City modifiers (2d10)

[Orm]

Why doesn't the ENG cancel out the negative city modifier? I expected the final combat odds to be +20 if the fractional odds failed.

Note that Netherlands is surprised.

[Centuur]

RAW:

Engineers provide +1 to the land combat die roll (see 11.16.5) when
attacking a 2 or 3 factory stack city. Defending engineers subtract 1
from the die roll when defending a 2 or 3 factory stack city. These
benefits are in addition to the other benefits and can be used
simultaneously (e.g. gaining both benefits when attacking across a
river into a 2 factory city).

There is only one factory in Amsterdam. No bug.

[ssiviour]

Agreed not a bug, but different calculation.

-1 for city, -1 for factory, +1 for ENG unit makes -1 modifier in Total

The quote from RAW is relevant to 1D10 Combat Table, not 2D10

[Orm]

Thank you, ssiviour. [&o] [:)]

For some reason I was blind to the fact that there was a factory in Amsterdam. [:(] [:D]

[Dabrion]

In the real WiF cities have no modifiers.. your ENG is just a future-looking dood! Don't blame him!

[WILHELM_slith]

2d10 combat results table. City Modifiers p174 Rules as Coded. Cant make chocolate of it.
Never +1 for HQ attacking a city. Never +1 per Engineer factor attacking a city.
I'm attacking a city(over river) in clear terrain and weather. Gives -0.5 instead of -1 ????
Does anybody understand or are these rules just now working?
Please no explanation about 1d10 combat table.

[paulderynck]

Mods - except for HQ support - are halved when attacking across a river. You must be attacking with an HQ so the plus 1 is halved. (If you were attacking with an engineer the river effect would be negated.) The +1 for an HQ versus a city is separate from HQ support.

[Courtenay]

The engineer effect is optional; you must turn it on individually for each combat. Right click on the engineer after combat has been declared, and then pick the appropriate menu item.

The reason you have to declare you are using engineer bonus is that if you do, engineer must be first casualty.

This also applies to using engineers to help attack across rivers.

[WILHELM_slith]

You are completely right. I figured it out. Tx

[WILHELM_slith]

p174 rules as coded. The bonus i'm talking about is not optional.

[paulderynck]

Also there's a note on page 174 that city mods can never sum to more than zero so FREX if an HQ and an engineer attack a city that has no factory you get a net zero, so no point in using the engineer unless to unhalve a river or there's an enemy engineer there.

No matter what is stated on page 174, the use of an engineer is always optional. It must be chosen, else it is assumed not used.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

The engineer effect is optional; you must turn it on individually for each combat. Right click on the engineer after combat has been declared, and then pick the appropriate menu item.

The reason you have to declare you are using engineer bonus is that if you do, engineer must be first casualty.

This also applies to using engineers to help attack across rivers.

Actually, I have written the code for engineer bonuses when attacking a city to be handled the same way as HQ bonuses for attacking a city.

That is,
1 - the engineer bonus of +1 to be applied against a city bonus of -1 is always applied, regardless of whether the engineer 'bonus' is explicitly asked for by the attacking player.

2 - The engineer has to take the first loss only if the engineer bonus is explicitly asked for by the attacking player.

My take on this is that the HQ gains the benefit without having to provide HQ support. Therefore the Engineer gains the benefit without having to provide engineer support.

If the engineer uses it benefits for attacking across a river, canal, or fort hex side, then it has to take the first loss,

Many players will disagree with my decision. I am sorry about that but the cost of building an engineer and the time required for them to arrive (5 turns) means that engineers would be rarely used for attacking a city. Why risk 3 build points and a delay of 10 months for an engineer replacement to add +1 DRM? My engineers would never be used in that manner. It would be as if the benefit for attacking cities didn't even exist.

[ssiviour]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

The engineer effect is optional; you must turn it on individually for each combat. Right click on the engineer after combat has been declared, and then pick the appropriate menu item.

The reason you have to declare you are using engineer bonus is that if you do, engineer must be first casualty.

This also applies to using engineers to help attack across rivers.

Actually, I have written the code for engineer bonuses when attacking a city to be handled the same way as HQ bonuses for attacking a city.

That is,
1 - the engineer bonus of +1 to be applied against a city bonus of -1 is always applied, regardless of whether the engineer 'bonus' is explicitly asked for by the attacking player.

2 - The engineer has to take the first loss only if the engineer bonus is explicitly asked for by the attacking player.

My take on this is that the HQ gains the benefit without having to provide HQ support. Therefore the Engineer gains the benefit without having to provide engineer support.

If the engineer uses it benefits for attacking across a river, canal, or fort hex side, then it has to take the first loss,

Many players will disagree with my decision. I am sorry about that but the cost of building an engineer and the time required for them to arrive (5 turns) means that engineers would be rarely used for attacking a city. Why risk 3 build points and a delay of 10 months for an engineer replacement to add +1 DRM? My engineers would never be used in that manner. It would be as if the benefit for attacking cities didn't even exist.

If the Engineer is not in danger of taking the mandatory loss then I can't see why this would be a problem. It has been my understanding of Engineers since reading the rules.