Matrix Games Forums

What's your Strategy?
https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/

A few questions about the rules

https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/viewtopic.php?t=157825

Page 4 of 10

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:39 pm
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Two new topics:

1. With unlimited divisional breakdown, are minors also given this ability?

2. Under RAW 5.1, if USSR DOW Hungary, GER may choose to receive another USSR oil or keep another GER build point per turn. Also under RAW 5.1 there is another section that states if GER aligns Hungary, the USSR gives GER one less resource per turn.

If the USSR DOW a neutral Hungary, which GER then aligns, how do these sections interact?

Why not asking this question to the rules discussion group too, where Harry could have his word ? I'd like t hear him about this issue.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:50 am
by paulderynck
ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Two new topics:

1. With unlimited divisional breakdown, are minors also given this ability?

2. Under RAW 5.1, if USSR DOW Hungary, GER may choose to receive another USSR oil or keep another GER build point per turn. Also under RAW 5.1 there is another section that states if GER aligns Hungary, the USSR gives GER one less resource per turn.

If the USSR DOW a neutral Hungary, which GER then aligns, how do these sections interact?

Why not asking this question to the rules discussion group too, where Harry could have his word ? I'd like t hear him about this issue.
Interesting. They appear contradictory but both effects can be implemented so that's what I'd do. I think as Germany I'd give up a resource and take an oil, and also I'd align Hungary to Italy.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:58 am
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Two new topics:

1. With unlimited divisional breakdown, are minors also given this ability?

2. Under RAW 5.1, if USSR DOW Hungary, GER may choose to receive another USSR oil or keep another GER build point per turn. Also under RAW 5.1 there is another section that states if GER aligns Hungary, the USSR gives GER one less resource per turn.

If the USSR DOW a neutral Hungary, which GER then aligns, how do these sections interact?

Why not asking this question to the rules discussion group too, where Harry could have his word ? I'd like t hear him about this issue.
Interesting. They appear contradictory but both effects can be implemented so that's what I'd do. I think as Germany I'd give up a resource and take an oil, and also I'd align Hungary to Italy.
Sort of makes DOWing Hungary a bad idea for the USSR.[:D]

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:31 am
by brian brian
Why Italy though?

If the Germans align it they can send in the dreaded 'peacekeepers' (in this case I like them) and passively fight Russians. Also they CAN break the pact, but they don't HAVE to.

As always, iirc

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 3:16 am
by paulderynck
ORIGINAL: brian brian

Why Italy though?

If the Germans align it they can send in the dreaded 'peacekeepers' (in this case I like them) and passively fight Russians. Also they CAN break the pact, but they don't HAVE to.

As always, iirc
Nice to have a good minor to serve as a new home country when Italy goes down - without the trouble you must go to in order to align Yugoslavia with Italy. Of course if there are a ton of Russians poised to come in, then Germany may be a better choice. The pact can be broken by Germany if Russians enter Hungary regardless of who Hungary is aligned with.

Anyway like Shannon said - a very bad idea for the USSR to do. Maybe Steve B. is preparing some wild new strategy like "No U.S. in Europe" for the upcoming Con.

It could be called the "No USSR in Europe" strategy. [:)]

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:12 am
by Joseignacio
Another one. I read in the RAW:
 
  
[font=times]To trace a basic supply path overseas, the unit must be in a coastal hex or trace the path via a port. To trace a railway path overseas, the secondary source must be in a coastal hex or trace the path via a port.[/font]
 
We have lately been restricting the meaning of this rule to an HQ; but re-reading it, I can not see why not any other unit could not trace supply path all the same, as I think we used to play this in the past. Am I right?

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:22 am
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Another one. I read in the RAW:
  
[font=times]To trace a basic supply path overseas, the unit must be in a coastal hex or trace the path via a port. To trace a railway path overseas, the secondary source must be in a coastal hex or trace the path via a port.[/font]

We have lately been restricting the meaning of this rule to an HQ; but re-reading it, I can not see why not any other unit could not trace supply path all the same, as I think we used to play this in the past. Am I right?
Yes, why not, but keep in mind that :
- Normal unit only trace basic supply paths. They are maximum 4 hexes. But these 4 hexes can go through a port like this rule says.
- Only HQ can trace railway supply paths.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:39 am
by Joseignacio
A-ha. that's why. [;)] Thx.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:29 pm
by paulderynck
Another tricky one:

Q: Can you trace a basic path across sea to an HQ on a coast and then a railway path overland to a supply source?

A: Yes but ONLY if the HQ is in a port.

The reason being "The port hex you trace the overseas supply path into does count against your 4 hex limit." In other words, the presence of an HQ on a coast does not make that hex into a port. However you can trace a basic path overland to an HQ on a coast and then trace a basic path from the HQ overseas to a port.

I have one opponent who continually forgets this fine distinction.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:41 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Another tricky one:

Q: Can you trace a basic path across sea to an HQ on a coast and then a railway path overland to a supply source?

A: Yes but ONLY if the HQ is in a port.

The reason being "The port hex you trace the overseas supply path into does count against your 4 hex limit." In other words, the presence of an HQ on a coast does not make that hex into a port. However you can trace a basic path overland to an HQ on a coast and then trace a basic path from the HQ overseas to a port.

I have one opponent who continually forgets this fine distinction.
Couldn't the HQ act as a secondary supply source? If it could, then it could trace to a primary using a railway supply path.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:44 pm
by paulderynck
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Another tricky one:

Q: Can you trace a basic path across sea to an HQ on a coast and then a railway path overland to a supply source?

A: Yes but ONLY if the HQ is in a port.

The reason being "The port hex you trace the overseas supply path into does count against your 4 hex limit." In other words, the presence of an HQ on a coast does not make that hex into a port. However you can trace a basic path overland to an HQ on a coast and then trace a basic path from the HQ overseas to a port.

I have one opponent who continually forgets this fine distinction.
Couldn't the HQ act as a secondary supply source? If it could, then it could trace to a primary using a railway supply path.
Only if it is in a port or within basic supply range less one from the port. You must trace overseas supply paths to a port. Of course you could trace to a port and then to an HQ as a secondary supply source, but the point of the example was that it is a mistake to think you can trace overseas directly to an HQ in a coastal hex if that hex does not contain a port. I guess the mistake is caused by being able to trace either a basic or RR path overseas from an HQ in a coastal hex that is not a port.

I have seen this come up in the Black Sea where other units on coastal hexes attempted to trace a basic path overseas to an HQ that was not in a port but on the coast. The weather was rain and the HQ was two hexes away from a port which indeed was connected by rail to a primary source. But the basic supply distance for the tracing units to get to the secondary supply source (the HQ) was greater than 2 and thus they were OOS even though the HQ could trace a valid RR path.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:57 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: paulderynck
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Another tricky one:

Q: Can you trace a basic path across sea to an HQ on a coast and then a railway path overland to a supply source?

A: Yes but ONLY if the HQ is in a port.

The reason being "The port hex you trace the overseas supply path into does count against your 4 hex limit." In other words, the presence of an HQ on a coast does not make that hex into a port. However you can trace a basic path overland to an HQ on a coast and then trace a basic path from the HQ overseas to a port.

I have one opponent who continually forgets this fine distinction.
Couldn't the HQ act as a secondary supply source? If it could, then it could trace to a primary using a railway supply path.
Only if it is in a port or within basic supply range less one from the port. You must trace overseas supply paths to a port. Of course you could trace to a port and then to an HQ as a secondary supply source, but the point of the example was that it is a mistake to think you can trace overseas directly to an HQ in a coastal hex if that hex does not contain a port. I guess the mistake is caused by being able to trace either a basic or RR path overseas from an HQ in a coastal hex that is not a port.

I have seen this come up in the Black Sea where other units on coastal hexes attempted to trace a basic path overseas to an HQ that was not in a port but on the coast. The weather was rain and the HQ was two hexes away from a port which indeed was connected by rail to a primary source. But the basic supply distance for the tracing units to get to the secondary supply source (the HQ) was greater than 2 and thus they were OOS even though the HQ could trace a valid RR path.
It seems to me that the presence of the HQ is irrelevant. The overseas supply path must end in a port. What happens after that is just the normal/other rules related to supply.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:48 am
by paulderynck
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

It seems to me that the presence of the HQ is irrelevant. The overseas supply path must end in a port. What happens after that is just the normal/other rules related to supply.
The overseas portion ends in a port. You may still have hexes left you can trace depending on the weather and how many hexes you traced before going overseas. We all know this.

I was merely attempting to illustrate an incorrect assumption I have witnessed concerning the asymmetry of having an HQ on a coastal hex for supply tracing purposes.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Sat Jul 25, 2009 12:13 am
by Neilster
This is why MWiF is going to be so much fun to play. We will no longer have that nagging feeling that we're not doing something right and we will no longer have to keep all those administrative balls in the air. Instead, we can concentrate on the interesting strategic, operational and grand-tactical stuff.

Cheers, Neilster

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 10:32 am
by Extraneous
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]This is an attempt, for me, to get a clarification of the rules and not an attempt to bash them.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Lets say I’m wrong on Aligning Minor Powers and use the RAW.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]I have stated you can only "align" the following:[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Axis minor countries that can be aligned:[/font][font="times new roman"] Argentina, Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Rumania, Persia and Iraq, Siam, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, and Yugoslavia.

Allied minor countries that can be aligned: Brazil, Bulgaria, Central America, Mexico, Mongolia, and Yugoslavia.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]
ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.o.pdf[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]In every other case, when one or more major powers declare war on a minor country, choose an active major power on the other side to align with it.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]If there is more than one eligible major power, offer the minor to the major power whose capital city is closest to the minor’s capital (any home country in the case of the Commonwealth). If it declines, offer it to the next closest, and so on.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]If every eligible major power declines, the minor (and all its controlled minors and territories) is immediately conquered by the attacking major power (see 13.7.1).[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]
[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]But…[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]
ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.o.pdf[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]If a neutral minor can align with your major power (see 19.6, 19.7 and 19.8), you can declare that it is aligning with you. You can only declare one minor aligned with your major power in each friendly impulse.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Your major power controls a minor that aligns with it exactly as if another major power had declared war on it.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]
[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]When the U.S. and U.S.S.R are neutral major powers and the CW and France are the only active major powers. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]This would mean that the CW could align one (1) minor power and France could align one (1) minor power. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Does this mean when Germany DOWs more than two (2) neutral minor powers. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Any DOWed minor power not aligned by the CW or France would be immediately compleatly conquered by Germany?[/font]
[font="times new roman"][/font] 
[font="times new roman"][/font]

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 11:35 am
by sajbalk
The restriction on alignments per impulse is for countries that may be aligned in the absence of an enemy DOW, i.e. Finland, Bulgaria, Rumania, etc. for Germany.

If a minor is DOWed, a Major Power may take control of unlimited minors in an impulse.

That is, during your impulse, 1 per MP; during your opponent's impulse: umlimited per MP (but only possible by enemy DOW).

I make the distinction under 19.2 that a minor may enter the war by alignment or by a major power DOW. I think an interpretation that simultaneous Allied DOWs on Spain, Portugal, Norway, Sweden, Argentina, etc. would mean that all but 3 are conquered because they cannot be aligned is silly.

Honestly, I have never had this question come up, and I agree the designer could have used clearer language (i.e. "except in response to an Allied DOW" in the last sentence of 19.7 and "except in response to an Axis DOW" in the last sentence of 19.8.

I am hopeful the designer hasl followed my interpretation of this language.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 11:41 am
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: Extraneous

[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]This is an attempt, for me, to get a clarification of the rules and not an attempt to bash them.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Lets say I’m wrong on Aligning Minor Powers and use the RAW.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]I have stated you can only "align" the following:[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Axis minor countries that can be aligned:[/font][font="times new roman"] Argentina, Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Rumania, Persia and Iraq, Siam, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, and Yugoslavia.

Allied minor countries that can be aligned: Brazil, Bulgaria, Central America, Mexico, Mongolia, and Yugoslavia.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]
ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.o.pdf[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]In every other case, when one or more major powers declare war on a minor country, choose an active major power on the other side to align with it.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]If there is more than one eligible major power, offer the minor to the major power whose capital city is closest to the minor’s capital (any home country in the case of the Commonwealth). If it declines, offer it to the next closest, and so on.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]If every eligible major power declines, the minor (and all its controlled minors and territories) is immediately conquered by the attacking major power (see 13.7.1).[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]
[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]But…[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]
ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.o.pdf[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]If a neutral minor can align with your major power (see 19.6, 19.7 and 19.8), you can declare that it is aligning with you. You can only declare one minor aligned with your major power in each friendly impulse.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Your major power controls a minor that aligns with it exactly as if another major power had declared war on it.[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]
[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]When the U.S. and U.S.S.R are neutral major powers and the CW and France are the only active major powers. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]This would mean that the CW could align one (1) minor power and France could align one (1) minor power. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Does this mean when Germany DOWs more than two (2) neutral minor powers. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Any DOWed minor power not aligned by the CW or France would be immediately compleatly conquered by Germany?[/font]
[font="times new roman"][/font] 
[font="times new roman"][/font]
The limit of 1 alignement of minor country per impulse is for the align minor step only.

The D2.1 Declare war (RAW 9.) stage is composed multiple minor steps that are :
- DoW Major (RAW 9.2)
- DoW Minor (RAW 9.2)
- US Entry (RAW 9.4)
- Neutrality Pacts (RAW 9.5)
- Call out reserves (RAW 9.6)
- Setup attacked minor's unit (RAW 9.7)
- Align Minor (RAW 9.8)

This is this last step (RAW 9.8) that is concerned by the limitation to 1 alignement per major power per impulsen, as specified in (RAW 9.8). The only Minor Countries that can be aligned during this step are detailed in RAW 19.6, 19.7, 19.8 that you listed in your post.

There are no limits to the number of countries that can be declared war in the first 2 steps (DoW Major & DoW Minor described in RAW 9.2), and so no limits on the number of countries that can align to a major due to these DoWs. Except during the first 2 impulses of the game (see RAW 9.3).

If Germany declares war to Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium in impulse 4 of the Global War scenarion, then the CW may align them all if they want. If they had the necessary conditions to align one of the RAW 19.6, 19.7, 19.8 minor countries, they could align 1 extra one during the last step of the DoW stage (RAW 9.8).

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 11:44 am
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: sajbalk
Honestly, I have never had this question come up, and I agree the designer could have used clearer language (i.e. "except in response to an Allied DOW" in the last sentence of 19.7 and "except in response to an Axis DOW" in the last sentence of 19.8.

I am hopeful the designer hasl followed my interpretation of this language.

Steve, IMO RAW 9.8 is clear that the limitation is not on alignements that are consequences of DoWs. I don't think that the designer have made anything wrong, I think that people mix & confuse things because the same words (aligning) are used. But looking from where they come, everything is clear IMO.

IMO the designer is just in a logic where he tries to avoid redundencies and hopes to keep the rulebook less than 1,000 pages. [:D]

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 3:37 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: sajbalk
Honestly, I have never had this question come up, and I agree the designer could have used clearer language (i.e. "except in response to an Allied DOW" in the last sentence of 19.7 and "except in response to an Axis DOW" in the last sentence of 19.8.

I am hopeful the designer hasl followed my interpretation of this language.

Steve, IMO RAW 9.8 is clear that the limitation is not on alignements that are consequences of DoWs. I don't think that the designer have made anything wrong, I think that people mix & confuse things because the same words (aligning) are used. But looking from where they come, everything is clear IMO.

IMO the designer is just in a logic where he tries to avoid redundencies and hopes to keep the rulebook less than 1,000 pages. [:D]
I had a lot of trouble figuring out the precise rules for the DOW phase, but this was not a point of confusion for me.

RE: A few questions about the rules

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 11:05 pm
by doctormm
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: sajbalk
Honestly, I have never had this question come up, and I agree the designer could have used clearer language (i.e. "except in response to an Allied DOW" in the last sentence of 19.7 and "except in response to an Axis DOW" in the last sentence of 19.8.

I am hopeful the designer hasl followed my interpretation of this language.

Steve, IMO RAW 9.8 is clear that the limitation is not on alignements that are consequences of DoWs. I don't think that the designer have made anything wrong, I think that people mix & confuse things because the same words (aligning) are used. But looking from where they come, everything is clear IMO.

IMO the designer is just in a logic where he tries to avoid redundencies and hopes to keep the rulebook less than 1,000 pages. [:D]
I had a lot of trouble figuring out the precise rules for the DOW phase, but this was not a point of confusion for me.

It should not be much of an issue, seeing as 9.8 says "You can only declare one minor aligned with your major power in each friendly impulse" and the provisions of 19.7 and 19.8 are applicable only in friendly impulses as well.

All times are UTC
Page 4 of 10

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited