fuzzy' area. It is when one major power provides transport for an ally's HQ which then uses an offensive chit. The combinations and permutations would have to be considered, as well as the sequence of play.

By the way, offensive chits can be played in 3 ways which do not require a designated HQ: reorg all HQs, supercombined, and create Ukraine.

As a sidenote, offensive chits should be played only at the START of any impulse, just after selecting impulse type, but before taking any actions. (Maybe obvious, but I've played with players that reorganized their HQ's at the END of their impulse, with an OC). The area of effect/range of offensives will then move with the HQ for land or air actions, while the AOE is linked to a specific port for naval offensives.

Well, if Germany does a no bessarabia gambit, they may treaten Kiev in the last impulse of Mar/Apr, and threaten to take away 4-5 blue factory stacks permanently from Russia. This is enough of a threat that I often see Russia putting some units in front of Kiev even if Germany sets up in Rumania.

Also, if you dont play with oil, it is more likely to happen than if you do, as without oil, germany can quickly become factory-limited rather than resource-limited.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

(...) and create Ukraine.

Out of curiosity, did someone ever used an OC to do that ????
I would think of it as a waste of BP, but I may have missed something [:D].

ORIGINAL: hakon

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Yes, this was my 'fuzzy' area. It is when one major power provides transport for an ally's HQ which then uses an offensive chit. The combinations and permutations would have to be considered, as well as the sequence of play.

By the way, offensive chits can be played in 3 ways which do not require a designated HQ: reorg all HQs, supercombined, and create Ukraine.

As a sidenote, offensive chits should be played only at the START of any impulse, just after selecting impulse type, but before taking any actions. (Maybe obvious, but I've played with players that reorganized their HQ's at the END of their impulse, with an OC). The area of effect/range of offensives will then move with the HQ for land or air actions, while the AOE is linked to a specific port for naval offensives.

In MWIF the playing of an Offensive chit is part of selecting the Action type. The OC can be toggled on and off and the action type changed too. As the player does either of these the displayed action limit table is updated to show the effect. I'll try to post a screen shot of the table today or tomorrow.

Re wording for partisans, how about "caveats"?

Cheers, Neilster

ORIGINAL: Neilster

Re wording for partisans, how about "caveats"?

Cheers, Neilster

Nice. Thanks.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

(...) and create Ukraine.

Out of curiosity, did someone ever used an OC to do that ????
I would think of it as a waste of BP, but I may have missed something [:D].

How about if you dont play w. hitlers war and do a 42 barb ...you can then create Ukraine so you are able to grab Kiev (to avoid the cityPMmod of +0.25) and 4-5 resources (is the kursk within ukraine?) without entering the USSR ...so no PMbonus to USSR for attacks in homenation etc.

...and as mentionen by Hakon this would prevet USSR from railing out 34 blue ukrainian factories ...not to mention that as long as GE stays within only ukraine USSR cannot rail factories AT ALL ...so once ukraine has been cleaned out there is a chance you can grab some more up north !?

ofcause I have NEVER actually seen ukraine created so?! *g*

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


[38][Fractional Odds][RAW 41 s. 11.16.5]
This optional rule helps dissuade players from calculating every attack down to the last decimal point, seeking a perfect combat strength ratio for the combat results table (CRT). It does this by giving players some benefit when the ratio is between the odds columns on the CRT.

The odds are rounded to a whole number in favor of the defender, then a calculation is done to determine how many more factors the attacker would need to reach the next odds ratio. The amount of factors in excess of what he needs for the current odds ratio is prorated for reaching the next odds ratio on the CRT. Against this percentage a random number is drawn to decide which of the lower or higher odds ratio on the CRT is used for the combat. A couple of examples should clarify this. The computer handles all these calculations so they are included here just in case you are interested.

Example # 1. 12:7 rounds to 3:2. The attacker has an extra 1.5 factors, since he only needs 10.5 factors to achieve a perfect 3:2 odds (10.5:7 = 3:2). The next odds ratio on the CRT is 2:1 and to reach that the attacker would need 14 factors, or 3.5 more than he needs for 3:2. So, the extra 1.5 factors he has are 42.9% of the way to a 2:1 (i.e. 1.5/3.5). This gives the attacker a 42.9% chance of having 2:1 odds on the CRT instead of 3:2.

Example # 2. 35:6 is 5.83:1 which rounds down to 5:1 but with an 83% chance of resolving the combat at 6:1.
=============================================================

Just today I sorta learned a WiF rule, or at least how it is written. I've been playing with the Fractional Odds option ever since I first heard about it. It greatly simplifies _playing_ the game (the rules are still complicated as heck). When you are attacking a critical hex with Fractional Odds you are rewarded for throwing in every last 1 point fighter-bomber with a better chance of winning the battle. Last summer I was talked into playing a game sorta using Fractional Odds in that it was played the original way it was introduced to WiF, by calling a 15:6 attack a +5 attack, not a +2 or a +4. My opponent talking me into this refused to use a third die to do fractionals, he thought using the odd numbers alone gave you the benefits of the Fractional Odds. I hadn't read that optional in a long time and assumed that was the way it was still written and the 3rd die was a newer innovation not yet in the rules. In that game I was suddenly back in factor counting and fighter-bomber missions making a +/- 1 difference to the combat. So I looked at it today and see that rolling the third die is the way the rules read today. I doubt I'll ever play any other way than with 3 dice and the 2d10 table.

Anyway I checked this thread to see what it had to say about that option. The text way on back there is a tad better than the very, very confusing entry in the ADG rules, but still kinda hard to sort out if you are new to the game. What it needs is a clear example of rolling the third die:

Let's say an attack is 13:7. This would be a +3.7 attack on the 2d10 table (13:7 = 1.857:1, multiplying that ratio by 2 is 3.714). When using the Fractional Odds option, three dice are rolled instead of two. If the single die rolls a 1-7, the attack is resolved at +4 to the sum of the pair of dice. If the single die rolls an 8-10, the attack remains at +3. If the attack was 14:7, a natural 2:1 attack, that would be a straight +4. If it was 15:7, the attack would be a +4.2, resolved at +5 if the single die rolls a 1 or 2, or remaining at +4 on a 3-10. A 16:7 attack would be a +4.5, and so on.

Of course you may wish to interface this text with how the combat resolution works on the screen; I'm guessing the screen might show some dice faces for die rolls? We use a single die of one color and a pair with matching colors for land combat. You could label what I call the 'single' die the 'fractional' die or something, depending on how the dice are depicted.

As to fractional odds, the program code (from CWIF) looks correct. While die rolls can be shown (player's choice), I do not know how dramatic that is. I would guess 3 identical dice.

Yeah, I figured there might or might not be visual dice. Reading the ADG explanation of fractionals makes it sound a lot more complicated than it really is, and I think this is how I ended up playing without a third die this summer. Your example #2 is much clearer than #1. Oh, and my example could say "a straight +4 with no need to roll a third die."

Happy Thanksgiving, Americans!

Lend Leased Air Units
(as of May 7, 2007)

I have been working on grouping the lend leased air units so that when a unit is lend-leased a matching unit is removed from the source country’s force pool.

For example, there are 2 USA air units named A-20B Boston III and a lend leased unit of the same name for both the Chinese and French. These 4 units form a single lend lease group with the USA as the source country. Until the USA lend leases one of its air units to either the Chinese or the French, the USA has two of these units in its force pool and available for building (though they would have to be selected as part of the standard random draw).

If one of the units is lend leased to the Chinese, say, then one of the USA units would be removed from the USA force pool, using random selection. The Chinese would then have their version of this unit placed into the Chinese Force Pool. If the USA demands the return of the unit later, then that process is reversed.

There are 73 lend lease/striped air units in MWIF, and there are slightly more matching units, so this involves roughly 200 air units out of 2000. At any one time there will be 73 units in the LendLeasePool, either the original 73 lend-lease (striped) air units or matching units from the source country that have been placed into the pool because they were lend leased.

The grouping is pretty straight forward for the most part, and I have taken the liberty to make slight modifications to unit names to standardize them. For example, I have renamed the DB-7 Boston to DB-7 Boston I, to match a second unit. I have been rather careful about this renaming though, and I have the following groups, composed of units with slightly different names:

∙ Bf 109E-2 & Bf 109E-2 Emil
∙ C-47 Dakota & C-47 Skytrain
∙ A-20A Boston I & DB-7 Boston I
∙ P-36A Mohawk & P-36A Hawk 75A
∙ P-40C Tomahawk & P-40C Hawk 81A
∙ P-40E Kittyhawk & P-40E Hawk 87D

I will use precisely matching unit names to form the lend lease groups, except for the 6 groups listed immediately above. In addition, air units from the source country will not be available to be lend-leased unless their build year equals or is less than the current year. For example, the USA has C-47 Skytrains built in 1938 (2), 1940, 1941, and 1943. The Chinese C-47 Dakotas are not available until 1942. If the USA lend leases a Skytrain to the Chinese in 1942, the removed USA unit will not be the 1943 Skytrain (since it will not be in the USA force pool yet).

Comments? Suggestions?

This is purely from memory and may be wrong but I thought there were cases where the plane may have two possible lendees but there is only one to lend, so FREX if France got it, then China could not.

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

This is purely from memory and may be wrong but I thought there were cases where the plane may have two possible lendees but there is only one to lend, so FREX if France got it, then China could not.

Yes. In that case at the start there would one unit for the US, say, in its force pool and two units (e.g., one for China and one for the USSR) in the LendLeasePool. If China gets the Lend Leased unit, then the US unit goes into the LendLeasePool and the the USSR is out of luck.

Here are the comments for the Lend Lease routine I am currently rewriting.

// ****************************************************************************
function TMajorCountry.CanLendLeaseAirUnit(const M: TMajorCountry;
const AU: TAirUnit): Boolean;
begin
// ****************************************************************************
// For Self to lend lease AU to M one of the following conditions must be met:
// Lend lease an air unit from Self to M.
// 1 - AU.LendLeaseSource = 0, AU is in either the Reserve Pool or Force Pool,
// there is a unit U2 in the LendLeasePool with the same name as AU,
// U2.LendLeaseSource = Self, and U2.Country = M.
// Return a Lend Leased air unit from Self to M.
// 2 - AU.LendLeaseSource = M and AU is in either the Reserve Pool or Force
// Pool. Unless something has been screwed up there has to be a unit U2 with the same name as AU in the
// LendLeasePool with U2.Country = M.
// ****************************************************************************

I now have all the lend lease air units going into the newly created LendLeasePool correctly. This screen shot is from the start of Waking Giant where all the major powers are at war and the Commonwealth has the ability to request lend lease air units from the US. For example, 5 of the fighters shown here.

Lend Leased Air Units
(as of May 7, 2007)

I have been working on grouping the lend leased air units so that when a unit is lend-leased a matching unit is removed from the source country’s force pool.

Good job, I think that you have done all this right.