AI for MWiF - Japan

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: coregames

ORIGINAL: micheljq

If USSR DOWs Persia, Japan should align Persia and go take the oil fields on the coastline.

That is our plan in the next game as the Axis. In the six games of WiF i have played, I'm surprised no one had done it so far.

Yes, but as soon as Persia is conquered, Units not at war with USSR must be teleported in the next hex where they can stack, so unless you DoW USSR, you'll have the oil for a short time only.

[micheljq]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: coregames

ORIGINAL: micheljq

If USSR DOWs Persia, Japan should align Persia and go take the oil fields on the coastline.

That is our plan in the next game as the Axis. In the six games of WiF i have played, I'm surprised no one had done it so far.

Yes, but as soon as Persia is conquered, Units not at war with USSR must be teleported in the next hex where they can stack, so unless you DoW USSR, you'll have the oil for a short time only.

Forgot that little detail, but for that oil, it may be worth declaring war on USSR.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: micheljq

Forgot that little detail, but for that oil, it may be worth declaring war on USSR.

The original CWiF setup shows:

5 CP in the Japanese Coast for the Japan-US trade agreement

3 CP in the South China Sea for Chinese resources (68, 141 to Soul) (73, 146 to Hiroshima) (79, 147 to Osaka)
2 CP in the South China Sea for the Netherlands trade agreement (Balikpapan to Shanghai) (Tarakan to Canton)
1 CP in the South China Sea for Manchurian resources to Fukuoka
1 CP in the South China Sea for Hainan resources to Koyto

2 CP in the China Sea for the Netherlands trade agreement (Balikpapan to Shanghai) (Tarakan to Canton)
1 CP in the China Sea for the Hainan resources to Koyto
1 CP in the China Sea for Pyongyang Korea resources to Koyto

4 CP in reserve

20 CP total

Or

5 CP in the Japanese Coast
7 CP in the South China Sea
4 CP in the China Sea
4 CP in reserve


If you plan on taking Oil from the Middle East the 4 CP reserve will get you 1 oil as far as the Canton in the South China Sea

Remember if you are a Neutral major power your limited to how many ships you can build per production phase.

[michaelbaldur]

Remember if you are a Neutral major power your limited to how many ships you can build per production phase

never seen japan as a neutral major power

the only one that is never neutral ...[:D]

[doctormm]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous


Remember if you are a Neutral major power your limited to how many ships you can build per production phase.

Where did you get this idea?

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
The original CWiF setup shows:

5 CP in the Japanese Coast for the Japan-US trade agreement

3 CP in the South China Sea for Chinese resources (68, 141 to Soul) (73, 146 to Hiroshima) (79, 147 to Osaka)
2 CP in the South China Sea for the Netherlands trade agreement (Balikpapan to Shanghai) (Tarakan to Canton)
1 CP in the South China Sea for Manchurian resources to Fukuoka
1 CP in the South China Sea for Hainan resources to Koyto

2 CP in the China Sea for the Netherlands trade agreement (Balikpapan to Shanghai) (Tarakan to Canton)
1 CP in the China Sea for the Hainan resources to Koyto

Hainan resource better go to Canton. Only 1 CP needed.

1 CP in the China Sea for Pyongyang Korea resources to Koyto

Korean RP to Korean factory is best.

Remember if you are a Neutral major power your limited to how many ships you can build per production phase.

This is wrong.
You are limited to how many ships you can move per impulse.
And Japan is never neutral, unless China has surrendered, or Japan have conquered China.

[composer99]

All major powers are limited to building ships according to their gearing limits; they have no gearing limits on the first turn of any scenario or when declared war on. Japan could easily build just convoys on the very first turn of the game (although they have plenty enough other things to build) and indeed if Japan is planning a Middle Eastern campaign (e.g. invade Saudi, Iraq and occupy the Persian oil if the USSR doesn't get it first) they should invest in a few ASAP.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

Remember if you are a Neutral major power your limited to how many ships you can build per production phase

never seen japan as a neutral major power

the only one that is never neutral ...[:D]

I forgot Japan and China are at war.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

And Japan is never neutral, unless China has surrendered, or Japan have conquered China.

I'm afraid your wrong also Froonp.

Two major powers at war can agree to come to peace on any terms mutually acceptable (except for transferring units). Both the nationalist and communist Chinese must agree before China can come to peace. A neutrality pact is then in place between the parties.

[Extraneous]

With out being able to get permission to move into ports it’s going to be hard to get USSR CP’s (Tankers) to Persia.
 

But you can do this
 
6. Enter hexes controlled by each other outside their major power home countries. You may of course only enter territory controlled by another major power on your side if that major power agrees.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous


With out being able to get permission to move into ports it’s going to be hard to get USSR CP’s (Tankers) to Persia.

But you can do this

6. Enter hexes controlled by each other outside their major power home countries. You may of course only enter territory controlled by another major power on your side if that major power agrees.

Why would you want to send USSR CPs to Persia ? When you say Persia, you mean the Persian Gulf, are you ?

[brian brian]

If I was planning a Japanese move to the Middle East I wouldn't set up the convoys across the Bay of Bengal, I would move them out later. A Japanese adventure like that is best in 1940 when the US entry chits are lowest.

I no longer consider an attack on Persia as the Russians. A Russian DoW on Persia is just too much of a gimme for the Japanese in my opinion. As Japan I like to keep enough long-range naval assets and infantry reserves in Canton to intervene at any time. I don't keep a lot in Manchuria. If the Russians go in to Persia, I just have Japan declare war on them the next impulse, regardless of the fact that I have few units in place for such a war. All you need is to land a few units on the Persian oil hexes and the rest of the campaign can develop later. It is also handy to leave the two TERRitorial units in the Force Pool, available to build immediately in the event of war with Russia. Same thing goes for the Harbin MIL should that one become one of the last in the force pool; I take that as a loss in China whenever I can. (You probably don't want to be in my Manchurian army).

The Russians can best get Persia in combination with the British if they can spare some forces, but that is not always the case. Also the British can help limit Japanese deployments by taking the ports in Italian East Africa if they can.

It will be fascinating to see how the new map plays out during a Japanese<>Russian conflict. Japan could easily cut the Trans-Siberian at the northern edge of Manchuria, which would soon end military activity beyond the point it was cut, in reality. But in World in Flames, there are three cities along that rail line, and in MWiF there is a new fourth one. For Japan to ever truly secure any resources they can take from the Russians, they would need to take all four. Given the new distances involved, this would be very difficult to accomplish.

[composer99]

You will pardon my bluntness, I'm sure: what 'ally' would refuse the USSR such basing rights for cps? I wouldn't want to play on the same side as anyone who could be quite that territorial.

At any rate, it is customary for the Western Allies, once the USSR is active, to provide the cps required for the USSR to ship the 2 Persian oil that cannot be railed.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: composer99

You will pardon my bluntness, I'm sure: what 'ally' would refuse the USSR such basing rights for cps? I wouldn't want to play on the same side as anyone who could be quite that territorial.

At any rate, it is customary for the Western Allies, once the USSR is active, to provide the cps required for the USSR to ship the 2 Persian oil that cannot be railed.

To ship them to another ally usually.
Because USSR don't need them to be shipped anywhere. USSR simply reorg oil dependent units directly on those 2 oil fields. That's 10 normal oil dependent units that can reorg for free.

[morgil]

Hmm, with the new errata on the forced peace between USSR and Japan, how would that look on the enlarged maps ?
Japan demands peace, they loose Manchuria, USSR force peace, they loose the Pacific Map.
What im wondering is, supposed URRS dow Persia, Japan dow USSR and move units into southern oil fields in Persia, while taking Vladivostok.
Would it be preferable for USSR to just force peace ASAP, or play along in Sibirea for some time ?

[Extraneous]

In response to composer99 post #132.
&nbsp;
I assumed by Steves post #332 that granting of any type of permission is not allowed in MWiF.
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

ORIGINAL: brian brian
&nbsp;
If I were planning a Japanese move to the Middle East I wouldn't set up the convoys across the Bay of Bengal, I would move them out later. A Japanese adventure like that is best in 1940 when the US entry chits are lowest.

I no longer consider an attack on Persia as the Russians. A Russian DoW on Persia is just too much of a gimme for the Japanese in my opinion. As Japan I like to keep enough long-range naval assets and infantry reserves in Canton to intervene at any time. I don't keep a lot in Manchuria. If the Russians go in to Persia, I just have Japan declare war on them the next impulse, regardless of the fact that I have few units in place for such a war. All you need is to land a few units on the Persian oil hexes and the rest of the campaign can develop later. It is also handy to leave the two TERRitorial units in the Force Pool, available to build immediately in the event of war with Russia. Same thing goes for the Harbin MIL should that one become one of the last in the force pool; I take that as a loss in China whenever I can. (You probably don't want to be in my Manchurian army).

The Russians can best get Persia in combination with the British if they can spare some forces, but that is not always the case. Also the British can help limit Japanese deployments by taking the ports in Italian East Africa if they can.

It will be fascinating to see how the new map plays out during a Japanese<>Russian conflict. Japan could easily cut the Trans-Siberian at the northern edge of Manchuria, which would soon end military activity beyond the point it was cut, in reality. But in World in Flames, there are three cities along that rail line, and in MWiF there is a new fourth one. For Japan to ever truly secure any resources they can take from the Russians, they would need to take all four. Given the new distances involved, this would be very difficult to accomplish.

&nbsp;
A primary supply source for a unit is: Any friendly city in an unconquered home country of a major power the unit co-operates with (see 18.1). Vladivostok is primary supply source for the USSR.
&nbsp;
The USSR would start 4 hexes from the Persian capital. Persia has no factories so taking the capital causes complete conquest at the end of the turn.
&nbsp;
Why do I need the help of the CW to take Persia?
&nbsp;
[font=arial]How do you plan on sending the Japanese land units to Persia AMP, TRS, SCS, or combination?[/font]
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

ORIGINAL:
&nbsp;
Hmm, with the new errata on the forced peace between USSR and Japan, how would that look on the enlarged maps?
Japan demands peace they loose Manchuria. The USSR force peace, they loose the Pacific Map.
What I’m wondering is, supposed USSR DoW Persia, Japan DoW USSR and move units into southern oil fields in Persia, while taking Vladivostok.
Would it be preferable for USSR to just force peace ASAP, or play along in Siberia for some time?

&nbsp;
Play along in Siberia to have the USSR Militia in place and have the USSR gearing limits up.
&nbsp;
&nbsp;
IMO:
&nbsp;
Japanese adventurism in Persia is an over extension of their military assets.
&nbsp;
&nbsp;
If Japan aligns Persia and establishes the convoy line for 1 turn it gets 1 oil for its trouble. Production comes before Peace.
&nbsp;
&nbsp;
If Japan DoW’s the USSR Japanese units in Persia will not be fighting in China or the USSR. It uses up all it’s reserve CP’s establishing and continuing the convoy line.
&nbsp;
The USSR will be able to call out its reserves and up its gearing limits. The USSR has 7 unused factories that can use the resources for production. This will give the USSR a much better position when Germany invades.
&nbsp;
The perfect situation for the USSR is to be able to keep minimal units in Siberia tying up as many Japanese units while holding on to Vladivostok and as many Japanese resources without forcing peace.
&nbsp;

[brian brian]

It is a good idea for the Russians to request CW assistance in an attack on Persia so the CW can occupy some of the oil hexes that the Russians can't reach, before Japanese troops arrive.

For Japan to use a few units in Persia in exchange for 1-3 oil resources is very much worth using up some units. That is the whole point of Japan's war aims - to secure access to oil. Also Japan need not go on a unilateral campaign by attacking Persia, they can take the Saudi resource instead and await developments, but then that might discourage the Russians from ever entering Persia. It is not easy for the Japanese to set-up the logistics required but with a multi-turn, multi-impulse plan one can accomplish this. The AI would need a dedicated script I would think.

A Japan<>Russia war does not increase Russia's production, nor does it call out their general reserves, only 5 units. It does let the Russians build out it's MIL pool though, making it a lot easier for them to stuff the border and prevent a German DoW in 1941, but without leaving very many units to face the Japanese. That can be really frustrating for the Germans, but if they break the garrison, it is easy to roll over the weak Russian MIL units wherever they are found.

I'm not sure if the newest rules language for Optional #50 will be part of MWiF, or even how that option works now. I have seen such strange interpretations of the newest version that we just dropped playing with it altogether, and stick to the "any terms mutually acceptable" process to end any such war. I'm not sure the AI would want to negotiate with a human player, but I guess it would have to be part of the programming for players who chose not to use Option 50. Either that or #50 would have to be mandatory in an AI game.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL:&nbsp; brian brian
&nbsp;
It is a good idea for the Russians to request CW assistance in an attack on Persia so the CW can occupy some of the oil hexes that the Russians can't reach, before Japanese troops arrive.
&nbsp;
For Japan to use a few units in Persia in exchange for 1-3 oil resources is very much worth using up some units. That is the whole point of Japan's war aims - to secure access to oil. Also Japan need not go on a unilateral campaign by attacking Persia, they can take the Saudi resource instead and await developments, but then that might discourage the Russians from ever entering Persia. It is not easy for the Japanese to set-up the logistics required but with a multi-turn, multi-impulse plan one can accomplish this. The AI would need a dedicated script I would think.
&nbsp;
A Japan<>Russia war does not increase Russia's production, nor does it call out their general reserves, only 5 units. It does let the Russians build out it's MIL pool though, making it a lot easier for them to stuff the border and prevent a German DoW in 1941, but without leaving very many units to face the Japanese. That can be really frustrating for the Germans, but if they break the garrison, it is easy to roll over the weak Russian MIL units wherever they are found.
&nbsp;
I'm not sure if the newest rules language for Optional #50 will be part of MWiF, or even how that option works now. I have seen such strange interpretations of the newest version that we just dropped playing with it altogether, and stick to the "any terms mutually acceptable" process to end any such war. I'm not sure the AI would want to negotiate with a human player, but I guess it would have to be part of the programming for players who chose not to use Option 50. Either that or #50 would have to be mandatory in an AI game.

&nbsp;
Persia would be aligned/controlled by an Axis major power so the CW cannot assume a peacekeeper role. The CW cannot DoW the USSR since they are on the same side.
&nbsp;
The oil is in Persian hands until after conquest or the Japanese land units.
&nbsp;
[font=arial]Even if you could grant permission the oil would fall to the Japanese before the CW could be of help. [/font]
&nbsp;
&nbsp;
I guess you could have both the USSR and CW DoW Persia. If this happened it would have to be pre-planned between the CW and the USSR. Then you also have to be careful of the US entry chits.
&nbsp;
&nbsp;
Japan hasn’t the CP/Tankers to move all the Persian oil.&nbsp; It would require 12 CP/Tankers to move all the oil from Persia to Canton.
&nbsp;
Saudi Arabia is to close to CW bases and their oil. Do you want to risk a DoW from the CW?
&nbsp;
&nbsp;
With 7 unused factories any new resources will increase USSR production. A DoW with the USSR also changes the gearing limits.
&nbsp;

Option 50: (USSR-Japan compulsory peace) If Japan controls Vladivostok during the first war between Japan and the USSR, the Japanese player must agree to a peace if the Soviet player wants one. Similarly, if the USSR controls 3 or more resources that were
Japanese controlled at the start of the war, the Soviet player must agree to a peace if the Japanese player wants one.
&nbsp;
In either case, the new Russo-Japanese border is established by the hexes each controls. Any pocket of non-coastal hexes wholly surrounded by hexes controlled by the other major power becomes controlled by the major power whose hexes surround them.

[coregames]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: coregames

ORIGINAL: micheljq

If USSR DOWs Persia, Japan should align Persia and go take the oil fields on the coastline.

That is our plan in the next game as the Axis. In the six games of WiF i have played, I'm surprised no one had done it so far.

Yes, but as soon as Persia is conquered, Units not at war with USSR must be teleported in the next hex where they can stack, so unless you DoW USSR, you'll have the oil for a short time only.

It may be worth the DoW. Something's gotta give. If the Russians did not set up for demanding Bessarabia, they may be able to defend against a Japanese attack and take Persia, but if they try for too much it's definitely worth it for Japan to attack if the Germans are going for Barbarossa, which is our plan.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: coregames

It may be worth the DoW. Something's gotta give. If the Russians did not set up for demanding Bessarabia, they may be able to defend against a Japanese attack and take Persia, but if they try for too much it's definitely worth it for Japan to attack if the Germans are going for Barbarossa, which is our plan.

With my plan nothing has been removed from the European front.

I can do Bessarabia on the same impulse if the US doesn't draw an entry chit for Persia.

[doctormm]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

ORIGINAL: coregames

It may be worth the DoW. Something's gotta give. If the Russians did not set up for demanding Bessarabia, they may be able to defend against a Japanese attack and take Persia, but if they try for too much it's definitely worth it for Japan to attack if the Germans are going for Barbarossa, which is our plan.

With my plan nothing has been removed from the European front.

I can do Bessarabia on the same impulse if the US doesn't draw an entry chit for Persia.

USE rolls are not made until AFTER all the declarations are made.