Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:06 pm**

ORIGINAL: brian brian

Factories in Flames does begin to keep ships in defined locations, in particular the ones under construction. I've only read the rule-set and haven't played it yet, but iirc it backs off a little bit on keeping damaged ships on the map at all times and still uses some teleportation-like moves to Repair Pools.

I believe that's wrong. I believe that damaged ships stay on the map with FiF.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:59 pm**

I can't recall right now but I think it allows damaged ships to be moved directly from a combat to a repair pool at a given port on the factory display chart. Maybe the issue is that the damaged ship has to be succesfully return to a base, but then can be placed in a repair pool of the owner's choosing after that - because there are only repair pools set up for a limited # of locations on the new production chart(s). There is no electronic copy of the rules yet, and my copy is at my opponent's house a hundred miles away. Once in a repair pool it is vulnerable to air attack, perhaps both by strategic bombers or port strikes? There are some differences amongst ships under repair or construction as to how airplanes can affect them, again iirc and it's been 5 months since I had those rules in hand. Several huge steps in the right direction, but there is still a bit of 'magic' involved that I would like to see go away, easily accomplishable with a few simple house rules added. (And we could still use some better definitions of where ships could or could not be repaired, which affected strategic decision making for both sides). Damaged ships on the way to the dockyard were a bit extra vulnerable, particularly to enemy submarines. But then subs are fairly toothless against capital ships in WiF anyway, another issue I would like to see improved in the game. (about 20 CVs sunk by Subs in WWII; your average game of WiF _might_ see that happen two or three times).

I have read some of the hex-based ideas, and when I can't play the game (most of the year) I like to mess around with writing up necessary rules language to accomplish that. I posted one on the list last year (a new air-mission: Coastal Strike for when naval units interact with land hexes), but dreaming up WiF ideas is like dropping them in to the Void, and I'd rather see Harry keep dreaming up great new games anyway. Harry and Ray were kind enough to let me comment on the initial drafts of Factories in Flames but I have no gaming group to ever play-test things with so I dropped out of that on-going process early on. I hope Harry comes through with putting up a forum on the ADG site to open up the whole rules process some.

It all comes back to how playable - i.e. time-consuming - any newer version would be. The ideal system would take advantage of computing power to handle things like convoy movement. The player could generically allocate shipping around the world as they see fit and the computer would handle the rest. This would also allow logistics to strain your shipping, a big real-war problem for Allied decision-makers that is a total gimme for the Allies in the game in the interest of simplicity; as is, say, fuel deliveries to Truk for the Japanese, but even with the tanker counters no one ever wants to use them since wargamers hate dealing with logistics just like all combat generals. (Should we run some convoys to Russia right now? Or do we need those ships to deliver the supply build-up necessary for the Torch landings? A top-level decision Churchill and Roosevelt really had to wrestle with. What if the Allies didn't invest in tech R&D and win the sub war...how would D-Day logistics have been affected? The WiF Germans have no chance of ever influencing that (though this is how they motivated the U-Boat force in 43 and 44) beyond intercepting TRS missions to the UK and then watching their SUBs get slaughtered by the surface factors of the battleships or the ASW factors generated by a horde of cruisers, patently absurd). Similarly, naval movement could be accomplished with varying chances of enemy recon discovering your shipping based on proximity to bases and weather; successful recon could lead to land-based air attacks _when within range of enemy airbases_ (and allowing for air rebases in response). There is so much that a computer could do that would be hugely difficult with paper and cardboard.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:42 pm**

I expended thousands of happy hours on table top WIF during grad school; it remains my all-time favorite board game.
But I'll jump on Brian Brian's bandwagon with respect to MWIF; why not exploit the capabilities of the computer to take the core design to another level? My vote for an MWIF-2 that would be worth another $XXX.xx would be a game that tries to push the envelope in terms of realism; a game that puts the players in the role of their historical counterparts.

Of course (as BB pointed out) the biggest departure from reality in most games on the market is IGO-UGO turns; a simultaneous movement system would be the ultimate IMO. With its sea zones/search boxes, alternating impulses, air interception rules, and simultaneous production ... WIF already has the foundation of a logical framework for a WEGO system. Seems to me that a strong AI would be more feasible with a WEGO system and FOW; the AI wouldn't have to compete with the ability of a human player to meticulously count every factor and movement point while concocting the optimal attack/counterstroke to unravel an enemy's positions.

A WEGO system would open the door to another huge advance in realism; introducing planning, command & control limitations. Virtually every major offensive operation in WWII was proceeded by months of preparation; intelligence gathering, training, stockpiling supplies, staff work to schedule unit & supply movements, briefing subordinate leaders, etc., etc. But in most wargames (WIF included) it's no big deal to switch your intended invasion of Europe from Normandy to Denmark at an impulses notice. A further iteration of WIF's impulse selection system could limit large scale offensive operations to "offensive" impulses which provide major combat benefits (or avoid major penalties), but require that movement routes/target hexes be selected in preceding impulses/turns.

FOW would be an obvious addition to existing WIF and would also lend itself to a new subsystem of intelligence; allowing players to produce SIGINT, spies, reconnaissance units, etc.

More detailed representation of infrastructure would be a great addition; allowing for the damage/repair of factories, shipyards, railroads, refineries, resource centers, port facilities. Factors could be associated with a specific output, i.e., Regensburg produces Me-109s, and could only produce that type of unit unless it retooled (with some lost production).

Unit quality could be made a function of unit history - not the 100 point scales for readiness, morale, fatigue, etc. seen in many games - but a simple, logical progression like: 6-4 black print => 7-4 white print => 8-4 white print as your German infantry succeeds in battles in Poland, France & the Balkans. Another method to accumulate unit quality would be to leave a unit on the spiral for extra "training cycles". This would be especially nice for modeling air unit quality; instead of the stock 6 month production cycle for pilots, players could elect to leave them on the spiral for a second or third training cycle. In 1944/45 the US was deploying new pilots with 18 months flight training vs 6 months for their Axis adversaries; the results spoke for themselves.

I also agree with preceding comments referring to a more fine-grained naval movement model that prohibits LBA from interdicting things it can't reach, i.e., by allowing ships to plot a hex-by-hex course rather than sea zone-by-sea zone, and forcing "patrolling" ships and aircraft to specify their search zones.

Sigh ... its fun to dream [:)]

Posted: **Fri Jan 09, 2009 9:13 pm**

[/quote]

This sounds quite interesting. IMO wif needs a better way to represent some specific types of operations. The naval combat charts seem to be excellent, but what I would change is exactly where units could and could not participate in combat. Naval moves should be on a hex level, so that LBA can correctly be used. I know wif abstracts things, but the naval box abstraction is the least effective in specific instances. The naval box makes sense for searches, but not moving through areas. The ability of a range 4 nav interdicting any traffic within a sea area the size of texas is quite insane, particularly when missions would never have been launched or come within range of said nav unit's port.

Naval moves with aircraft also allow the player to completely avoid 'realistic' rebases. There are many 'impossible' rebases that can be done if you simply move an aircraft to a seabox.

Additionally, Movement through the english channel as a result of ships RTB'ing to Brest is wildly unrealistic. A very similar mechanic applys to the Baltic via Frederikshavn.

Ships that were in construction during the war were struck in shipyards. Unlike land units and air units, a naval asset under construction should be placed in the port it's being constructed in - and be a potential target for Port Attack.

Damaged ships should similarly return to base and stay in that port until repaired.

[/quote]

I know there will be a lot of flak from this, but while WiF is a very enjoyable game to play, it is a very flawed representation of WWII. The Naval rules are probably the worst. Unless you institute night impulses, the chances of a fleet in the Med not being found via air or sea searches should be very small, say 10% (since we are using 10 sided dice). There is not enough consideration given to weather. Rain (not to mention snow, storm or blizzard) reduces visability by a lot more than 10% (+1 to the search die roll). Searches do not take into consederation national differeneces in radar and radar improvements throughout the war. Nor is the number of ships (fleets) or planes considered in the search mechanism. Whether you have one Nav in the 4 box of the Western Med or the entire British Navy and the entire British air force in that same 4 box, the chances of finding the Italian navy is the same. Similarly, whether the opponent has 1 ship or an 100 ships in an area, the chances of finding any of his ships are the same. Plus when you do find (unless you find each other) you find everything, whether the search is in the Red Sea or in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

This whole Action choice mechanism is cute, but come on now, because OKW launches a campaign in Russia, the subs quit searching for merchant ships. Or when the Brits launched Operation Crusader, the WD air marshall chose not to conduct air seaches over the Med for Italian ships. I am sorry, but I do not see Adm Cunningham telegraphing General Auchinleck, "Sorry mate, but since you are launching Operation Crusader, the fleet will be unable to interdict Italian shipping in the Med this month." Or inversely, the army has to stop or curtail its campaign because the Navy wants to search for enemy ships.

While these mechanism may work well from a game standpoint, they are not good representations of WWII naval actions.

Posted: **Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:51 pm**

some great points Jaguar, but do keep in mind that when the weather is "Rain" or worse, it is not raining 100% of the time across an entire ocean. but the points you make about naval searches are things that a computer could greatly improve at no cost in time or bookkeeping to the players. but it is an unfortunate classic when 1/3 or more of the Royal Navy and Air Force together in the Western Med can't 'find' the Italian fleet about to invade Gibraltar.

the action limits are even more discussed than the sea zones. There is a need for them...there were some limitations on how many major ops a country could be running simultaneously. But that is a nebulous thing and hard to quantify. One way to approach it is ... who do you give the gas to? Rommel in Africa? Doenitz? Goering? Guderian on the eastern front? You are the supreme commander; you decide. A computer could dial this in to a lot finer degree based on your actual oil supplies rather than the necessary fudges of the current oil systems. Someone mentioned training time...I've long felt that this should be tied to oil somehow, like requiring one oil to be used in production to build any amount of pilots. As oil supplies tightened up, Axis training hours went down; as they went down their air defenses weakend leading to more disruptions in their oil supplies leading to less gas to train pilots (in Europe; in Asia the Japanese pig-headedly refused to copy the British convoy system because their system didn't reward defensive thinking, but anyway). This is absent in WiF, but easily programmable on a computer.

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:41 pm**

ORIGINAL: SGT Rice
Unit quality could be made a function of unit history - not the 100 point scales for readiness, morale, fatigue, etc. seen in many games - but a simple, logical progression like: 6-4 black print => 7-4 white print => 8-4 white print as your German infantry succeeds in battles in Poland, France & the Balkans. Another method to accumulate unit quality would be to leave a unit on the spiral for extra "training cycles". This would be especially nice for modeling air unit quality; instead of the stock 6 month production cycle for pilots, players could elect to leave them on the spiral for a second or third training cycle. In 1944/45 the US was deploying new pilots with 18 months flight training vs 6 months for their Axis adversaries; the results spoke for themselves.

I had written a house rule about "experience levels", that I keep ready for MWiF 2 [:D].

Basicaly it is :
************************************************
There are 4 Crew Experience levels. The experience level changes during the production step. All units setup at the beginning of the scenarios begin the game at the Normal Experience level :

For the Air Force
Green : Planes are -1 to all factors except range (minimum 1, except for air to air factor whose minimum is 0) on the first turn on the map, until after the first combats (air to air combat or air mission other than rebase or CAP & escort).
Normal : Factors go back to normal the turn after their first involvement in a combat (air to air combat or air mission other than rebase or CAP & escort that produces no combat).
Veteran : Factors are +1 on all factors except range after 5 more involvements in combats (air to air combat or air mission other than rebase or CAP & escort).
Crack : Factors are +2 on all factors except range (maximum double initial factor - or only +1 but roll twice and take the best) after 20 total involvements in combats (air to air combat or air mission other than rebase or CAP & escort).
Crew experience affects the pilot, not the aircraft counter, and goes back 1 level after the plane goes back to the reserve pool, or the plane is shot down in combat.
Example : A Veteran crew would go back to Normal, a Normal to Green, a Crack to Veteran, etc... A Green would stay Green.

For the Navy
Green : Factors are -20% on all factors except defense factor, range, movement & carrier class (minimum 1) on the first turn on the map, until after the shakedown cruise.
Normal : Factors go back to normal the turn after the shakedown cruise. The shakedown cruise is the first naval movement that ends in a sea box section, where the ship returns to base at the return to base step. Movements from port to port would not count as the shakedown cruise. Movement at sea that do not stay at sea until the end of the turn would not count neither.
Veteran : Factors are +20% on all factors except defense factor, range, movement & carrier class after 5 combats in which the ship was involved.
Crack : Factors are +40% on all factors except defense factor, range, movement & carrier class (maximum double initial factors) after 20 combats in which the ship was involved.
Crew experience goes back to Green status after the ship is bottomed. Crew experience goes back 1 level in case of damaged ship.
Example : A Veteran crew would go back to Normal, a Normal to Green, a Crack to Veteran, etc...

For the Army
MAR & PARA and White Print units would begin at the normal status.
DIV sized units and GBA are not affected by this rule.
Green : Combat Factor is -20% (minimum 1) on the first turn on the map, until after the meeting with the enemy.
Normal : Factors go back to normal after the meeting with the enemy. The meeting with the enemy is the first time when the unit finishes the turn in an enemy ZoC.
Veteran : Combat Factor is +20% after 5 combats in which the unit was involved.
Crack : Combat Factor is +40% (maximum double initial factors) (and maybe gain white print status) after 20 combats in which the unit was involved.
Crew experience goes back 1 level after the unit is shattered (or Breakthrough'ed).
Example : A Veteran crew would go back to Normal, a Normal to Green, a Crack to Veteran, etc...

Variant
As a variant, only combat that achieves something allow experience to increase.

Experience acquired through training
Only combat can allow units to reach the Veteran or Crack levels of experience.
Choice A
Units built normally enter the map at the Normal level of Crew Experience.
Units built in 1 turn less duration enter the map at the Green level of Crew Experience.
Choice B
Units built normally enter the map at the Green level of Crew Experience (except MAR & PARA).
Units can enter the map at the Normal level of Crew Experience if 1 extra turn of building time is spent.
************************************************

Another system, that I read about, written by Hubert (IA211@yahoo.fr), a fellow French player from the French WiF Discussion list.
************************************************
A solution with "veteran" markers.
Each time you destroy one enemy unit, in air, overrun, land, naval, etc... action, you increase your veteran marker of 1 (Use the pilot track).
At 10, 25, 50 you get a veteran marker in your force pool. It cost 3 BP to build. (Use the pilot track). Lost veteran markers only return in the force pool if the veteran level is high enough. When you reach 50, you stay at 50.
This represents a particular effort made to group the veteran on a special unit to improve its effectiveness, but at a cost. It can also represent special training done by such veteran.
You put this marker on a relevant land, air, or naval unit. The veteran marker can only move to a unit of same type once first placed. The move must be done during the final return to base, and the veteran marker must be in supply.
If the airplane or pilot with the veteran marker is shot down, the land unit destroyed, or the ship destroyed, you loose the veteran marker and 10 points on your veteran track.
A veteran unit can be used in two ways (only one veteran can be used in a given combat step) :
1. It can add or lower any roll of 1 (Like intell, use the same rules).
2. You can sacrifice them, (costing you 10 veteran point), to reroll one time. It can be used only 1 time per combat even if the combat has several rounds and several veterans are presents.
This way you have a nice feature for most part already tested under the Intell rule, and you only have 4 counters per country (3 veteran and a track marker), i.e. 28 counters.
************************************************

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:51 pm**

ORIGINAL: Jaguar
I know there will be a lot of flak from this, but while WiF is a very enjoyable game to play, it is a very flawed representation of WWII. The Naval rules are probably the worst. Unless you institute night impulses, the chances of a fleet in the Med not being found via air or sea searches should be very small, say 10% (since we are using 10 sided dice). There is not enough consideration given to weather. Rain (not to mention snow, storm or blizzard) reduces visability by a lot more than 10% (+1 to the search die roll). Searches do not take into consederation national differeneces in radar and radar improvements throughout the war. Nor is the number of ships (fleets) or planes considered in the search mechanism. Whether you have one Nav in the 4 box of the Western Med or the entire British Navy and the entire British air force in that same 4 box, the chances of finding the Italian navy is the same. Similarly, whether the opponent has 1 ship or an 100 ships in an area, the chances of finding any of his ships are the same.

Some factors could be taken care of, such as the ships & planes numbers, the nationality particularities such as radar & all. But let's face it : The game is already quite complicated enough. There are house rules existing for all those things, and you're free to propose improvements too. If simple and historical, they will raise interst (at least by me).

Plus when you do find (unless you find each other) you find everything, whether the search is in the Red Sea or in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

I don't understand what yo mean here. You mean that searching in the Red Sea have you find in the middle of the Pacific Ocean ?

[/quote]This whole Action choice mechanism is cute, but come on now, because OKW launches a campaign in Russia, the subs quit searching for merchant ships. Or when the Brits launched Operation Crusader, the WD air marshall chose not to conduct air seaches over the Med for Italian ships. I am sorry, but I do not see Adm Cunningham telegraphing General Auchinleck, "Sorry mate, but since you are launching Operation Crusader, the fleet will be unable to interdict Italian shipping in the Med this month." Or inversely, the army has to stop or curtail its campaign because the Navy wants to search for enemy ships.

While these mechanism may work well from a game standpoint, they are not good representations of WWII naval actions.

[/quote]
I think that you are not understanding (WiFZining) WiF the right way.
The impulses are sequential in the game, but I believe they represent events that are more or less simultaneous in reality. If during the turn you take 1 naval, 1 combined and 3 land actions (which is a lot), it means that you devoted about 70% of the war effort for land actions and 30% for naval actions. That does not mean that when the ship move, the soliders stop walking. If the naval action was during the impulse 2, this mean that most of the naval action took place during the first part of the turn, but this is not even sure.

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:19 pm**

Patrice,

His "find everything" remark is that the system does not take into account the overall size of the sea area. The Red Sea is a rather small area (and bounded by land which is fairly close) compared to some sea areas in the middle of the Pacific which are huge, and quite far from continental land masses.
==
Some of the complaints about the current system is the ability of land based air units to patrol large sea reas. I remember seeing historical maps of the North Atlantic and how the ability of the Allied land based air units to patrol for Axis subs increased dramatically over the course of the war. Those were depicted as concentric circles drawn from Ireland, Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland, and the like. At the start of the war, the circles are small and leave most of the North Atlantic open ground where Axis submarines could roam freely. By the end of the war, the whole North Atlantic was covered by the circles, that denote the range of land based air units.

Air units fly fast and can see great distances from their height (subs moving on the surface leave wake trails in the water). Naval units are much slower and have a drastically reduced ability to see other ships/subs. That is one reason why aircraft were/are so much more effective at searching for enemy ships and subs.

I can't speak for the Pacific, but I think WIF has a good system for simulating searching in the Atlantic using land based air.

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:15 pm**

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Patrice,

His "find everything" remark is that the system does not take into account the overall size of the sea area. The Red Sea is a rather small area (and bounded by land which is fairly close) compared to some sea areas in the middle of the Pacific which are huge, and quite far from continental land masses.

OK, I get it.
Maybe he would appreciate that small sea areas have bonuses for the findings, and large sea areas have a malus.
But Wif does not have that, I think that is to keep it "simple and streamlined". [:D] [:D] [:D]

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:02 pm**

I think that you are not understanding (WiFZining) WiF the right way.
The impulses are sequential in the game, but I believe they represent events that are more or less simultaneous in reality. If during the turn you take 1 naval, 1 combined and 3 land actions (which is a lot), it means that you devoted about 70% of the war effort for land actions and 30% for naval actions. That does not mean that when the ship move, the soliders stop walking. If the naval action was during the impulse 2, this mean that most of the naval action took place during the first part of the turn, but this is not even sure.

I accept that there are limited resources and limits on the command structure to co-ordinate and use available resources. However, once a fleet has been committed to patrolling a sea area, it does not stop pattrolling because some land campaign is underway. From my point of view, naval searches should occur every impulse in every area which contains ships / planes of opposing forces regardless of the type of impulse choosen.

I beleive that you have to view various impulses as semi-sequential and not simultaneous. Land impulses that re-use inf and arm units to march from location to location have to be considered sequential. THe same forces cannot be in multiple places at the same time. Planes are a little different. In a two month period, an air wing could easily conduct more than one operation, so you have to consider that when a plane is used in the game, it is being used over time for the same operation, flying multiple sorties. However, the problem with this concept is that an air unit can be used in a ground strike or ground support an hex that becomes friendly controlled. Presumably, the air units do not continue to bombard the area which was formerly occupied by the emeny and is now occuppied by friendly forces. Or the original tagreted hex becomes vacant or by both friendly and enemy units; surely we are not to assume the the air units are still bombarding the same hex which overtaken by friendly forces and is now vacant. Therefore, I think that there are elements of the impulse system considered simultanious or continuous and other elements that are sequential with a definative beginning and ending other than the beginning and ending of the turn.

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:47 pm**

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: SGT Rice
Unit quality could be made a function of unit history - not the 100 point scales for readiness, morale, fatigue, etc. seen in many games - but a simple, logical progression like: 6-4 black print => 7-4 white print => 8-4 white print as your German infantry succeeds in battles in Poland, France & the Balkans. Another method to accumulate unit quality would be to leave a unit on the spiral for extra "training cycles". This would be especially nice for modeling air unit quality; instead of the stock 6 month production cycle for pilots, players could elect to leave them on the spiral for a second or third training cycle. In 1944/45 the US was deploying new pilots with 18 months flight training vs 6 months for their Axis adversaries; the results spoke for themselves.
I had written a house rule about "experience levels", that I keep ready for MWiF 2 [:D].

Basicaly it is :
************************************************
There are 4 Crew Experience levels. The experience level changes during the production step. All units setup at the beginning of the scenarios begin the game at the Normal Experience level :

For the Air Force
Green : Planes are -1 to all factors except range (minimum 1, except for air to air factor whose minimum is 0) on the first turn on the map, until after the first combats (air to air combat or air mission other than rebase or CAP & escort).
Normal : Factors go back to normal the turn after their first involvement in a combat (air to air combat or air mission other than rebase or CAP & escort that produces no combat).
Veteran : Factors are +1 on all factors except range after 5 more involvements in combats (air to air combat or air mission other than rebase or CAP & escort).
Crack : Factors are +2 on all factors except range (maximum double initial factor - or only +1 but roll twice and take the best) after 20 total involvements in combats (air to air combat or air mission other than rebase or CAP & escort).
Crew experience affects the pilot, not the aircraft counter, and goes back 1 level after the plane goes back to the reserve pool, or the plane is shot down in combat.
Example : A Veteran crew would go back to Normal, a Normal to Green, a Crack to Veteran, etc... A Green would stay Green.

For the Navy
Green : Factors are -20% on all factors except defense factor, range, movement & carrier class (minimum 1) on the first turn on the map, until after the shakedown cruise.
Normal : Factors go back to normal the turn after the shakedown cruise. The shakedown cruise is the first naval movement that ends in a sea box section, where the ship returns to base at the return to base step. Movements from port to port would not count as the shakedown cruise. Movement at sea that do not stay at sea until the end of the turn would not count neither.
Veteran : Factors are +20% on all factors except defense factor, range, movement & carrier class after 5 combats in which the ship was involved.
Crack : Factors are +40% on all factors except defense factor, range, movement & carrier class (maximum double initial factors) after 20 combats in which the ship was involved.
Crew experience goes back to Green status after the ship is bottomed. Crew experience goes back 1 level in case of damaged ship.
Example : A Veteran crew would go back to Normal, a Normal to Green, a Crack to Veteran, etc...

For the Army
MAR & PARA and White Print units would begin at the normal status.
DIV sized units and GBA are not affected by this rule.
Green : Combat Factor is -20% (minimum 1) on the first turn on the map, until after the meeting with the enemy.
Normal : Factors go back to normal after the meeting with the enemy. The meeting with the enemy is the first time when the unit finishes the turn in an enemy ZoC.
Veteran : Combat Factor is +20% after 5 combats in which the unit was involved.
Crack : Combat Factor is +40% (maximum double initial factors) (and maybe gain white print status) after 20 combats in which the unit was involved.
Crew experience goes back 1 level after the unit is shattered (or Breakthrough'ed).
Example : A Veteran crew would go back to Normal, a Normal to Green, a Crack to Veteran, etc...

Variant
As a variant, only combat that achieves something allow experience to increase.

Experience acquired through training
Only combat can allow units to reach the Veteran or Crack levels of experience.
Choice A
Units built normally enter the map at the Normal level of Crew Experience.
Units built in 1 turn less duration enter the map at the Green level of Crew Experience.
Choice B
Units built normally enter the map at the Green level of Crew Experience (except MAR & PARA).
Units can enter the map at the Normal level of Crew Experience if 1 extra turn of building time is spent.
************************************************

Another system, that I read about, written by Hubert (IA211@yahoo.fr), a fellow French player from the French WiF Discussion list.
************************************************
A solution with "veteran" markers.
Each time you destroy one enemy unit, in air, overrun, land, naval, etc... action, you increase your veteran marker of 1 (Use the pilot track).
At 10, 25, 50 you get a veteran marker in your force pool. It cost 3 BP to build. (Use the pilot track). Lost veteran markers only return in the force pool if the veteran level is high enough. When you reach 50, you stay at 50.
This represents a particular effort made to group the veteran on a special unit to improve its effectiveness, but at a cost. It can also represent special training done by such veteran.
You put this marker on a relevant land, air, or naval unit. The veteran marker can only move to a unit of same type once first placed. The move must be done during the final return to base, and the veteran marker must be in supply.
If the airplane or pilot with the veteran marker is shot down, the land unit destroyed, or the ship destroyed, you loose the veteran marker and 10 points on your veteran track.
A veteran unit can be used in two ways (only one veteran can be used in a given combat step) :
1. It can add or lower any roll of 1 (Like intell, use the same rules).
2. You can sacrifice them, (costing you 10 veteran point), to reroll one time. It can be used only 1 time per combat even if the combat has several rounds and several veterans are presents.
This way you have a nice feature for most part already tested under the Intell rule, and you only have 4 counters per country (3 veteran and a track marker), i.e. 28 counters.
************************************************

One of the troubles with veteran units is that it was common for units to became combat fatigued. They became experienced at staying alive and avoid attacking and taking risks. This happened even more to western Allied units toward the end of the war (as early as the Normandy Campaign). The soldiers did not want to risk their lives when the war was already won.

-Orm

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:58 pm**

ORIGINAL: brian brian

some great points Jaguar, but do keep in mind that when the weather is "Rain" or worse, it is not raining 100% of the time across an entire ocean. but the points you make about naval searches are things that a computer could greatly improve at no cost in time or bookkeeping to the players. but it is an unfortunate classic when 1/3 or more of the Royal Navy and Air Force together in the Western Med can't 'find' the Italian fleet about to invade Gibraltar.

the action limits are even more discussed than the sea zones. There is a need for them...there were some limitations on how many major ops a country could be running simultaneously. But that is a nebulous thing and hard to quantify. One way to approach it is ... who do you give the gas to? Rommel in Africa? Doenitz? Goering? Guderian on the eastern front? You are the supreme commander; you decide. A computer could dial this in to a lot finer degree based on your actual oil supplies rather than the necessary fudges of the current oil systems. Someone mentioned training time...I've long felt that this should be tied to oil somehow, like requiring one oil to be used in production to build any amount of pilots. As oil supplies tightened up, Axis training hours went down; as they went down their air defenses weakend leading to more disruptions in their oil supplies leading to less gas to train pilots (in Europe; in Asia the Japanese pig-headedly refused to copy the British convoy system because their system didn't reward defensive thinking, but anyway). This is absent in WiF, but easily programmable on a computer.

I beleive that this would be better handled by command points that could be spent as each player saw fit. My biggest complaint about the Action Choice system is that the navy essentially becomes inactive when you are conducting a ground campaing. This is particularly critical to the German's once they get into Russia. Naval and naval air units at sea should always be able to search regardless of which Implule Action Choice a player has made. Now while this would increase the sub activity and result in more allied mechant ship sinking, I beleive that this is easyly offset by allowing the UK to marshall their unused resources (which is historical) each turn. I also think that the game needs Air Marshall and Admiralty HQs.

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:14 pm**

The other issue with vetern units is that the best men of the unit become causualties quickly and you are left with the slackers, so to speak.

There was certainly a strong feeling amoung the UK troops in France that the veterans of North Africa and Italy did not perform with the same elan they previously had. However, there were several factors at work here. Many of the men in these units had already been fighting for four years. As a veteran myself, I can tell you that one year in a combat zone is quite enough. I cannot imagine having to do it continually for four years. Also, there was a general concensus that Germany was loosing the war and that their own country and homes were no longer in danger; consequently the motivation and morale that drove them in 1940-1942 was now lacking. Additionally, there was a feeling amoung the veteran units that they had done their part and that it was time for others to step up and do theirs.

It was my experience that if a new recruit made it through his first 90 days his chance of serving his 13 month tour and going home was quite good. There was a tendancy for the solders to become paranoid and fatalistic as they got to within the last four to six weeks of their tour of duty. They would become overly caustious and thier perfomance as a combat solder would becline significantly.

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:30 pm**

ORIGINAL: Jaguar

I beleive that this would be better handled by command points that could be spent as each player saw fit. My biggest complaint about the Action Choice system is that the navy essentially becomes inactive when you are conducting a ground campaing. This is particularly critical to the German's once they get into Russia. Naval and naval air units at sea should always be able to search regardless of which Implule Action Choice a player has made. Now while this would increase the sub activity and result in more allied mechant ship sinking, I beleive that this is easyly offset by allowing the UK to marshall their unused resources (which is historical) each turn. I also think that the game needs Air Marshall and Admiralty HQs.

This could be solved with allowing 1 (or 2) free naval moves (one ship/move. No stacks) in a land action. And the ships that moved were allowed to search. In a naval you could allow 1 or 2 land moves, maybe even a land attack. To compensate for combined action you could allow some more actions . It feels only right to me to increase the number of units allowed to move since they have not increased but with all expansions you got alot more units.

-Orm

Posted: **Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:56 am**

Yep, Jaguar, I agree. In earlier editions, the HQs were worthless on the attack, so they would primarily be used for flipping back units. Now they are so strong and important in the attack that often they will be used for combat rather than reflipping units. Besides, in a combat you MAY end up with units still face up. With air combat, you never will (barring O-chit).

A corollary are the action limits. I have long thought that the operations limits were developed for a smaller map and smaller pool of counters. I started only in 4th or 5th edition, before all of the X-in-Flames additions. Now don't get me wrong. I loved those, especially Sif and Pif, but the aciton limits never increased.

RE: the ships not getting a search, this COULD BE explained away by stating that they are out there, but not finding the opponent. Kinda weak, but it'll work as an answer.

I don't think that any of this will change however, without fundamentally changing the system (ie. designing a new game.) This is similar to stacking limts and generic spaces rather than hexes for Empires in Arms. You can have huges stacks of corps, where in reality, at least the French, often traveled down adjacent road structures allowing them to be mutually supporting. To change this in EIA would fundamentally change the game. It's similar here. There are some things that can be changed or added to, but some things cannot and will not change, without making it a different game.

Jason

ORIGINAL: Jaguar

I think that you are not understanding (WiFZining) WiF the right way.
The impulses are sequential in the game, but I believe they represent events that are more or less simultaneous in reality. If during the turn you take 1 naval, 1 combined and 3 land actions (which is a lot), it means that you devoted about 70% of the war effort for land actions and 30% for naval actions. That does not mean that when the ship move, the soliders stop walking. If the naval action was during the impulse 2, this mean that most of the naval action took place during the first part of the turn, but this is not even sure.

I accept that there are limited resources and limits on the command structure to co-ordinate and use available resources. However, once a fleet has been committed to patrolling a sea area, it does not stop pattrolling because some land campaign is underway. From my point of view, naval searches should occur every impulse in every area which contains ships / planes of opposing forces regardless of the type of impulse choosen.

I beleive that you have to view various impulses as semi-sequential and not simultaneous. Land impulses that re-use inf and arm units to march from location to location have to be considered sequential. THe same forces cannot be in multiple places at the same time. Planes are a little different. In a two month period, an air wing could easily conduct more than one operation, so you have to consider that when a plane is used in the game, it is being used over time for the same operation, flying multiple sorties. However, the problem with this concept is that an air unit can be used in a ground strike or ground support an hex that becomes friendly controlled. Presumably, the air units do not continue to bombard the area which was formerly occupied by the emeny and is now occuppied by friendly forces. Or the original tagreted hex becomes vacant or by both friendly and enemy units; surely we are not to assume the the air units are still bombarding the same hex which overtaken by friendly forces and is now vacant. Therefore, I think that there are elements of the impulse system considered simultanious or continuous and other elements that are sequential with a definative beginning and ending other than the beginning and ending of the turn.

Posted: **Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:59 am**

Oh, heck, one other issue for me is the issue of subs. Aren't the counters supposed to represent "wolf packs"? That would mean that one sub unit (ie. wolfpack), should be pretty dangerous. You shouldn't NEED to have a few of them together to do damage, right? If this is not the case, and one unit = 1 sub, then the cost is too high.

Jason

ORIGINAL: Jaguar

ORIGINAL: brian brian

some great points Jaguar, but do keep in mind that when the weather is "Rain" or worse, it is not raining 100% of the time across an entire ocean. but the points you make about naval searches are things that a computer could greatly improve at no cost in time or bookkeeping to the players. but it is an unfortunate classic when 1/3 or more of the Royal Navy and Air Force together in the Western Med can't 'find' the Italian fleet about to invade Gibraltar.

the action limits are even more discussed than the sea zones. There is a need for them...there were some limitations on how many major ops a country could be running simultaneously. But that is a nebulous thing and hard to quantify. One way to approach it is ... who do you give the gas to? Rommel in Africa? Doenitz? Goering? Guderian on the eastern front? You are the supreme commander; you decide. A computer could dial this in to a lot finer degree based on your actual oil supplies rather than the necessary fudges of the current oil systems. Someone mentioned training time...I've long felt that this should be tied to oil somehow, like requiring one oil to be used in production to build any amount of pilots. As oil supplies tightened up, Axis training hours went down; as they went down their air defenses weakend leading to more disruptions in their oil supplies leading to less gas to train pilots (in Europe; in Asia the Japanese pig-headedly refused to copy the British convoy system because their system didn't reward defensive thinking, but anyway). This is absent in WiF, but easily programmable on a computer.

I beleive that this would be better handled by command points that could be spent as each player saw fit. My biggest complaint about the Action Choice system is that the navy essentially becomes inactive when you are conducting a ground campaing. This is particularly critical to the German's once they get into Russia. Naval and naval air units at sea should always be able to search regardless of which Implule Action Choice a player has made. Now while this would increase the sub activity and result in more allied mechant ship sinking, I beleive that this is easyly offset by allowing the UK to marshall their unused resources (which is historical) each turn. I also think that the game needs Air Marshall and Admiralty HQs.

Posted: **Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:00 am**

This to me makes sense. Also, it adjusts the action limits, which I think need a tweaking anyway.
Jason

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: Jaguar

I beleive that this would be better handled by command points that could be spent as each player saw fit. My biggest complaint about the Action Choice system is that the navy essentially becomes inactive when you are conducting a ground campaing. This is particularly critical to the German's once they get into Russia. Naval and naval air units at sea should always be able to search regardless of which Implule Action Choice a player has made. Now while this would increase the sub activity and result in more allied mechant ship sinking, I beleive that this is easyly offset by allowing the UK to marshall their unused resources (which is historical) each turn. I also think that the game needs Air Marshall and Admiralty HQs.

This could be solved with allowing 1 (or 2) free naval moves (one ship/move. No stacks) in a land action. And the ships that moved were allowed to search. In a naval you could allow 1 or 2 land moves, maybe even a land attack. To compensate for combined action you could allow some more actions . It feels only right to me to increase the number of units allowed to move since they have not increased but with all expansions you got alot more units.

-Orm

Posted: **Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:43 pm**

ORIGINAL: iamspamus
Oh, heck, one other issue for me is the issue of subs. Aren't the counters supposed to represent "wolf packs"? That would mean that one sub unit (ie. wolfpack), should be pretty dangerous. You shouldn't NEED to have a few of them together to do damage, right? If this is not the case, and one unit = 1 sub, then the cost is too high.

The scales, for naval units, are :

· 1 TRS, 1 AMPH or 6 CP = 1 million tons of merchant shipping (100 to 300 ships - 180 average) (180-210 x 5,000 ton freighters).
· 1 CP = 150 000 – 170 000 tons of merchant shipping (15 to 55 ships - 30 average) (30-35 x 5,000 ton freighters).
· 1 SCS or CV (SiF & CLiF) = 1 capital ship plus 4 to 6 DD.
· 1 SUB = 30 first line submarines (plus many more obsolete).
. 1 ASW = around 5 to 20 DD/DE/corvette type units, depending on which class & the unit's factors, etc., etc. (D. LeLacheur)
. 1 ASW-CV units = around 6 CVEs (D. LeLacheur)

See here http://pagesperso-orange.fr/froon/WiF/Scales.txt for more.

Posted: **Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:17 am**

That idea that each capital ship includes 5 DD is not quite accurate in my opinion. The Royal Navy, for example starts with 45 'capital' ships of class CA, BB, CV, or CVL. But I don't think they started the war with 220 DD by any means, but I can't find a quick stat on it. DD's were an important part of a task force, but they didn't scale up linearly. 2 CA might have a squadron of 5 DD with them, but a task force of 3 CA and a BB might also have only that same one squadron of DD, or perhaps a couple more, but not 20 DD sailing with them. I think it would be the same in the other navies - German starts with 8 CA or better (only 6 if you don't count the Schlesien and it's sister ship) but I am somewhat sure that they deployed about 20 DD in the whole war, losing 10 of them in Norway alone. The capital ship / 5 DD idea traces back to the way ASW factors are generated by capital ships in the '0' box with convoys, a huge playability fudge.

I have always thought that with the exception of the designated land units and the capital ships, all other units in WiF have never been 100% precisely scaled from the beginning of the game. The work involved on that would be monumental to go with the simple economic system, and quite beside the point (just look at the flexible scales for the #s of planes in an air counter). Even the land units are a somewhat flexible concept as not all of them are in the game and different countries have different #s of men in the counter. WiF gives you a great 'feel' for WWII. Harry worked out the systems and started playtesting them and got the thing to all work together eventually, and it still does. Yet gamers having played precisely scaled tactical and operational games want to know this information on a definite level, but I don't think that is so easy to do in a grand-strategic level game.

Posted: **Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:14 pm**

From: JGN

ORIGINAL: iamspamus
Oh, heck, one other issue for me is the issue of subs. Aren't the counters supposed to represent "wolf packs"? That would mean that one sub unit (ie. wolfpack), should be pretty dangerous. You shouldn't NEED to have a few of them together to do damage, right? If this is not the case, and one unit = 1 sub, then the cost is too high.

ORIGINAL: Froonp
The scales, for naval units, are:

· 1 TRS, 1 AMPH or 6 CP = 1 million tons of merchant shipping (100 to 300 ships - 180 average) (180-210 x 5,000 ton freighters).
· 1 CP = 150 000 – 170 000 tons of merchant shipping (15 to 55 ships - 30 average) (30-35 x 5,000 ton freighters).
· 1 SCS or CV (SiF & CLiF) = 1 capital ship plus 4 to 6 DD.
· 1 SUB = 30 first line submarines (plus many more obsolete).
. 1 ASW = around 5 to 20 DD/DE/corvette type units, depending on which class & the unit's factors, etc., etc. (D. LeLacheur)
. 1 ASW-CV units = around 6 CVEs (D. LeLacheur)

From JGN
Patrice; if your using 22.4.6 Light Cruisers (CLiF option 75) your calculations are wrong.

ORIGINAL: The RAW
22.4.6 Light Cruisers (CLiF option 75)
The light cruisers in Cruisers in Flames replace those provided in World in Flames and depict every CL and CAA of WWII (except those already included in Ships in Flames).

CLiF cruisers are treated the same as WiF light cruisers. However, when playing with CLiF, each CV and BB has an ASW factor of 0 (see 11.5.10 Submarine combat) and, if playing with oil (see 13.5.1 Oil (AfA option 48)), CAs and CLs only count as a quarter of a unit during final reorganization.

Since Carriers and Battleships do not have an ASW factor this would indicate that the destroyers are no longer included with Carriers and Battleships.

ORIGINAL: The RAW
1.2 Scale
An aircraft unit represents 250 aircraft in 1939 gradually increasing to 500 aircraft by 1945.

13.5.1 Oil (AfA option 48)
SiF option 9: Each naval unit (CVPiF/SiF option 56: or carrier plane) you turn face-up counts as half a unit and each convoy point counts as a quarter of a unit.

22.4.19 Convoys in Flames (CoiF option 76)
Some ASW units have an air component, representing escort carrier task forces. Like all other Ships in Flames CVs, you need to equip the ASW CV with a carrier plane (PiF option 28: and its pilot) to gain any benefit from air power.

14.3.2 Combat
Calculate a new air-to-air strength at the start of each round. It is equal to the air-to-air rating of your front fighter, +1 for each other FTR, and +0.5 (CVPiF/SiF option 56: one tenth its air-to-air strength) for each other carrier plane, in your fighter group (you ignore bombers’ air-to air ratings).

Patrice; if your NOT using 22.4.6 Light Cruisers (CLiF option 75) your calculations are wrong.
I take issue with your assumption that 1 ASW-CV unit = around 6 CVEs (D. LeLacheur).
The above rules taken from the RAW indicate that “Carrier Planes” represent much fewer aircraft than land based “Aircraft Units”.
Since a “Carrier Plane” represents approximately 25-50 aircraft (250-500 divided by 10) (see 14.3.2 Combat (CVPiF & SiF option 56) above). It is ludicrous to assume that an ASW-CV represents 6 CVEs carrying approximately 4-9 aircraft on each one of them.

Matrix Games Forums

MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions

RE: MWIF Expansions