optional rules

[Neilster]

The first three optional rules fall into a category which I mentally refer to as "why would anyone object to this?" There are a substantial number of rules that seem to add realism while adding only low or medium amounts of additional complexity. Should they be flagged in some way, maybe in the intro to options?

As the computer will be doing all the work, adding optional rules will now be quite painless. Most of those I've read seem to add a fair bit of realism so I'll be pouring them on. This is an example of where the computer version will really shine.

Does anyone have an opinion on this? Patrice?

Cheers, Neilster

[wfzimmerman]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

He
=============================================================
[71][Cruisers In Flames][RAW 75 s. 22.4.6]
This optional rule adds a lot more cruiser *counters* to the game, all of which represent light cruisers and their associated escort ships. The major effect of adding the light cruiser counters is that they and their provide ASW defense against submarines. Without them, carriers and battleships are assumed to have intrinsic light cruisers attached to them which provide ASW support. With this optional rule in use, the light cruisers are explicitly added to the counter mixed and the ASW defense of carriers and battleships by themselves is zero. When playing with the Light Cruisers option, every CL and C*L*AA of WWII is depicted in the counter mix.

[there were no CAAs in the US nomenclature scheme -- only CLAAs. All CW CAAs were CLAAs.]

For game play purposes, the additional cruisers are treated the same as previous light cruisers. However, now each carrier and battleship has an ASW factor of 0 and, if playing with oil cruisers and light cruisers only count as a quarter of a unit during final reorganization.

Another change is that rough weather slows down the smaller ships. This is implemented during the naval movement step only, and each light cruiser, destroyer flotilla, naval transport, and convoy that moves into 1 or more sea areas in blizzard or storm has its movement allowance and range reduced by 1 for that step (note that this may prevent the unit from entering its final sea area).

[now there should be a typhoon rule.]

[Froonp]

[50][Twin Engined Fighters][RAW 53 s. 14.3.2]
This optional rule reduces the air-to-air combat effectiveness of twin engine fighters when in air-to-air combat with single engine fighters.

In air-to-air combat during the day, all front fighters with an orange air-to-air rating achieve one result less than normal when the front enemy fighter in the combat does not have an orange air-to-air rating. In these cases an AX result becomes a DX, a DX becomes an AA, an AA becomes a DA and so on. A DC result is unaffected and remains a DC result.

You may make it more clear than RAW here : The results of the Air to Air combats are, from the more devastating to the least :
AX, DX, AA, DA, -, AC, DC
So, a DA becomes a -, and a - becomes an AC.
An AC becomes a DC, which means more bouncing !!!!

[lomyrin]

I have not seen any restrictions in the number of partisans in a country in the rules, you limit them to 3.

The likelyhood of a partisan in a country that was neutral in any part of the current year is halved.

There is also the 22.4.16 Partisan HQ's as an availablt option - will you include that one separately ?

Lars

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

He
=============================================================
[71][Cruisers In Flames][RAW 75 s. 22.4.6]
This optional rule adds a lot more cruiser *counters* to the game, all of which represent light cruisers and their associated escort ships. The major effect of adding the light cruiser counters is that they and their provide ASW defense against submarines. Without them, carriers and battleships are assumed to have intrinsic light cruisers attached to them which provide ASW support. With this optional rule in use, the light cruisers are explicitly added to the counter mixed and the ASW defense of carriers and battleships by themselves is zero. When playing with the Light Cruisers option, every CL and C*L*AA of WWII is depicted in the counter mix.

[there were no CAAs in the US nomenclature scheme -- only CLAAs. All CW CAAs were CLAAs.]

For game play purposes, the additional cruisers are treated the same as previous light cruisers. However, now each carrier and battleship has an ASW factor of 0 and, if playing with oil cruisers and light cruisers only count as a quarter of a unit during final reorganization.

Another change is that rough weather slows down the smaller ships. This is implemented during the naval movement step only, and each light cruiser, destroyer flotilla, naval transport, and convoy that moves into 1 or more sea areas in blizzard or storm has its movement allowance and range reduced by 1 for that step (note that this may prevent the unit from entering its final sea area).

[now there should be a typhoon rule.]

OK

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

[50][Twin Engined Fighters][RAW 53 s. 14.3.2]
This optional rule reduces the air-to-air combat effectiveness of twin engine fighters when in air-to-air combat with single engine fighters.

In air-to-air combat during the day, all front fighters with an orange air-to-air rating achieve one result less than normal when the front enemy fighter in the combat does not have an orange air-to-air rating. In these cases an AX result becomes a DX, a DX becomes an AA, an AA becomes a DA and so on. A DC result is unaffected and remains a DC result.

You may make it more clear than RAW here : The results of the Air to Air combats are, from the more devastating to the least :
AX, DX, AA, DA, -, AC, DC
So, a DA becomes a -, and a - becomes an AC.
An AC becomes a DC, which means more bouncing !!!!

OK.

[Froonp]

Partisans are drawn randomly from the partisan force pool. There is a maximum of 3 partisan units per country, and since they are corps sized units, the maximum number of partisan units in a hex is 2. The composition of the partisan force pool changes year to year which changes the probability of drawing weak, weaker, or very weak partisan units. The strength of the units you have drawn previously has no effect on the probability of what you will draw next. In particular, there is a limitless pool of partisans to draw from - subject to the 3 unit maximum per country. [This section of the partisan rule is quite different from WIF FE because there is no longer any restriction due to the counter mix.]

This 3 units limitation is not RAW.
Moreover, there are often situations (China, Russia, France) where there are more than 3 Partisans at the same time in the country, this limitation will screw them, especially Russia & China, where the Anti-Partisan duty is very demanding to the invader. Limiting it to 3 units nearly remove the threat.
If this limit was imposed in the game because of the unlimited Partisan Force Pool, I'd rather play with the limited force pool and the unilimited number of partisans per country.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

The first three optional rules fall into a category which I mentally refer to as "why would anyone object to this?" There are a substantial number of rules that seem to add realism while adding only low or medium amounts of additional complexity. Should they be flagged in some way, maybe in the intro to options?

As the computer will be doing all the work, adding optional rules will now be quite painless. Most of those I've read seem to add a fair bit of realism so I'll be pouring them on. This is an example of where the computer version will really shine.
Does anyone have an opinion on this? Patrice?
Cheers, Neilster

These optional rules are no brainer for me in normal games too. All the paperwork being done by the CPU, they could even be automatically selected.

[Froonp]

[71][Cruisers In Flames][RAW 75 s. 22.4.6]
(...)
Another change is that rough weather slows down the smaller ships. This is implemented during the naval movement step only, and each light cruiser, destroyer flotilla, naval transport, and convoy that moves into 1 or more sea areas in blizzard or storm has its movement allowance and range reduced by 1 for that step (note that this may prevent the unit from entering its final sea area).

This latest part should be made separate from the CLiF Option.
As for the BP to spend to create an oil barrel in the other option, I don't see what this rule does in a games like WiF FE.
Moreover, all ships being accompanied by 4-6 DD, all ships would suffer the penalty. Well, this is a bad and useless rule for me, and it is a shame if it is mandatory when you use CLs.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Partisans are drawn randomly from the partisan force pool. There is a maximum of 3 partisan units per country, and since they are corps sized units, the maximum number of partisan units in a hex is 2. The composition of the partisan force pool changes year to year which changes the probability of drawing weak, weaker, or very weak partisan units. The strength of the units you have drawn previously has no effect on the probability of what you will draw next. In particular, there is a limitless pool of partisans to draw from - subject to the 3 unit maximum per country. [This section of the partisan rule is quite different from WIF FE because there is no longer any restriction due to the counter mix.]

This 3 units limitation is not RAW.
Moreover, there are often situations (China, Russia, France) where there are more than 3 Partisans at the same time in the country, this limitation will screw them, especially Russia & China, where the Anti-Partisan duty is very demanding to the invader. Limiting it to 3 units nearly remove the threat.
If this limit was imposed in the game because of the unlimited Partisan Force Pool, I'd rather play with the limited force pool and the unilimited number of partisans per country.

I am merely documenting what CWIF did here. I do not like the WIF FE version though. Taking units off the map and magically placing them elsewhere always affronts my sensitivities. Especially since you could take them from one country and place them in another - yuck!

Making the maximum number variable by country would be easy to do. I am thinking of increasing the maximum for Russia and China while making it fewer for some of the smaller countries. A maximum does strike me as a good idea - a dozen partisan corps swarming all about in a country because there wasn't any garrison force and the die rolls worked out that way ... another yuck!

Perhaps the maximum for a minor country could be roughly related to how many regular infantry corps it has. For example, 1 for Iran and Iraq, 3 for Greece and Poland, 6 for major powers. ???

[wfzimmerman]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

[71][Cruisers In Flames][RAW 75 s. 22.4.6]
(...)
Another change is that rough weather slows down the smaller ships. This is implemented during the naval movement step only, and each light cruiser, destroyer flotilla, naval transport, and convoy that moves into 1 or more sea areas in blizzard or storm has its movement allowance and range reduced by 1 for that step (note that this may prevent the unit from entering its final sea area).

This latest part should be made separate from the CLiF Option.
As for the BP to spend to create an oil barrel in the other option, I don't see what this rule does in a games like WiF FE.
Moreover, all ships being accompanied by 4-6 DD, all ships would suffer the penalty. Well, this is a bad and useless rule for me, and it is a shame if it is mandatory when you use CLs.

1) Isn't the idea that the BBs & CVs are no longer accompanied by DDs? Now all the escort functions are moved into the CLs.

2) If the storm effects is RAW, then how can we throw it out?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

[71][Cruisers In Flames][RAW 75 s. 22.4.6]
(...)
Another change is that rough weather slows down the smaller ships. This is implemented during the naval movement step only, and each light cruiser, destroyer flotilla, naval transport, and convoy that moves into 1 or more sea areas in blizzard or storm has its movement allowance and range reduced by 1 for that step (note that this may prevent the unit from entering its final sea area).

This latest part should be made separate from the CLiF Option.
Moreover, all ships being accompanied by 4-6 DD, all ships would suffer the penalty. Well, this is a bad and useless rule for me, and it is a shame if it is mandatory when you use CLs.

I think you are misunderstanding this. A task force (group of ships moving together) is only as fast as its slowest ship. The rough weather paragraph has no effect on BBs or CVs directly. It only slows down any accomplanying CLs et al. If a BB with a movement/range of 4/4 is accompanied by a CL with a movement/range of 6/5, then even in bad weather it is the BB that limits what the task force can do (the CL is effectively a 5/4 in bad weather).

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

ORIGINAL: Froonp

[71][Cruisers In Flames][RAW 75 s. 22.4.6]
(...)
Another change is that rough weather slows down the smaller ships. This is implemented during the naval movement step only, and each light cruiser, destroyer flotilla, naval transport, and convoy that moves into 1 or more sea areas in blizzard or storm has its movement allowance and range reduced by 1 for that step (note that this may prevent the unit from entering its final sea area).

This latest part should be made separate from the CLiF Option.
As for the BP to spend to create an oil barrel in the other option, I don't see what this rule does in a games like WiF FE.
Moreover, all ships being accompanied by 4-6 DD, all ships would suffer the penalty. Well, this is a bad and useless rule for me, and it is a shame if it is mandatory when you use CLs.

1) Isn't the idea that the BBs & CVs are no longer accompanied by DDs? Now all the escort functions are moved into the CLs.

Without CLiF, Capital ships are supposed to be accompanied by 1 CL and some DD.
With CLiF, Capital ships are supposed to be accompanied by 4-6 DD.
The DD are supposed to be part of the Capital Ship's Counter.

2) If the storm effects is RAW, then how can we throw it out?

In RAW, you can choose options entirely or part of them.
For some of them, it make sence, because the 2 parts are not very much related.
Why will TRS be slower in Storms if you play with CL, and faster if you play without, is beyond me.

[wfzimmerman]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

ORIGINAL: Froonp

This latest part should be made separate from the CLiF Option.
As for the BP to spend to create an oil barrel in the other option, I don't see what this rule does in a games like WiF FE.
Moreover, all ships being accompanied by 4-6 DD, all ships would suffer the penalty. Well, this is a bad and useless rule for me, and it is a shame if it is mandatory when you use CLs.

1) Isn't the idea that the BBs & CVs are no longer accompanied by DDs? Now all the escort functions are moved into the CLs.

Without CLiF, Capital ships are supposed to be accompanied by 1 CL and some DD.
Without CLiF, Capital ships are supposed to be accompanied by 4-6 DD.
The DD are supposed to be part of the Capital Ship's Counter.

2) If the storm effects is RAW, then how can we throw it out?

In RAW, you can choose options entirely or part of them.
For some of them, it make sence, because the 2 parts are not very much related.
Why will TRS be slower in Storms if you play with CL, and faster if you play without, is beyond me.

OK. But then why do the BBs & CVs only use .25 of an oil with CLIF? One CL can't use very much oil...

Suspect I am doing good job of simulating confused newbie here...

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Froonp

[71][Cruisers In Flames][RAW 75 s. 22.4.6]
(...)
Another change is that rough weather slows down the smaller ships. This is implemented during the naval movement step only, and each light cruiser, destroyer flotilla, naval transport, and convoy that moves into 1 or more sea areas in blizzard or storm has its movement allowance and range reduced by 1 for that step (note that this may prevent the unit from entering its final sea area).

This latest part should be made separate from the CLiF Option.
Moreover, all ships being accompanied by 4-6 DD, all ships would suffer the penalty. Well, this is a bad and useless rule for me, and it is a shame if it is mandatory when you use CLs.

I think you are misunderstanding this. A task force (group of ships moving together) is only as fast as its slowest ship. The rough weather paragraph has no effect on BBs or CVs directly. It only slows down any accomplanying CLs et al. If a BB with a movement/range of 4/4 is accompanied by a CL with a movement/range of 6/5, then even in bad weather it is the BB that limits what the task force can do (the CL is effectively a 5/4 in bad weather).

I'm don't think that I am misunderstanding.
The US and the Japanese have Task Forces with a 6/6, 6/5 and 6/4 movement/range, so this rule changes it all in the Pacific.
If it was a realistic rule, I'd say OK for it, but it is quite a silly one. Why would TRS be slower in storms if CLs are in play ?
From a realistic point of view, the ships that suffered the most from Storms were the DDs. As there are DD everywhere, I don't feel that this rule is realistic at all.

[wfzimmerman]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Froonp

This latest part should be made separate from the CLiF Option.
Moreover, all ships being accompanied by 4-6 DD, all ships would suffer the penalty. Well, this is a bad and useless rule for me, and it is a shame if it is mandatory when you use CLs.

I think you are misunderstanding this. A task force (group of ships moving together) is only as fast as its slowest ship. The rough weather paragraph has no effect on BBs or CVs directly. It only slows down any accomplanying CLs et al. If a BB with a movement/range of 4/4 is accompanied by a CL with a movement/range of 6/5, then even in bad weather it is the BB that limits what the task force can do (the CL is effectively a 5/4 in bad weather).

I'm don't think that I am misunderstanding.
The US and the Japanese have Task Forces with a 6/6, 6/5 and 6/4 movement/range, so this rule changes it all in the Pacific.
If it was a realistic rule, I'd say OK for it, but it is quite a silly one. Why would TRS be slower in storms if CLs are in play ?
From a realistic point of view, the ships that suffered the most from Storms were the DDs. As there are DD everywhere, I don't feel that this rule is realistic at all.

This is an aside, but some of the old CLs were quite fragile and vulnerable in storms.

[Froonp]

OK. But then why do the BBs & CVs only use .25 of an oil with CLIF? One CL can't use very much oil...
Suspect I am doing good job of simulating confused newbie here...

Humm... indeed [:D]

BB & CV use 0,1 of an oil, everytime, except if playing without SiF, but MWiF has SiF as mandatory.
CA use 0,1 of an oil if playing without CLiF, and CA and CL use 0,05 of an oil if playing with CLiF.

[wfzimmerman]

The CLs in flame does seem confusing & not as well tested as most.  Maybe it deserves to be slightly deprecated in the introduction to the optional rule.

[Froonp]

Just wanted to make this clear :
I'm not advocating that the Rough Seas option should disappear, I'm advocating that it should be separate (but dependant) on the CLiF option.

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

OK. But then why do the BBs & CVs only use .25 of an oil with CLIF? One CL can't use very much oil...
Suspect I am doing good job of simulating confused newbie here...

Humm... indeed [:D]

BB & CV use 0,1 of an oil, everytime, except if playing without SiF, but MWiF has SiF as mandatory.
CA use 0,1 of an oil if playing without CLiF, and CA and CL use 0,05 of an oil if playing with CLiF.

Normally I think Europe has things better worked out than elsewhere but that "comma instead of the point to denote the decimal place" thing has got me completely jiggered.

I can't see how it's superior when the comma is used in mathematics to separate elements of a set.

So for me, the elements of the set {7,3,2.4,8,9.7} are obvious but how do you write that using the continental method? {7,3,2,4,8,9,7} ?

I look forward to some serious replies. [:'(]

Cheers, Joey