Rules Clarification List

[Mziln]

Or
 
11.12 Air transport (2 sentences above The transport)
 
Each air transport mission you attempt counts as 1 land move as well as 1 aircraft mission.

[c92nichj]

ORIGINAL: Froonp
11.12 does not say it, but the 10.2 rule says that :
**********************************
Moving a land unit during the land movement (see 11.11), air transport (see 11.12), debarkation (see 11.13), invasion (see 11.14) or paradrop (see 11.15) step counts as a land move.
**********************************

11.11 add that "Only face-up land units can make a land move".
Thus face-down land units cannot be picked by an ATR to be transported somewhere else.

Ok thanks for the help, I thought the counts as a land move was only for action limits.

[mmn]

In a game I'm currently participitating a situation arose which our group felt needed to be clarified.
Here is the question and Mr. Rinscheidts answer:

Regards,
Morten

----clarification----
> The situation is the following:
> CW has invaded and incompletely conquered Portugal (Portugal was
> aligned to Italy). Later Germany has taken control of Lisbon.
>
> Germany does not want to liberate Portugal. Instead they wish to cede
> control of the hexes to Portugal so that Lisbon will become a
secondary
> supply source for Italy (since Portugal is aligned to Italy).
>
> The questions are:
> - Is this legal according to RaW?

--->>> Yes.

> - Is this the correct outcome (meaning: Lisbon does become a
secondary
> supply source for Italy) following the described events?

--->>> Yes.

> - Can Italy afterwards liberate Portugal or will Portugal remain
"red"
> for partisan purposes?

--->>> Italy: no, PART: yes.
---/clarification----

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: mmn

In a game I'm currently participitating a situation arose which our group felt needed to be clarified.
Here is the question and Mr. Rinscheidts answer:

Regards,
Morten

----clarification----
> The situation is the following:
> CW has invaded and incompletely conquered Portugal (Portugal was
> aligned to Italy). Later Germany has taken control of Lisbon.
>
> Germany does not want to liberate Portugal. Instead they wish to cede
> control of the hexes to Portugal so that Lisbon will become a
secondary
> supply source for Italy (since Portugal is aligned to Italy).
>
> The questions are:
> - Is this legal according to RaW?

--->>> Yes.

I was surprised by this answer, and looked at the rules.

Quote :
*****************************************************
13.7.5 Liberation
(...)
You can choose not to liberate a country that could be liberated. If you do that, the country suffers the effects of partisans as if it were marked in red on the Partisan table, until it is liberated (see 13.1, Option 46).

(...)
Reversion
You can return a hex or minor country you control to the major power that controlled it in 1939 during any liberation step. You may revert Chinese hexes to either the Communists or Nationalists. You can also return control of a minor country hex to that minor country. You can only return hexes or minor countries to a major power or minor country that is on your side and is not currently completely conquered.
*****************************************************

So it seems to be right, to refuse to liberate, and to revert Portugal to Italy, as Italy was the Major Power controlling Portugal when the CW attacked it.

> - Is this the correct outcome (meaning: Lisbon does become a
secondary
> supply source for Italy) following the described events?

--->>> Yes.

> - Can Italy afterwards liberate Portugal or will Portugal remain
"red"
> for partisan purposes?

--->>> Italy: no, PART: yes.

Here I wonder why Italy could not choose to liberate Portugal.

*****************************************************
13.7.5 Liberation
(...)
(...) the major power controlling its capital can liberate it during the peace step if that major power is from the other side to the major power that conquered it
*****************************************************
So, Morten, could you ask Ruediger, given what I quoted from 13.7.5, why Italy could not liberate Portugal in a future Liberation step ?

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: mmn
> Germany does not want to liberate Portugal. Instead they wish to cede
> control of the hexes to Portugal so that Lisbon will become a secondary
> supply source for Italy (since Portugal is aligned to Italy).

Also I wondered about this.
Is Lisbon, in the case Germany liberates it, a secondary supply source to Italian unit, or not.
The answer is, it is not.

Quote :
*********************************************
2.4.2 Tracing supply
A secondary supply source for a unit is:
ï an HQ the unit co-operates with (see 18.1); or
ï the capital city of a minor country controlled by the unit’s major power; or
ï the capital city of a major power, or a minor country, conquered by the unit’s major power, or by a major power the unit co-operates with.
*********************************************
A Capital of a Minor Country Aligned to Germany (Portugal becomes aligned to Germany if Germany liberates it) is not a supply source for Italian units.

This issue was clear to me in the case of other countries, for example Rumania / Italy, but I had to think for this one.

I think that the MWiF game should provide this information to the player, when it prompt him to take such an important decision. Example :
Germany, Do you want to Liberate Portugal ?
- If you do, it will be aligned to you, and you will incorporate its force pool into yours, and its capital will be a secondary supply source for Germany.
- If you don't, it will become a red partisan country, and you will still be able to revert it to its original controlling Major Power.

Well, my 2 cents...

[Chaylaton]

A question I have on the Ukraine option for Germany. If I were dumb enought to use an O chit on forming the state of Ukraine: 1) I would do this so there would be a chunk of land I wouldn't have to garrison on my advance forward and 2) I could add advanced units to my force pool and 3) maybe give some partison difficulty to the Russians. So that leads me to my question Ukraine does not appear on the Partison chart but if Ukraine is formed does it take the place of one of the; I think, not looking at it, four appearances of Russia on the chart?

Chaylaton

[Frederyck]

From RAW7m

19.12 The Ukraine (Option 62)

Instead, whenever a roll for partisans in the Soviet Union is called for, you also make a separate roll for partisans in The Ukraine. The partisan number in the Ukraine is 10 and only affects enemy major powers (i.e. equivalent to the green partisans on the Partisan table).

My emphasis added! [:)]

[mmn]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: mmn

In a game I'm currently participitating a situation arose which our group felt needed to be clarified.
Here is the question and Mr. Rinscheidts answer:

Regards,
Morten

----clarification----
> The situation is the following:
> CW has invaded and incompletely conquered Portugal (Portugal was
> aligned to Italy). Later Germany has taken control of Lisbon.
>
> Germany does not want to liberate Portugal. Instead they wish to cede
> control of the hexes to Portugal so that Lisbon will become a
secondary
> supply source for Italy (since Portugal is aligned to Italy).
>
> The questions are:
> - Is this legal according to RaW?

--->>> Yes.

I was surprised by this answer, and looked at the rules.

Quote :
*****************************************************
13.7.5 Liberation
(...)
You can choose not to liberate a country that could be liberated. If you do that, the country suffers the effects of partisans as if it were marked in red on the Partisan table, until it is liberated (see 13.1, Option 46).

(...)
Reversion
You can return a hex or minor country you control to the major power that controlled it in 1939 during any liberation step. You may revert Chinese hexes to either the Communists or Nationalists. You can also return control of a minor country hex to that minor country. You can only return hexes or minor countries to a major power or minor country that is on your side and is not currently completely conquered.
*****************************************************

So it seems to be right, to refuse to liberate, and to revert Portugal to Italy, as Italy was the Major Power controlling Portugal when the CW attacked it.

In my group we had a lengthy discussion about wether Portugal should be reverted as a minor (which would be prohibited because Portugal has no 1939-controlling MP) or if it should be reverted as minor country hexes. This prompted the question to Ruediger.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

> - Is this the correct outcome (meaning: Lisbon does become a
secondary
> supply source for Italy) following the described events?

--->>> Yes.

> - Can Italy afterwards liberate Portugal or will Portugal remain
"red"
> for partisan purposes?

--->>> Italy: no, PART: yes.

Here I wonder why Italy could not choose to liberate Portugal.

This part actually made sense to me. Germany reverts the hexes to Portugal (controlled by Italy) and even though Italy controls Portugal it is Portugal that controls the hexes. An Italian liberation would thus require Italy to return hexes to Portugal which Portugal already owns.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

*****************************************************
13.7.5 Liberation
(...)
(...) the major power controlling its capital can liberate it during the peace step if that major power is from the other side to the major power that conquered it
*****************************************************
So, Morten, could you ask Ruediger, given what I quoted from 13.7.5, why Italy could not liberate Portugal in a future Liberation step ?

I'll do that.

By the way - On which partisan table does Portugal show up?

[Froonp]

By the way - On which partisan table does Portugal show up?

It doesn't appear on the WiF FE Partisan table.
It only appear on the PatiF Partisan Table.
A shame [:D] !

[paulderynck]

Here is one I posted on the WiF list and it is currently running 3 to 2 as a "Yes".

Situation: Turkey is aligned with Germany. In Turkey, CW units are attacking a German mountain corps which has a flipped Italian ATR in its hex. May Turkish planes provide Ground Support?

There are 2 points in RAW section 18 which seem to apply.
Non-cooperating units cannot:
1. stack in the same hex, at any time that stacking limits apply
2. be committed to any combat or mission that the other unit is, or will be, involved in this step.

However, there are no stacking limits for either ground supporting air units and their escorts nor for these same units in combination with the units they are supporting.

So it comes down to the meaning of "involved". The Italian ATR is not involved in defending the hex but it could be destroyed if the CW units advance after combat.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Here is one I posted on the WiF list and it is currently running 3 to 2 as a "Yes".

Situation: Turkey is aligned with Germany. In Turkey, CW units are attacking a German mountain corps which has a flipped Italian ATR in its hex. May Turkish planes provide Ground Support?

There are 2 points in RAW section 18 which seem to apply.
Non-cooperating units cannot:
1. stack in the same hex, at any time that stacking limits apply
2. be committed to any combat or mission that the other unit is, or will be, involved in this step.

However, there are no stacking limits for either ground supporting air units and their escorts nor for these same units in combination with the units they are supporting.

So it comes down to the meaning of "involved". The Italian ATR is not involved in defending the hex but it could be destroyed if the CW units advance after combat.

I've added this one to the list of questions.
My answer is :

No they can't, as an Italian ATR is involved in the combat.
Advancing after combat is part of "11.16.5 Resolving attacks", which is part of "11.16 Land combat", so the Italian ATR is involved in the land combat.

[Incy]

I'd say yes to this, I don't think the plane is involved in the combat. (but I agree the issue is open to interpretation)

[composer99]

I already said on the WiF discussion list that I thought the Turks could fly ground support. I say this because even though the Italian ATR has a stake in the combat (it stands to get destroyed if the CW takes the hex) it is not involved in the combat in the sense that it is not contributing in any way to the outcome of the combat. Italian ground troops would be another matter, of course.
 
This issue makes me think that RAW needs to be adjusted in this regard when it comes to mixed forces. I think that RAW's exclusive-OR approach ought to be changed to an inclusive-OR approach.
 
For example, if France doesn't fall or the Americans liberate it, then the French do not cooperate with the CW. So, a hex with US and French land units together could not, under RAW, receive CW ground support (or even have CW fighters intercept/CAP during any tactical air phase).
 
This makes no sense to me whatsoever; I think that it is the presence of cooperating units that should define whether or not aircraft can fly missions to hexes. In the above example, the presence or absence of American units ought to define when and where CW forces can fly missions, rather than the presence of French ones (in mixed groups, anyway - I have no problem with the CW being unable to fly to support the French when on their own, even if by 1944 it's kind of silly).
 
It may be there for game balance reasons, but it strikes me as rather ahistorical and also goes against the team-play grain of the game.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: composer99
I already said on the WiF discussion list that I thought the Turks could fly ground support. I say this because even though the Italian ATR has a stake in the combat (it stands to get destroyed if the CW takes the hex) it is not involved in the combat in the sense that it is not contributing in any way to the outcome of the combat. Italian ground troops would be another matter, of course.

This issue makes me think that RAW needs to be adjusted in this regard when it comes to mixed forces. I think that RAW's exclusive-OR approach ought to be changed to an inclusive-OR approach.

For example, if France doesn't fall or the Americans liberate it, then the French do not cooperate with the CW. So, a hex with US and French land units together could not, under RAW, receive CW ground support (or even have CW fighters intercept/CAP during any tactical air phase).

This makes no sense to me whatsoever; I think that it is the presence of cooperating units that should define whether or not aircraft can fly missions to hexes. In the above example, the presence or absence of American units ought to define when and where CW forces can fly missions, rather than the presence of French ones (in mixed groups, anyway - I have no problem with the CW being unable to fly to support the French when on their own, even if by 1944 it's kind of silly).

It may be there for game balance reasons, but it strikes me as rather ahistorical and also goes against the team-play grain of the game.

I agree with your points here (although I am not going to redesign MWIF to accommodate them).

I can give you a pretty good reason why the rules on non-cooperation exist though. It is common practice in war games where such restrictions are not in place for players to intermix units without regard to nationality. A 5 factor tactical bomber, or a 7 factor fighter are sent into battle without even noticing what country they are from. Unless the rules impose a restriction or penalty of some sort, players become blind to the nationalities involved and just shove cardboard counters around.

I offer as some related examples, the irritation of forum members to: (1) the heavy use of Italian air units with Balboa in the USSR during Barbarossa, (2) the suggestion to use a Baltic country as the new home country for Italy, (3) the defense of Italy by German land units instead of Italian units, and (4) in general, the sacrifice of Italian units in order to preserve German units. These all fall under the heading of 'gamey' strategies/tactics.

[composer99]

I certainly wouldn't expect any re-working of the WiF:FE rules by Matrix Games for MWiF. [:)] Indeed, if memory serves, I've defended the status quo on a couple of occasions.

[JagWars]

Germany does not want to liberate Portugal. Instead they wish to cede
control of the hexes to Portugal so that Lisbon will become a
secondary supply source for Italy (since Portugal is aligned to Italy).

Germany, Do you want to Liberate Portugal ?
- If you do, it will be aligned to you, and you will incorporate its force pool into yours, and its capital will be a secondary supply source for Germany.
- If you don't, it will become a red partisan country, and you will still be able to revert it to its original controlling Major Power.

I would argue that Portugal does not have an original controlling Major Power; Egypt does, Lybia does, Korea does. I beleive that original in this context means as of Sep 1939.

If the CW DOWs Portugal and Germany, Italy, and Japan all decline to align Portugal, does the CW then become the original controlling Major Power?

[JagWars]

Partisans in Eastern Poland:
 
If Polish Partisans can be placed into Eastern Poland, then should not the Soviet units in Eastern Poland be included in the garrison valuation for determing partisan availability?

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Jaguar

Partisans in Eastern Poland:

If Polish Partisans can be placed into Eastern Poland, then should not the Soviet units in Eastern Poland be included in the garrison valuation for determing partisan availability?

This is sound and logical.
This whole Eastern Poland & Partisan issue is a real mess.
It is part of the clarification list we established for Harry to answer.

[Mziln]

NOTE: The rules state that the modifiers to the die role are affected by the total garrison IN THE COUNTRY.
 
 
If the USSR has occupied Eastern Poland:
 
Polish Partisans are created in Poland NOT Eastern Poland.
 
Partisans cannot enter Eastern Poland it is part of the USSR.
 
 
 

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Mziln

NOTE: The rules state that the modifiers to the die role are affected by the total garrison IN THE COUNTRY.


If the USSR has occupied Eastern Poland:

Polish Partisans are created in Poland NOT Eastern Poland.

Partisans cannot enter Eastern Poland it is part of the USSR.

Eastern Poland is not part of the USSR, this is the problem, even after the USSR has occupied Eastern Poland Eastern Poland is considered conquered.