Rules Clarification List
Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets
-
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
- Contact:
Rules Clarification List
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
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
-
- Posts: 22136
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
- Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
- Contact:
RE: Rules Clarification List
Peter,
Thank you for taking on such a difficult task.
Thank you for taking on such a difficult task.
Steve
Perfection is an elusive goal.
Perfection is an elusive goal.
RE: Rules Clarification List
Give that man a spot on the test team!
Oh... wait... he's already on the test team[:)]
Oh... wait... he's already on the test team[:)]
/Greyshaft
-
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
- Contact:
RE: Rules Clarification List
Those who are about to die, salute you!
--Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part I.
--Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part I.
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Peter,
Thank you for taking on such a difficult task.
RE: Rules Clarification List
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.
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.
-
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
- Contact:
RE: Rules Clarification List
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
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.
-
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
- Contact:
RE: Rules Clarification List
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
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
RE: Rules Clarification List
I have the same.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. However this one is not directly from Harry. It may not be worthless however, but it is not as valuable as his word.2) WiF rules player aid: Date 06/2005; Author: Harold Martin-Vignerte; Updated for raw 07-aug-2004
I've got this :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.
- 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.
Great. I hope we'll se it soon [:D]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
-
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
- Contact:
RE: Rules Clarification List
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
Peter
-
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:17 pm
- Location: Manistee, MI
- Contact:
RE: Rules Clarification List
ORIGINAL: Froonp
he answered me that he had other things cooking for the moment
COOL, a new Harry game? Yay!
RE: Rules Clarification List
I don't know.ORIGINAL: trees treesORIGINAL: Froonp
he answered me that he had other things cooking for the moment
COOL, a new Harry game? Yay!
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.
RE: Rules Clarification List
ORIGINAL: Froonp
I don't know.ORIGINAL: trees treesORIGINAL: Froonp
he answered me that he had other things cooking for the moment
COOL, a new Harry game? Yay!
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...)
RE: Rules Clarification List
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!"[:'(]ORIGINAL: christo
If that is the case, should MWIF be khaki as well ? (ducks and runs for cover...)
That reminds me of an actual wartime headline. "British push bottles up Rommel's rear". [X(] Sounds nasty.
Cheers, Neilster
Cheers, Neilster
-
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:40 am
- Contact:
RE: Rules Clarification List
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?
RE: Rules Clarification List
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
RE: Rules Clarification List
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!
- Zorachus99
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Palo Alto, CA
RE: Rules Clarification List
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
RE: Rules Clarification List
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.
RE: Rules Clarification List
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?
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?
RE: Rules Clarification List
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".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?
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.