Page 1 of 1

Not sure if these are production bugs or WAD?

Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 10:54 am
by Lord Drakken
I do note that in the sequence of play return to base happens before production. But in MWIF production planning happens before return to base so I did an experiment. In production planning the CW was at 19 BPs. I am playing with Food in Flames currently. I thought that when I returned all convoys out of the Bay of Biscay. The CW would drop down to a production of 5 with their current .75 multiple. However, what happened was the CW had 14 build points.

They did not have the 19 I made during the production planning, nor did they have the 5 it showed in the final production phase. They had 14 which is in the middle? I looked through RAC and couldn't find in the production step anywhere that it says when exactly convoys need to be in place.

Is this working as designed as some middle ground so convoys can be returned to base without losing all resources they were moving during the turn? Or is it a bug? For the life of me I can't remember how the old WIF rules used to be when I played 25 years ago either...

In my humble opinion if convoys are in place at the end of the turn they have done their job surviving the battle phases of the game and should have convoyed their cargo. You should be able to reassign them without losing all functionality for an entire turn. I didn't bother to look up RAW so please enlighten me on the rules.

The second situation that came up that I thought was really strange was this. The USSR is embroiled with the Finnish in the Winter War. They have captured the resource in Petsamo. However, due to no CP being set up outside of the Black and Caspian seas the Russians cannot get this resource home to use it. What they are doing is they are shipping this resource through the part of Finland the Finnish control and sending it to Germany to satisfy their trade agreement.

I understand that resources are fungible. One resource is no different than another. I do not think that the Finns would allow resources from a mine under USSR control to pass through their country letting the USSR then pass those resources off as their own to the Germans. This may be within the rules with multiple states of war. Or it may be a bug. Either way it should not be happening. Now if the USSR could get that resource back to their home country first then I think they could use it to satisfy a trade agreement.




RE: Not sure if these are production bugs or WAD?

Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:58 pm
by Centuur
The first one looks like a bug. If no convoys are present at the final production phase, than resources don't arrive in het UK. The convoy chain needs to be in place at that moment. That's RAW...

The Finnish resource can be send by the USSR to Germany, which might be transported through Finland and the USSR to a factory in Germany, even with the Finns and the USSR at war with eachother. It's allowed by the rules. Should it not be happening? That's for the rules committee at ADG to decide...

RE: Not sure if these are production bugs or WAD?

Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 4:25 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: Lord Drakken

I do note that in the sequence of play return to base happens before production. But in MWIF production planning happens before return to base so I did an experiment. In production planning the CW was at 19 BPs. I am playing with Food in Flames currently. I thought that when I returned all convoys out of the Bay of Biscay. The CW would drop down to a production of 5 with their current .75 multiple. However, what happened was the CW had 14 build points.

They did not have the 19 I made during the production planning, nor did they have the 5 it showed in the final production phase. They had 14 which is in the middle? I looked through RAC and couldn't find in the production step anywhere that it says when exactly convoys need to be in place.

Is this working as designed as some middle ground so convoys can be returned to base without losing all resources they were moving during the turn? Or is it a bug? For the life of me I can't remember how the old WIF rules used to be when I played 25 years ago either...

In my humble opinion if convoys are in place at the end of the turn they have done their job surviving the battle phases of the game and should have convoyed their cargo. You should be able to reassign them without losing all functionality for an entire turn. I didn't bother to look up RAW so please enlighten me on the rules.

The second situation that came up that I thought was really strange was this. The USSR is embroiled with the Finnish in the Winter War. They have captured the resource in Petsamo. However, due to no CP being set up outside of the Black and Caspian seas the Russians cannot get this resource home to use it. What they are doing is they are shipping this resource through the part of Finland the Finnish control and sending it to Germany to satisfy their trade agreement.

I understand that resources are fungible. One resource is no different than another. I do not think that the Finns would allow resources from a mine under USSR control to pass through their country letting the USSR then pass those resources off as their own to the Germans. This may be within the rules with multiple states of war. Or it may be a bug. Either way it should not be happening. Now if the USSR could get that resource back to their home country first then I think they could use it to satisfy a trade agreement.



I would need a saved game to recreate and debug the first problem.

RE: Not sure if these are production bugs or WAD?

Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 4:30 pm
by paulderynck
The first one is a bug - no way CPs deliver stuff without being in place in the Production phase of the turn.

The second is a minor bug IMO. (Minor = occurs rarely and minimal impact to game play). The reason I'd say it's a bug is the following:

You must, if at all possible deliver resources that you promise in a trade agreement. You do not promise specific resources, only that you will send X of this and/or Y of that. A popular example is USSR conquering Persia and then saying they're giving two oil from Persia (which is impossible for them to deliver, they can only store it in place) to "fulfill" their trade agreement with Germany. This has been ruled as a violation of the rules, especially since the USSR could still use the oil for re-org and easily deliver other oil. The other rule is that you can only transport resources or build points through territory controlled by a major power, if it agrees. It's obviously in Germany's best interest to refuse because the USSR can't use that resource itself and must deliver a different one in its absence.

You lose what you can't deliver. The only time you can nominate a resource to be lost that you, yourself can not use, is when it is completely impossible for any resource to reach the recipient. An example of this is CW lends 2 resources to Russia but all CP lines are down. So CW announces the two resources to be "lost" are two in Malaya. It's gamey, but it should even be possible to "arrange" such a situation (when determined advantageous) by being very selective about which CPs RTB.

All the above (not to mention if and when CP-lines can be shared by allies) represents why the production planning and convoy routing would have been a horrid bearcat to program.

RE: Not sure if these are production bugs or WAD?

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 8:06 pm
by Lord Drakken
Thanks Paulderynck. I thought this seemed a little to useful for the USSR to be true. And certainly a lot too gamey. Luckily this can be self regulated by forcing the Finnish resource to be idle.

RE: Not sure if these are production bugs or WAD?

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:40 am
by ACMW
Fungible. Not a word heard (or read) everyday. A little vocabular pleasure.

Drakken, thou art truly Lord of the Lexicon.