Persian Partisan

[celebrindal]

This is most likely a bug, we have a partisan in Persia. He couldn't move, and the Russians are unable to attack him.
We are using version 1.07

[paulderynck]

Looks like Persia is controlled by the Axis and so that partisan is on the Allied side. Whoever controls the partisan can move it out of the way, although it cant stack with Allied units.

If something else weird has happened - like the partisan came on as anti-Russian and then moved to an axis hex - then it's a bug.

[celebrindal]

I'd have to let my russian counterpart answer for sure, but as far as I know it showed up to attack the russians. They invaded persia and persian control was given to the germans.

[markb50k]

Right but once Persia is controlled by a major power any partisans always fight against the controlling power. It's a red country

[celebrindal]

Persia hadn't been conquered yet.

[Numdydar]

It is owned by Germany so the partiion is fighing against Germany, not Russia, since Germany is the controling major power. Once Russia fully conqueres Persia, then the partisians will fight against Russia if my understanding of this is correct [:)]

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

It is owned by Germany so the partiion is fighing against Germany, not Russia, since Germany is the controling major power. Once Russia fully conqueres Persia, then the partisians will fight against Russia if my understanding of this is correct [:)]

Correct. No bug.
The same thing happens f.e. in India or in French Indo China. Now, Persia is neutral at start, but that doesn't mean this rule doesn't apply. As soon a Red partisan country becomes active, the side which controls the country, doesn't control the partisan.

So in this case the Germans aligned Persia. In the following Partisan phase, an Allied controlled partisan appears (since Germany still controls Persia). If during the conquest phase, Persia is conquered by the USSR, the Partisan immediately changes side and becomes controlled by Italy (closes MP capital...).

[celebrindal]

ah we were under the impression it was a partisan against the Russians.. makes sense now. was wondering why I couldn't move it as the germans.

[Dabrion]

Who controls Persia? Is it axis or commies rushing in? Can't see from the screenshot

Apologies, was answered. Then it is a RU controlled PART.

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: Dabrion

Who controls Persia? Is it axis or commies rushing in? Can't see from the screenshot

Apologies, was answered. Then it is a RU controlled PART.

Looking at the color it is (free) French.

[Dabrion]

True, seems unusual. Is the FF capital in Syria?

[celebrindal]

No France hasn't fallen yet, is close but not yet..

[Dabrion]

In that case, Moscow dist(35), Paris dist (61). Shouldn't the PART for red countries be controlled by the closest MP on the opposite side (capital to capital distance)?

p.s.: would be nice to have the <Enter> key work in the distance calculator when selecting cities/ports.

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: Dabrion

In that case, Moscow dist(35), Paris dist (61). Shouldn't the PART for red countries be controlled by the closest MP on the opposite side (capital to capital distance)?

Technically, yes, but if it is a bug it makes that the partisan is in the spirit of the red countries that it also doesn't want to be controlled by the invading country.

[Dabrion]

Even then Chunking is dist(57). It seems MWiF falsely includes controlled minor country capitals into the list to determine the control. In that case it would have found French controlled Damascus dist (16) to be closest, thus assigning PART control to France. FF capital in Damascus has been ruled out. Closer would be Baghdad dist(9), Kuwait dist(9), Riyadh (15), which would then be neutral minors.

Or USSR is not at war with GE yet (likely) so that France is the closest MP at war with GE. In that case French control is correct. Still a strange sight, I am sure have never seen it How did Persia survive a turn anyways?

[paulderynck]

Worth noting here for any WiF grognards stumbling upon this discussion that a deviation in RAC says: "There are 3 additional ‘red’ countries in MWIF: Iraq, Persia, and Saudi Arabia."

So yes the partisan must be French controlled because France has the nearest capital of a country at war with Persia's controller (Germany).

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Dabrion

Even then Chunking is dist(57). It seems MWiF falsely includes controlled minor country capitals into the list to determine the control. In that case it would have found French controlled Damascus dist (16) to be closest, thus assigning PART control to France. FF capital in Damascus has been ruled out. Closer would be Baghdad dist(9), Kuwait dist(9), Riyadh (15), which would then be neutral minors.

Or USSR is not at war with GE yet (likely) so that France is the closest MP at war with GE. In that case French control is correct. Still a strange sight, I am sure have never seen it How did Persia survive a turn anyways?

From RAC 13.1,
Getting Partisans: "There are 3 additional 'red' countries in MWIF: Iraq, Persia, and Saudi Arabia".
Controlling Partisans: "Partisans in 'red' countries are controlled by the nearest major power currently at war with the major power that controls the country."

Germany controls Persia. Germany is at war with France and the Commonwealth. The French capital (Paris) is closer to Teheran than the Commonwealth capital (London).

[Dabrion]

Ok new partisan table, I am *not* surprised. Keep it coming.. It is funny how we will need a MOD to play actual WiF in the end

[paulderynck]

You previously posted this:

ORIGINAL: Dabrion
Or USSR is not at war with GE yet (likely) so that France is the closest MP at war with GE. In that case French control is correct. Still a strange sight, I am sure have never seen it

so how come you didn't know Persia was red then?

[Dabrion]

I didn't, it was mentioned in the thread somewhere so I accounted for that possibility.

In fact I might have edited it after your post.. judging from the timestamps