AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

A forum for the discussion of the World in Flames AI Opponent.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by composer99 »

That's if they return to base at the end of the turn; if they do so during a naval move they can always be reorganized and sent back out to sea to ship resources.
~ Composer99
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.0.pdf
11.4.1 Definition of ‘naval move’

(c) Return a task force of FACE-UP surface naval units from one section of a sea-box to ONE port (see 13.4 Return to base).

Then why under "11.4.1 Definition of ‘naval move’" does it say "see 13.4 Return to base"?

Yes, I have a word document of 11.1 Naval movement.

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by composer99 »

Extraneous:

The RAW reference to §13.4 in §11.4.1 is there because the procedure for returning to base by units at sea is listed in §13.4 in full.

This is unfortunate, because it mixes up generic rules for naval units returning to base with the rules for final return to base during the end of the turn.

However, any naval unit that is returned to base as part of §11.4.1 can be reorganized (§11.18) and sent back out to sea during a subsequent impulse (if there is one). Convoys at sea can ship resources & build points.

The restriction to which you refer quite clearly, IMO, refers to convoy points that are returned to base during the actual final return to base step during the end-of-turn sequence of play, and not to convoys that are returned to base during the naval movement step (unless of course they stay in port and do not sail out again).
~ Composer99
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

ORIGINAL: composer99

The RAW reference to §13.4 in §11.4.1 is there because the procedure for returning to base by units at sea is listed in §13.4 in full.

This is unfortunate, because it mixes up generic rules for naval units returning to base with the rules for final return to base during the end of the turn.

However, any naval unit that is returned to base as part of §11.4.1 can be reorganized (§11.18) and sent back out to sea during a subsequent impulse (if there is one). Convoys at sea can ship resources & build points.

The restriction to which you refer quite clearly, IMO, refers to convoy points that are returned to base during the actual final return to base step during the end-of-turn sequence of play, and not to convoys that are returned to base during the naval movement step (unless of course they stay in port and do not sail out again).

I can understand your view but doesn't "CP's in port cannot be used to transport resources" sound kind of odd?

Because that's where the CP's would be if they returned to port during 13.4 Return to base step when it came time to trace your resources during production.
University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
User avatar
paulderynck
Posts: 8355
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
Location: Canada

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by paulderynck »

Are you saying if they return to base, get re-orged, and then go to sea again in the same turn, you think they can't convoy resources that turn?
Paul
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Are you saying if they return to base, get re-orged, and then go to sea again in the same turn, you think they can't convoy resources that turn?

Yes exactly as I did in my post #480.
University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by composer99 »

As far as I can see, that is an incorrect interpretation of RAW. IMO, it is possible because of how the rules were organized (instead of, say, having the procedure for returning to base included in §11.4.1 and referring to them in §13.4).

It strikes me as very unlikely that Harry Rowland intended to impose such a restriction on players.

I will bring it up on the Yahoo!Groups discussion list to see if others have interpreted the rule in this fashion.
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by composer99 »

My inquiry on the wifdiscussion list:
s it the case that a convoy point thar RTBs, whatever the reason, during a regular impulse can no longer ship resources even if it is redeployed to sea, or (as I contend) not?


The responses:

(Response from the list.)
No. All that matters is where a CP is when resources are transported. I'll get this to the rules list as well.


(Follow up to the above.)
Actually, no need to refer to the rules list. The section of the rule quoted applies to CPs returning to base during the end of turn phase, not during the turn itself. If CPs return to base at the end of the turn, it is before resources and BPs are ferried.


(Response direct to my own email.)
If you sai[l] convoy points home during an impulse the[y] have to be [reorganized] by a[n] HQ or ATR, then the[y] are able to sail out again in a later impulse and stay at sea to transport resourses or keep supply.
~ Composer99
brian brian
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by brian brian »

I have never wanted the rules to hold your hand on every single tiny possible reading implication in them. If you want rules like that, they will be 3x longer and we would have 3x less players. You have to use basic common sense at times, or this game is quite simply not for you.


Should the CW AI try this build schedule:

S/O 40: Fort/4

N/D 40: PARA, AMPH face-up

J/F 41: MAR, MOT

M/A 41: 3 INF or MIL

and then raid Brest in Jul/Aug 41, hoping to drop the Fort there in Sep/Oct, with Singapore as an alternate destination if you can't clear it of ZoC?

Or is this a little too aggressive when the CW might need to be maximizing economic aid to the Soviets along with an Alexander led BEF in northern or southern Russia, while perhaps starting the first few Free French forces?
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

ORIGINAL: composer99

My inquiry on the wifdiscussion list:
s it the case that a convoy point thar RTBs, whatever the reason, during a regular impulse can no longer ship resources even if it is redeployed to sea, or (as I contend) not?


The responses:

(Response from the list.)
No. All that matters is where a CP is when resources are transported. I'll get this to the rules list as well.


(Follow up to the above.)
Actually, no need to refer to the rules list. The section of the rule quoted applies to CPs returning to base during the end of turn phase, not during the turn itself. If CPs return to base at the end of the turn, it is before resources and BPs are ferried.


(Response direct to my own email.)
If you sai[l] convoy points home during an impulse the[y] have to be [reorganized] by a[n] HQ or ATR, then the[y] are able to sail out again in a later impulse and stay at sea to transport resourses or keep supply.


So their response is:

[:D] CP's that return to port during the return to base step cannot be used to transport resources. [:D]

[:D] Because they are in port. [:D]

Well they are your experts and we have to abide their rulings.

I would suggest that, "If they do return to base, they won’t be able to convoy resources in the production step of this turn." be removed from 13.4 Return to base in the RAC to avoid confusion.
University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by composer99 »

OK, now I'm just confused. [&:]

As far as I know, no one on this forum is suggesting that convoy points that return to base during the corresponding step at the end of the turn are able to ship resources or build points. I am sure everyone is in agreement on this point.

What we were discussing was returning convoy points to a port during a normal impulse, reorganizing them at the end of that impulse, and then putting them back out to sea during a subsequent impulse, all in the same turn. As a result, these redeployed convoy points would be able to ship resources or build points as required.

As per your posts #480 and #486 it appears you were arguing that this was not possible.

Am I missing something here?
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by composer99 »

ORIGINAL: brian brian

Should the CW AI try this build schedule:

S/O 40: Fort/4

N/D 40: PARA, AMPH face-up

J/F 41: MAR, MOT

M/A 41: 3 INF or MIL

and then raid Brest in Jul/Aug 41, hoping to drop the Fort there in Sep/Oct, with Singapore as an alternate destination if you can't clear it of ZoC?

Or is this a little too aggressive when the CW might need to be maximizing economic aid to the Soviets along with an Alexander led BEF in northern or southern Russia, while perhaps starting the first few Free French forces?

I suspect it depends on what the Axis is doing. If the Germans & Italians are clearly preparing for a kitchen-sink Barb with minimal sub/NAV builds early on and little to no activity in the Med/Middle East, then a raiding build like this is feasible (since you can probbaly afford to do this and build convoys to ensure effective lend-lease at the same time if you have been building convoys since the start of the game).
~ Composer99
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

ORIGINAL: composer99

OK, now I'm just confused. [&:]

As far as I know, no one on this forum is suggesting that convoy points that return to base during the corresponding step at the end of the turn are able to ship resources or build points. I am sure everyone is in agreement on this point.

What we were discussing was returning convoy points to a port during a normal impulse, reorganizing them at the end of that impulse, and then putting them back out to sea during a subsequent impulse, all in the same turn. As a result, these redeployed convoy points would be able to ship resources or build points as required.

As per your posts #480 and #486 it appears you were arguing that this was not possible.

Am I missing something here?

Nope you're not confused you understand perfectly. It has been ruled as a rule ambiguity.


University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I have never wanted the rules to hold your hand on every single tiny possible reading implication in them. If you want rules like that, they will be 3x longer and we would have 3x less players. You have to use basic common sense at times, or this game is quite simply not for you.


Should the CW AI try this build schedule:

S/O 40: Fort/4

N/D 40: PARA, AMPH face-up

J/F 41: MAR, MOT

M/A 41: 3 INF or MIL

and then raid Brest in Jul/Aug 41, hoping to drop the Fort there in Sep/Oct, with Singapore as an alternate destination if you can't clear it of ZoC?

Or is this a little too aggressive when the CW might need to be maximizing economic aid to the Soviets along with an Alexander led BEF in northern or southern Russia, while perhaps starting the first few Free French forces?

You need to give more information before someone can give you a response.

What Scenario?
24.4.1 Missed the Bus ~ The end of the beginning: Jul/Aug 1940 - Jul/Aug 1945
24.4.7 The Global war: Sep/Oct 1939 ~ Jul/Aug 1945


How much production BP are you generating?
Will there be any left over BP after these builds?
A brief summary of the world situation.


S/O 40:
Fort/4 ~ 3 and 1 (7 BP), 2 and 2 (8 BP), or 4x 1 (8 BP)?

N/D 40:
PARA ~ Corps (5 BP) or division (3 BP)?

AMPH face-up?

J/F 41:
MAR (Corps 5 BP, division 3 BP), MOT (Corps 4 BP, division 2 BP)

M/A 41:
3x INF (Corps 9 BP, 6 BP) or 3x MIL (6 BP)

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
User avatar
paulderynck
Posts: 8355
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
Location: Canada

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by paulderynck »

...about N/D 40

How would you build an Amph face-up without having one in the Construction Pool?


Paul
User avatar
Centuur
Posts: 9012
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:03 pm
Location: Hoorn (NED).

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Centuur »

In my opinion, the building of an Amph should be started by the CW in the first turn of the game. It is so important for the CW to have a invasion possibility on the board. After that first Amph in SO 1939, the rest has to be defensive of course.
Peter
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

...about N/D 40

How would you build an Amph face-up without having one in the Construction Pool?

Using the 24.4.7 The Global war: Sep/Oct 1939 ~ Jul/Aug 1945 scenario he could have started an AMPH early in the war.


But before I could sign off on this plan I would have to know how the CW is doing at sea, what is the Axis doing, and what is the Axis OOB is in Occupied France.

Due to its small army and air force early in the war the CW is not usually prone to an aggressive stance and chooses to build up its forces.

More or less the CW chooses to react to aggression rather than act aggressively.


If the invasion of Brest is successful do you plan to try and hold it or is this just a raid (an in and out)?

You need to know what the Axis OOB is in Occupied France if you plan the Invasion of Europe.

If this is just a raid is it just to keep the Axis off balance or what?


[:)] (brian brian you've got our attention you are now in the hot seat continue with your plan.) [:)]

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

My studies show the CW has 22 factories (1 each in Melbourne, Australia and Belfast, Northern Ireland; 2 each in Canada and India; and 16 in Great Britain)

In 1939 at full production the 21 CW factories (the .5 production multiplier allows full production with 21 factories) would produce 11 BP.

In 1940 at full production the 22 CW factories (the .75 production multiplier allows full production with 22 factories) would produce 17 BP.

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
User avatar
Centuur
Posts: 9012
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:03 pm
Location: Hoorn (NED).

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Centuur »

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

...about N/D 40

How would you build an Amph face-up without having one in the Construction Pool?

Using the 24.4.7 The Global war: Sep/Oct 1939 ~ Jul/Aug 1945 scenario he could have started an AMPH early in the war.


But before I could sign off on this plan I would have to know how the CW is doing at sea, what is the Axis doing, and what is the Axis OOB is in Occupied France.

Due to its small army and air force early in the war the CW is not usually prone to an aggressive stance and chooses to build up its forces.

More or less the CW chooses to react to aggression rather than act aggressively.


If the invasion of Brest is successful do you plan to try and hold it or is this just a raid (an in and out)?

You need to know what the Axis OOB is in Occupied France if you plan the Invasion of Europe.

If this is just a raid is it just to keep the Axis off balance or what?


[:)] (brian brian you've got our attention you are now in the hot seat continue with your plan.) [:)]

A threath towards something is usually a good idea to make sure the Euroaxis keeps more forces to guard ports in France. To actually execute an invasion into Europe by the CW alone is something totally different. If it succeeds, the question is: how do the Euroaxis respond here. If they are capable of sending a large force against you, I would suggest to leave.
If you got time as the CW (because of Axis units being transported by rail and not able to attack this turn), I would try to replace those expensive units with MIL and INF and see what happens next.
Peter
Extraneous
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:58 am

RE: AI for MWiF - Commonwealth

Post by Extraneous »

ORIGINAL: Centuur

A threath towards something is usually a good idea to make sure the Euroaxis keeps more forces to guard ports in France. To actually execute an invasion into Europe by the CW alone is something totally different. If it succeeds, the question is: how do the Euroaxis respond here. If they are capable of sending a large force against you, I would suggest to leave.

If you got time as the CW (because of Axis units being transported by rail and not able to attack this turn), I would try to replace those expensive units with MIL and INF and see what happens next.

Yes, You dont want your Operation Sledgehammer (an early Allied plan for a cross-Channel invasion of Europe) to turn into a Operation Jubilee (The Dieppe Raid).
University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
Post Reply

Return to “AI Opponent Discussion”