Matrix Games Forums

1. No kidding, the change to CW production that I'm showing I made a half of dozen times between preliminary production and final production and CW production always reverted back to the top production screen in the cap below.

2. It's final production and I once again route the idle Non-oil Res, India[95,110] to an idle factory in Glasgow.

3. The bottom line is that this change increases CW production by 2 BP's from 19 to 21.

4. I hit the "Finalize Production" button safe in the knowledge that since production is FINALIZED that the CW will get 21 BP's for production.

5. By the way, I kept this game up and running all the way through the start of final production to the end of production. That is, there were NO saves and re-loads.

6. It's CW production and this is just not right! MWiF has reverted CW production back to 19 BP's AFTER production for them was finalized.

7. In my opinion this behavior by MWiF is a CRITICAL PRODUCTION BUG that needs to be fixed!

8. Game file (ver 2.9.4 Public Beta).

Looking at the game file there are no CPs in the West Med so everything going to and from France and the UK has to go through 21 CPs in the Bay of Biscay (19), Faroes (1) and North Sea (1).

8 are needed for lends (5 BP to UK and 3 resources to France), leaving 13. So the max UK can produce with is 13 + 2 at home plus the 5 overseas, equals 20 PP, and counting the 5 lends that's also 20 BP.

I suspect CP constriction resulting from the "lends must get through" rule accounts for the other 1 you are missing.

This is a great example of why production is such a hairy issue. It all can look right but MWiF has to try and follow the lending rules and it appears to me there are not enough CPs to satisfy what is being requested.

Edit: I was trying to check the routes for all the lends but in this phase of the game as soon as you select one and view it, then as soon as you move the mouse you get the error message about no changes to lend routing allowed and then it gets funny as the production screen moves magically around trying to dodge the cursor just like the old joke: "click here to get your tax refund". This part is definitely buggy behavior, but the bottom line as to why production is getting changed is, I believe, as I state above.

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Looking at the game file there are no CPs in the West Med so everything going to and from France and the UK has to go through 21 CPs in the Bay of Biscay (19), Faroes (1) and North Sea (1).

8 are needed for lends (5 BP to UK and 3 resources to France), leaving 13. So the max UK can produce with is 13 + 2 at home plus the 5 overseas, equals 20 PP, and counting the 5 lends that's also 20 BP.

I suspect CP constriction resulting from the "lends must get through" rule accounts for the other 1 you are missing.

This is a great example of why production is such a hairy issue. It all can look right but MWiF has to try and follow the lending rules and it appears to me there are not enough CPs to satisfy what is being requested.

Edit: I was trying to check the routes for all the lends but in this phase of the game as soon as you select one and view it, then as soon as you move the mouse you get the error message about no changes to lend routing allowed and then it gets funny as the production screen moves magically around trying to dodge the cursor just like the old joke: "click here to get your tax refund". This part is definitely buggy behavior, but the bottom line as to why production is getting changed is, I believe, as I state above.

For me this is the core issue. MWiF wants full control over how production works, but then it tells me one thing during final production and gives me something else during production. How in the world am I suppose to count on what MWiF says my production is if it tells me one thing in all phases prior to production and then does something different during production?

Not sure how to respond. Over the board, such an issue might not be caught, but the bottom line is there are insufficient CPs to carry out the production orders. I lay the blame on the fact that Fr and CW production are done separately but can use each others' CPs (meaning the program has to somehow be aware of all requests at once even though they are done separately - not sure who has dibs if both powers try to use the same CP!??), and that final routing must prioritize lends, and perhaps on allowances for Search and Seizure which may be partly implemented in the code.

It would be interesting to edit in another CP in the Bay of Biscay and see what happens, but I suspect there is at least one more needed somewhere.

Ideally the code should spot a bottleneck and inform the user, but preliminary production is before RTB and what if someone creates the bottleneck by RTBing CPs then? Is it supposed to re-analyze all the convoy routes every time someone RTBs a CP?

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
Ideally the code should spot a bottleneck and inform the user, but preliminary production is before RTB and what if someone creates the bottleneck by RTBing CPs then? Is it supposed to re-analyze all the convoy routes every time someone RTBs a CP?

So why couldn't the code verify all is correct before allowing preliminary production to be exited, even seperately? If it's a question of who has dibs, then whoever does should go last to be sure. Either which way, I agree with rkr1958 that player(s) should know all is well prior to production and not be surprised by any changes during production.

It's possible that due to fighting during the RTB phase, additional convoy points are destroyed. But apart from that, I agree totally that MWIF should automatically put all convoy points to sentry which are used for transportation after the prel. production phase gets finished.

Also: MWIF should always be able to calculate an optimized use for convoys to get the maximum production available to a side. That this isn't always happening, is something which is a huge bug in MWIF.

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
Ideally the code should spot a bottleneck and inform the user, but preliminary production is before RTB and what if someone creates the bottleneck by RTBing CPs then? Is it supposed to re-analyze all the convoy routes every time someone RTBs a CP?

So why couldn't the code verify all is correct before allowing preliminary production to be exited, even seperately? If it's a question of who has dibs, then whoever does should go last to be sure. Either which way, I agree with rkr1958 that player(s) should know all is well prior to production and not be surprised by any changes during production.

It could be correct for the CW because it assumes the FR CPs transport the CW BPs, but then if FR is next and France "has dibs" then it assumes the FR CPs transport the resources to FR and that has to be correct - which in turn makes the CW production wrong, but the CW has already finalized...

And as pointed out, everything could be correct for everybody after preliminary production is finalized but if CPs are lost or aborted or RTB'd during the RTB step, then it can no longer be correct for final production.

Guys,

All this happened after FINAL production was finished for the CW. So, when I ended final production for the CW the form was showing 21 BP's. When I got to CW production it showed 19 BP's.

Could be the code decided things were OK when going through production one country at a time (for the reasons cited above due to combined FR and CW CPs), but then when processing the lends first for actual production, it used up the available CPs so the CW had to suffer (since there are a net of at least one too few to comply with the production "directives"). If that code had run earlier, then it could have alerted the user to a problem.

I think this relates to the design decision that final production cannot be changed because then you could work around a search and seizure. That's why lend sources and routes cannot be changed in the Final Production phase.

Maybe that would be the solution, run the production code as a "trial run" (but without allocating the BPs) right after the Preliminary Production phase, and if the BPs don't match what the forms say, then issue a warning message and return to the start of that side's Preliminary Production phase. It would be left to the player to try and find what was wrong, but of course if he can't see what it is, then he's stuck in a loop. To some, that could be more frustrating then the way it works now, although perhaps this proposed solution could also be controlled by an interface setting to turn it on and off.

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
I think this relates to the design decision that final production cannot be changed because then you could work around a search and seizure. That's why lend sources and routes cannot be changed in the Final Production phase.

Maybe that would be the solution, run the production code as a "trial run" (but without allocating the BPs) right after the Preliminary Production phase, and if the BPs don't match what the forms say, then issue a warning message and return to the start of that side's Preliminary Production phase. It would be left to the player to try and find what was wrong, but of course if he can't see what it is, then he's stuck in a loop. To some, that could be more frustrating then the way it works now, although perhaps this proposed solution could also be controlled by an interface setting to turn it on and off.

It sounds like search and seizure may not (should not?) be an issue.

To add to the idea about a warning message and an On/Off option, there could also perhaps be an override to accept the warning. For example, if FR goes first then it may get warnings for itself and CW, but FR accepts them to allow CW to proceed next and resolve any warnings. Or vice versa. That should lock things in?

I also have had issues like the one described above. Some of the problems can be resolved during the prelim step to not "finish" any of the countries until the receiving countries are looked at and any saves of oil made and/or routing. Then move back to the sending countries and look at them. then back to the receiving countries and if it looks okay then close them and go back to the sending countries and then close them. When a country is receiving oil and BP's it is complicated for both parties.
Lending takes priority over any other shipment.
One other item to mention. Using oil. If you use the wrong oil point/resource it could also mess up your properly set convoys especially if you are lending oil.

In playing the board/Vassal game I didn't realize how hard it is for the CW/USA to lend resources and BP's. It takes a lot of convoys because as Paul pointed out the lending of BP's has to be first produced and then sent out to the receiving country. This may double up the number of convoys needed. I'm now sure I cheated over the board game many times not realizing that fact.

Another thing I didn't realize is that oil resources from minors can't be saved just any old place. They have to be sent to home countries. Playing the CW is extremely complicated when it comes to convoys. Build LOTS of convoys. Don't try to be as efficient as you can by having the minimum required.

It's nice to have a Preliminary Production Planning phase. But if you give this to the players, one should also give the players the possibility to adjust production planning after the Use Oil phase, but before Search and Seizure gets executed.

On the board, the final production planning decisions are made after the use oil phase. Than Search and Seizure gets executed (no changes of traded resources and build points are allowed anymore for that turn) and the final amount of build points are calculated...

I've had this happen many times. I have found that the program changes the convoy routes to some configuration that ends up cutting CW resources. Usually when the CW trades resources or build points to China or France. Even if there are enough convoys, the program switches to a less efficient routing.

Lent oil can go to any possession of the receiving power so the CW especially, has a host of locations it can use. FREX the Persian oil can go to Cairo until Syria goes Vichy.

ORIGINAL: gw15
Don't try to be as efficient as you can by having the minimum required.

Reserve merchant fleet; yes.
But at sea I'd argue you need to have the minimum required (otherwise Axis can sink too much).

So sending out convoys for the CW is, and always has been, quite a precise job. If the CW player can't get it right reasonably early in the war, the allied cause could be lost right there and then.
Imagine if the CW loses 1 BP per turn because of inefficiency (for whatever reason). That costs the allies 35BP during the war, which is a very serious amount if lost on top of the damage the Axis do to it.

ORIGINAL: TeaLeaf

ORIGINAL: gw15
Don't try to be as efficient as you can by having the minimum required.

Reserve merchant fleet; yes.
But at sea I'd argue you need to have the minimum required (otherwise Axis can sink too much).

So sending out convoys for the CW is, and always has been, quite a precise job. If the CW player can't get it right reasonably early in the war, the allied cause could be lost right there and then.
Imagine if the CW loses 1 BP per turn because of inefficiency (for whatever reason). That costs the allies 35BP during the war, which is a very serious amount if lost on top of the damage the Axis do to it.

+1

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Lent oil can go to any possession of the receiving power so the CW especially, has a host of locations it can use. FREX the Persian oil can go to Cairo until Syria goes Vichy.

MWIF, right or wrong, will not allow saved trade oil to go to any possession.

But in the game Ronnie posted in this thread, he has the oil from Persia going to Suez, obviously successfully, since it's set up as a default and there's already two stored there??