Rules Clarification List

World in Flames is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. World In Flames is a highly detailed game covering the both Europe and Pacific Theaters of Operations during World War II. If you want grand strategy this game is for you.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

Post Reply
pak19652002
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
Contact:

Rules Clarification List

Post by pak19652002 »

This topic has been raised on several threads here and also on the Yahoo! group. I am compiling a list of rule disputes and clarifications that will be submitted to ADG for final ruling. To do this, I have started with two existing lists totaling around 200 questions. I am editing and thinning those lists presently.

I ask you to submit to this thread disputed or ambiguous rules for consideration. This will help ensure that I don't miss any questions that arise coincidentally on other threads and will help you to avoid repeating questions that have already been submitted.

This thread is NOT for answering or debating any of these questions. My sole objective is to cast a wide net to identify high-priority questions that only ADG can answer. Many of these disputes have rattled around the Yahoo! group for years and this is an attempt to anwer them definitively. Please do not try to debate them here. If this urge becomes irresistable, take the issue to the Yahoo! group. They will be happy to debate it to death...and beyond.

Please follow the following guidelines:

1) Each question should relate to only one issue. Don't try to cram three or four questions into one sentence.

2) Try to format the questions so they can be answered yes or no. The second preference would be questions that can be answered with one or two words. If you just can't do it (e.g., English is not your first language), then pose the question as best you can and I'll reformat it.

3) Provide examples, if needed.

Feel free to submit any questions you like, but try to focus on major issues that have come up in your WiF games or discrepancies you've found in CWiF. Since this thread is not providing answers, don't post simple questions that you could have looked up in the rule book! Do that, or go over to the Yahoo! group and ask them.

For the veterans, I only ask you to resist the temptation to try to answer questions posted here. I know it's difficult, but this will only muddy the waters and make my job more difficult.

When the list is in decent shape, I will post it here and on the Yahoo! group for review. I'm hoping to have the first draft ready in two weeks.

Thanks,

Peter
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22136
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

Peter,

Thank you for taking on such a difficult task.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
User avatar
Greyshaft
Posts: 1979
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:59 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by Greyshaft »

Give that man a spot on the test team!
Oh... wait... he's already on the test team[:)]
/Greyshaft
pak19652002
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by pak19652002 »

Those who are about to die, salute you!

--Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part I.



ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Peter,

Thank you for taking on such a difficult task.
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by Froonp »

Do you really intend to send your 200 questions to Harry for a Yes / No answer ?

I think it would be good if the learned ones about the rules see if they agree abut the answers, and only ask Harry about the rules where there is no agreement.

Also, I think that there might be questions you have on your list, that already have an answer in the Compilation of Clarifications from Harry (1996-1998), or subsequent clarificatiosn(1998-1999), or the FAQ (2004).

Both these means of solvint the diputes, plus some hot debates on the WiF Discussion list (yahoo group ) might shorten the list to a few tens.

Even if you send your questions to Harry only 10 per 10, if you intend to send him 200 I think you should think again .

Also, I asked Harry why he wasn't taking a more active part in the MWiF project, and he answered me that he had other things cooking for the moment, but that he would take a more active part when he will be finished with these.
pak19652002
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by pak19652002 »

NO, NO, NO! I intend to send him far fewer than 200. The part of this that is going to take time is weeding the questions to a reasonable number and then formatting the remainder in as simple and straightforward way as possible. I can't say if they all can be answered yes/no, but it is a worthy goal. I've read Harry's answers to imprecise questions that spawned new debates!

Let's just get them all out in the open first.

I'm not sure I have the first two documents you mentioned. The third (FAQ), I do have.

Peter



ORIGINAL: Froonp

Do you really intend to send your 200 questions to Harry for a Yes / No answer ?

I think it would be good if the learned ones about the rules see if they agree abut the answers, and only ask Harry about the rules where there is no agreement.

Also, I think that there might be questions you have on your list, that already have an answer in the Compilation of Clarifications from Harry (1996-1998), or subsequent clarificatiosn(1998-1999), or the FAQ (2004).

Both these means of solvint the diputes, plus some hot debates on the WiF Discussion list (yahoo group ) might shorten the list to a few tens.

Even if you send your questions to Harry only 10 per 10, if you intend to send him 200 I think you should think again .

Also, I asked Harry why he wasn't taking a more active part in the MWiF project, and he answered me that he had other things cooking for the moment, but that he would take a more active part when he will be finished with these.
pak19652002
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by pak19652002 »

Patrice:

The dates I have on the files from the Yahoo! group are as follows:

1) FAQ by Jeff Wang, February 2004

2) WiF rules player aid: Date 06/2005; Author: Harold Martin-Vignerte; Updated for raw 07-aug-2004

To your knowledge, are those the latest versions of the documents? Are the other two lists you mentioned something different? If so, please send them.

So far, I've created a master spreadsheet and dumped all these in. I'll be paring and editing soon; after I feel like I've got most of the questions in hand.

Peter
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by Froonp »

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

Patrice:

The dates I have on the files from the Yahoo! group are as follows:

1) FAQ by Jeff Wang, February 2004
I have the same.
2) WiF rules player aid: Date 06/2005; Author: Harold Martin-Vignerte; Updated for raw 07-aug-2004
I have the same. However this one is not directly from Harry. It may not be worthless however, but it is not as valuable as his word.
To your knowledge, are those the latest versions of the documents? Are the other two lists you mentioned something different? If so, please send them.
I've got this :
- 1 PDF file (by Larry Whalen) that is a compilation of 153 clarifications document direct from Harry, from july 96 to october 98.
- 49 word files who are clarifications direct from Harry, from october 98 to march 99.
All those files should have been taken into account when the people making the FAQ did it, but I prefer keeping them for real reference to the original word of Harry.
The compilation plus 49 word files all zipped are about 1 MB. I can send them to you.
The dates may seem quite ancient, but the information is still valuable. For example, the bit about the 79th ARM DIV can be found in the PDF compilation file, in one of the previous 153 files, and also on your 2004 FAQ.
So far, I've created a master spreadsheet and dumped all these in. I'll be paring and editing soon; after I feel like I've got most of the questions in hand.

Peter
Great. I hope we'll se it soon [:D]
pak19652002
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by pak19652002 »

Yes, please send. I am still wrestling with the best way to manage all this. I'm reading the questions and thinking about it. This new information will help. I don't want to spend a lot of time rewriting questions that have already been answered or that are obvious. I also want to prioritize the questions so that the most important ones get addressed first. I'm not qualified to do any of this, however, so I am probably going to get the document out, as ugly as it may be, early so you can look at it.

Peter
trees trees
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:17 pm
Location: Manistee, MI
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by trees trees »

ORIGINAL: Froonp
he answered me that he had other things cooking for the moment

COOL, a new Harry game? Yay!
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by Froonp »

ORIGINAL: trees trees
ORIGINAL: Froonp
he answered me that he had other things cooking for the moment

COOL, a new Harry game? Yay!
I don't know.
I know there are reprints of countersheets, a new annual, and khaki in flames, I am not sure at all about the latest, but this was rumored to be a reprinting of all the CW counters in khaki instead of deep blue. It was a demand from the WiF FE Discussion list that Harry seems to have followed.
christo
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: adelaide, australia

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by christo »

ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: trees trees
ORIGINAL: Froonp
he answered me that he had other things cooking for the moment

COOL, a new Harry game? Yay!
I don't know.
I know there are reprints of countersheets, a new annual, and khaki in flames, I am not sure at all about the latest, but this was rumored to be a reprinting of all the CW counters in khaki instead of deep blue. It was a demand from the WiF FE Discussion list that Harry seems to have followed.

If that is the case, should MWIF be khaki as well ? (ducks and runs for cover...)
User avatar
Neilster
Posts: 2880
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: Devonport, Tasmania, Australia

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by Neilster »

ORIGINAL: christo
If that is the case, should MWIF be khaki as well ? (ducks and runs for cover...)
It might be a good option. I'd play with it, despite the potential of a clash with some terrain, for the authentic feel of spiffing, khaki-clad chaps, often with stiff upper lips, hitting Jerry for six. Well....the Italians anyway. "Wizard show, old bean!"[:'(]

That reminds me of an actual wartime headline. "British push bottles up Rommel's rear". [X(] Sounds nasty.

Cheers, Neilster
Cheers, Neilster
pak19652002
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by pak19652002 »

I hope the counters are left just the way they are. Blue is one color I can see really well and another set of tan/khaki/green/yellow counters would push me over the edge! Why mess with the color anyway?
christo
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: adelaide, australia

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by christo »

ORIGINAL: pak19652002

I hope the counters are left just the way they are. Blue is one color I can see really well and another set of tan/khaki/green/yellow counters would push me over the edge! Why mess with the color anyway?

The problem does not seem to be so marked with the computer but with the board game it is somewhat difficult to differentiate the dark blue from the black numerals/ writing on the units
User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by mlees »

Think of it this way: Your sets with the blue CW units will become collector's item's! Woot! Ebay, here I come. My retirement is assured!
User avatar
Zorachus99
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Palo Alto, CA

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by Zorachus99 »

ORIGINAL: mlees

Think of it this way: Your sets with the blue CW units will become collector's item's! Woot! Ebay, here I come. My retirement is assured!

You have noticed that those counters degrade faster than any others in the game? I usually end up buying new countersheets because of the CW counters degrade.

Of course I use putty on my counters to keep them from moving between gaming sessions.
Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln
User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by mlees »

You have noticed that those counters degrade faster than any others in the game?

Of course, you only have that problem if you actually have the space to set up the game.

All I have space for nowadays is to open the box and sniff the rulebook to bring back old memory's.
User avatar
c92nichj
Posts: 345
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:15 pm
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by c92nichj »

ANother rule question.

What nationality is a notional unit that occupies a territory such as New caledonia?

In our current game New caledonia became part of Vichy france so that makes me believe that the notional is vichy french and hence is out of supply unless the axis can trace a supply path back to metropolitan vichy france.

Or is it new caledonian and always in supply in it's home territory?
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: Rules Clarification List

Post by Froonp »

ORIGINAL: c92nichj
ANother rule question.

What nationality is a notional unit that occupies a territory such as New caledonia?

In our current game New caledonia became part of Vichy france so that makes me believe that the notional is vichy french and hence is out of supply unless the axis can trace a supply path back to metropolitan vichy france.

Or is it new caledonian and always in supply in it's home territory?
A notional unit that occupies an hex in New Caledonia is of New Caledonian nationality, so it draws it supply from any New Caledonian supply source. There are none, because there are no "friendly city in the unit’s unconquered home country".

As New Caledonia is a Minor country aligned to Vichy France, a New Caledonian notional could draw supply on "any friendly city in an unconquered home country of a major power the unit co-operates with". Minor country units only cooperate with their controller Major Power, so a New Caledonian notional can draw supply from a Vichy city in the Vichy Home Country.

So I think that you played it right.
Post Reply

Return to “World in Flames”