The oil rules in WIF provide an extra dimension to the game that I find interesting, like many other players do, but I (and many others as well) find it also quite tedious to manage. Even with the computer support in MWIF, it can be a real fun-killer for many.
I was thinking about a house rule that might re-create similar conditions (but not identical), without tediousness of the existing oil rules. I was just wondering if someone have done that before or if anyone has proposal for improvement to this house rule. I have not tried yet.
The house rule I was thinking about is for every two of either air, land or naval action selected, a power expands 1 oil. This means that to save oil one has to do combine or pass (and a super combined would not use oil, as implicitly in all the BPs required to build the offensive chit there is oil in there).
A potential alternative would be of using 1 oil for each naval and air action selected, and 1 oil each two land actions selected (not sure if it should rounded up or down here).
This would cause to keep oil resources a key strategic consideration, and force players to think and plan wisely their next step, but without having to do micro-management.
On MWIF, this mean concretely to make the count of action selected, and turn oil production sites to idle as required, each turn for each power. MWIF does not allow to save oil if the Oil Rules are not on, but a power could save oil by putting as many as desired oil production sites to idle during the production phase, and just keep track of it on a piece of paper. If they are expanded on a later turn, then each of them can be used without turning an oil resource to idle until saved oil is all exhausted.
Oil rules - House version ?
Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
I was just thinking a bit further, and there might be a situation where oil is spent through action, but then a power looses some oil sites, and does not have enough production left and/or reserve to cover. In such situation, it would be in "debt" of oil. This should not happen often, but it can for sure.
So, I was thinking adding two clarifications: (1) Obviously, a power cannot use oil-spending actions beyond what is available (both in production and reserve), and (2) if the oil "debt" situation occurs because of enemy action, then for that turn the power would have also to turn 2 non-oil resource sites to idle for each point of oil debt (to simulate the oil used for shipping, factories, business and industrial logistics is impacted by transferring it temporarily to military operations).
So, I was thinking adding two clarifications: (1) Obviously, a power cannot use oil-spending actions beyond what is available (both in production and reserve), and (2) if the oil "debt" situation occurs because of enemy action, then for that turn the power would have also to turn 2 non-oil resource sites to idle for each point of oil debt (to simulate the oil used for shipping, factories, business and industrial logistics is impacted by transferring it temporarily to military operations).
-
paulderynck
- Posts: 8362
- Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
- Location: Canada
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
Your idea is similar to the new rules for Collectors Edition. You can go to ADG's site and download the latest rules and check out rule 10.3.
Unfortunately the suggestion puts all the headaches that playing with oil over the board in RAW7 caused - and puts them back into the part of MWiF that eliminated those headaches!
But each to their own. Remember though that an oil rule that does not include penalties for a side that mismanages it, may as well not be bothered with, as it always adds overhead.
Unfortunately the suggestion puts all the headaches that playing with oil over the board in RAW7 caused - and puts them back into the part of MWiF that eliminated those headaches!
But each to their own. Remember though that an oil rule that does not include penalties for a side that mismanages it, may as well not be bothered with, as it always adds overhead.
Paul
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
Thanks Paul for this.
I had a look at WIF CE optional rules 10.3, and I find it still onerous to use on MWIF.
I agree with you that mismanagement should come with stiff penalty. So, may the follow adjustment would be appropriate:
If a power exceeds its allowable oil capacity because of enemy actions (loosing sites by combat, loosing convoy, strategic bombing), then it is in “oil debts”, in which situation a power has to reduce it non-oil resources as per following formula, for EACH over-spent oil point:
a. During the production phase, count the number of non-idle factories, and multiply by 20% (rounded up);
b. Turn to “idle” the same amount of non-oil resources for that turn. For example, if China has 7 producing factory, then it has to put on idle 2 more non-oil resources (1.4 rounded to 2), while Germany with 28 factories producing would have to put 6 more resources on idle (5.6 round to 6).
I had a look at WIF CE optional rules 10.3, and I find it still onerous to use on MWIF.
I agree with you that mismanagement should come with stiff penalty. So, may the follow adjustment would be appropriate:
If a power exceeds its allowable oil capacity because of enemy actions (loosing sites by combat, loosing convoy, strategic bombing), then it is in “oil debts”, in which situation a power has to reduce it non-oil resources as per following formula, for EACH over-spent oil point:
a. During the production phase, count the number of non-idle factories, and multiply by 20% (rounded up);
b. Turn to “idle” the same amount of non-oil resources for that turn. For example, if China has 7 producing factory, then it has to put on idle 2 more non-oil resources (1.4 rounded to 2), while Germany with 28 factories producing would have to put 6 more resources on idle (5.6 round to 6).
-
paulderynck
- Posts: 8362
- Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
- Location: Canada
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
Certainly could work if all players are willing to put in the extra effort.
Paul
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
Thanks Paul for your encouragement!
I have started a new Global War with this rule, on solitaire mode, and no one has cheated yet...
It works quite well so far (3 turns in), the accounting is very light and easy to do, with one hand most of the time. Same strategic dilemmas arise, especially for Italy about saving oil or using it for production, and Japan about whether to build up and save oil for dealing with the CW and US in the future or going all-out against China now. The main decision point is at the action selection phase, and the assessment can be done holistically, so no counting 0.05 oil to check how many CL I can afford to use. Then, as per standard oil rule, the production planning forms have to be used for saving or not oil.
The main adjustment I made was Land action is counting for 0.5 oil, and total rounded down. This allows powers like China, France, and Italy to have at least one land action per turn without having to worry about using their saved oil. This seems more balanced, and somewhat more historical to me.
So, here is the revised house rule for oil:
1. Oil rules are still turned off on MWIF.
2. A manual count of actions is used instead for determining oil consumption, for each power, as follow:
a. Each Air and Naval action consumes 1 oil;
b. Each Land actions consume 0.5 oil;
c. Combined (including “super combined”), and Pass do not use oil.
3. Each turn, each power can save oil points as per standard Oil Rules, but it has to be done manually by turning to “idle” one oil production site for each oil saved, and then record it separately (Note: CW can save the non-used oil site as per standard oil rules).
4. At the end of each turn, for each power, oil consumption is counted based on action choices (rounded down) and oil production sites have to be turned to “idle” and / or saved oil be deducted from the manual record to match oil consumption.
5. No power can voluntarily spend more oil than available in production sites and reserve combined.
6. If a power exceeds its allowable oil capacity because of enemy actions (loosing sites by combat, loosing convoy, strategic bombing of oil production sites, end of trade agreement), then it is in “oil debts”, in which situation a power has to reduce its non-oil resources as per following formula, for EACH over-spent oil point:
a. During the production phase, count the number of non-idle factories, and multiply by 20% (rounded up)
b. Turn to “idle” the same amount of non-oil resources for that turn. For example, if China has 7 producing factory, then it has to put on idle 2 more non-oil resources (1.4 rounded to 2), while Germany with 28 factories producing would have to put 6 more resources on idle (5.6 round to 6).
7. One unavoidable variation, there is no bombing or capture of saved oil, but oil production sites can be bombed as per standard rules. It is assumed that oil is stored in a multitude of spots.
I have started a new Global War with this rule, on solitaire mode, and no one has cheated yet...
It works quite well so far (3 turns in), the accounting is very light and easy to do, with one hand most of the time. Same strategic dilemmas arise, especially for Italy about saving oil or using it for production, and Japan about whether to build up and save oil for dealing with the CW and US in the future or going all-out against China now. The main decision point is at the action selection phase, and the assessment can be done holistically, so no counting 0.05 oil to check how many CL I can afford to use. Then, as per standard oil rule, the production planning forms have to be used for saving or not oil.
The main adjustment I made was Land action is counting for 0.5 oil, and total rounded down. This allows powers like China, France, and Italy to have at least one land action per turn without having to worry about using their saved oil. This seems more balanced, and somewhat more historical to me.
So, here is the revised house rule for oil:
1. Oil rules are still turned off on MWIF.
2. A manual count of actions is used instead for determining oil consumption, for each power, as follow:
a. Each Air and Naval action consumes 1 oil;
b. Each Land actions consume 0.5 oil;
c. Combined (including “super combined”), and Pass do not use oil.
3. Each turn, each power can save oil points as per standard Oil Rules, but it has to be done manually by turning to “idle” one oil production site for each oil saved, and then record it separately (Note: CW can save the non-used oil site as per standard oil rules).
4. At the end of each turn, for each power, oil consumption is counted based on action choices (rounded down) and oil production sites have to be turned to “idle” and / or saved oil be deducted from the manual record to match oil consumption.
5. No power can voluntarily spend more oil than available in production sites and reserve combined.
6. If a power exceeds its allowable oil capacity because of enemy actions (loosing sites by combat, loosing convoy, strategic bombing of oil production sites, end of trade agreement), then it is in “oil debts”, in which situation a power has to reduce its non-oil resources as per following formula, for EACH over-spent oil point:
a. During the production phase, count the number of non-idle factories, and multiply by 20% (rounded up)
b. Turn to “idle” the same amount of non-oil resources for that turn. For example, if China has 7 producing factory, then it has to put on idle 2 more non-oil resources (1.4 rounded to 2), while Germany with 28 factories producing would have to put 6 more resources on idle (5.6 round to 6).
7. One unavoidable variation, there is no bombing or capture of saved oil, but oil production sites can be bombed as per standard rules. It is assumed that oil is stored in a multitude of spots.
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
I suspect that a aggressive Japan can truly hurt China with this rule.
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
Good point. It will have to be tested.
The propose house rules might produce a similar result than with the standard oil rules. With a bunch of planes and ships used to support land operations in China, and most if not all Japan's HQs flipped at the end of the turn, with the standard oil rules, this may lead to a similar oil consumption rate as with these house rules.
If not, maybe an adjustment might be necessary where larger powers (GE, JP, CW, USA, USSR) use 1 oil for a land action as they have more land units, but only 0.5 for smaller powers (IT, FR, CH)? This would be simple enough to implement, and still keep the rules simple.
The propose house rules might produce a similar result than with the standard oil rules. With a bunch of planes and ships used to support land operations in China, and most if not all Japan's HQs flipped at the end of the turn, with the standard oil rules, this may lead to a similar oil consumption rate as with these house rules.
If not, maybe an adjustment might be necessary where larger powers (GE, JP, CW, USA, USSR) use 1 oil for a land action as they have more land units, but only 0.5 for smaller powers (IT, FR, CH)? This would be simple enough to implement, and still keep the rules simple.
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
Continuing testing, now 6 turns of Global War completed.
- Oil house rules work quite well for France, Italy and China, results are very similar to using standard oil rules.
- For CW, USA, and USSR, it is too early to tell--will have to wait for Barbarossa, and the Japanese at war with CW and US, but so far it seems to work. As noted by Orm it might be a problem if Japan is aggressive with China.
- And definitely there is a problem with Germany, as it has too much oil compared to the standard rules, now that the French campaign is completed. So, I will adjust the rules to:
larger powers (GE, JP, CW, USA, USSR) use 1 oil for each land action, but only 0.5 for smaller powers (IT, FR, CH).
- Oil house rules work quite well for France, Italy and China, results are very similar to using standard oil rules.
- For CW, USA, and USSR, it is too early to tell--will have to wait for Barbarossa, and the Japanese at war with CW and US, but so far it seems to work. As noted by Orm it might be a problem if Japan is aggressive with China.
- And definitely there is a problem with Germany, as it has too much oil compared to the standard rules, now that the French campaign is completed. So, I will adjust the rules to:
larger powers (GE, JP, CW, USA, USSR) use 1 oil for each land action, but only 0.5 for smaller powers (IT, FR, CH).
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
J/A 41 turn is now completed, with Barbarossa in full swing and the Oil Embargo in place where Japan feels the pain.
With the house rule Germany used 5 oil points. I would think that a typical J/A 41 turn would cost Germany 3.5 to 4 oil, using the standard rules. So, there might be some more tweaking required. Maybe a 0.75 oil per Land action for the larger powers with a rounded up provision would be better. It is still simple enough, and would still produce the same end result without having to do detailed calculations in advance.
I still have to figure out how things might work out for Japan once the full naval war starts in the Pacific.
If anyone wants to try these house rules, let me know, we could compare notes.
With the house rule Germany used 5 oil points. I would think that a typical J/A 41 turn would cost Germany 3.5 to 4 oil, using the standard rules. So, there might be some more tweaking required. Maybe a 0.75 oil per Land action for the larger powers with a rounded up provision would be better. It is still simple enough, and would still produce the same end result without having to do detailed calculations in advance.
I still have to figure out how things might work out for Japan once the full naval war starts in the Pacific.
If anyone wants to try these house rules, let me know, we could compare notes.
RE: Oil rules - House version ?
Mid-1942 on play testing the house oil rules, with the war in the Pacific in full swing. The tweaking proposed in the last post is working well, and clearly oil plays its role in strategic decision-making without having to do the "staff officer work". Although the way to reproduce the impact of oil is somewhat different, the end result is very similar to the standard rules in terms of setting strategic priorities, decision-making and level of action for the various powers.
So here is the refined proposed house rules for oil:
1. Oil rules are still turned off on MWIF.
2. A manual count of actions is used instead for determining oil consumption, for each power, as follow:
a. Each Air and Naval action consumes 1 oil;
b. Each Land action of smaller powers (IT, FR, CH) consume 0.5 oil;
c. Each Land action of larger powers (GE, CW, USA, USSR, JP) consume 0.75 oil;
d. Combined (including “super combined”), and Pass do not use oil.
3. At the production phase:
a. for each power, oil consumption is counted based on action choices (rounded down for smaller powers (IT, FR, CH), and rounded up for larger powers (GE, CW, USA, USSR, JP)) and oil production sites have to be turned to “idle” and / or saved oil be deducted from the manual record to match oil consumption.
b. as well, each power can save oil points as per standard oil rules, but it has to be done manually by turning to “idle” one oil production site for each oil saved, and then record it
(Note: unused oil from site already idle can be saved/consumed as per standard oil rules).
4. No power can voluntarily spend more oil than available in production sites and saved oil combined.
5. If a power exceeds its allowable oil capacity because of enemy actions (loosing sites by combat, loosing convoy, strategic bombing of oil production sites, end of trade agreement), then it is in “oil debts”, in which situation a power has to reduce its non-oil resources as per following formula, for EACH over-spent oil point:
a. During the production phase, count the number of non-idle factories, and multiply by 20% (rounded up)
b. Turn to “idle” the same amount of non-oil resources for that turn. For example, if China has 7 producing factory, then it has to put on idle 2 more non-oil resources (1.4 rounded to 2), while Germany with 28 factories producing would have to put 6 more resources on idle (5.6 rounded to 6).
6. One unavoidable variation, there is no bombing or capture of saved oil, but oil production sites can be bombed as per standard rules. It is assumed that oil is stored in a multitude of spots.
So here is the refined proposed house rules for oil:
1. Oil rules are still turned off on MWIF.
2. A manual count of actions is used instead for determining oil consumption, for each power, as follow:
a. Each Air and Naval action consumes 1 oil;
b. Each Land action of smaller powers (IT, FR, CH) consume 0.5 oil;
c. Each Land action of larger powers (GE, CW, USA, USSR, JP) consume 0.75 oil;
d. Combined (including “super combined”), and Pass do not use oil.
3. At the production phase:
a. for each power, oil consumption is counted based on action choices (rounded down for smaller powers (IT, FR, CH), and rounded up for larger powers (GE, CW, USA, USSR, JP)) and oil production sites have to be turned to “idle” and / or saved oil be deducted from the manual record to match oil consumption.
b. as well, each power can save oil points as per standard oil rules, but it has to be done manually by turning to “idle” one oil production site for each oil saved, and then record it
(Note: unused oil from site already idle can be saved/consumed as per standard oil rules).
4. No power can voluntarily spend more oil than available in production sites and saved oil combined.
5. If a power exceeds its allowable oil capacity because of enemy actions (loosing sites by combat, loosing convoy, strategic bombing of oil production sites, end of trade agreement), then it is in “oil debts”, in which situation a power has to reduce its non-oil resources as per following formula, for EACH over-spent oil point:
a. During the production phase, count the number of non-idle factories, and multiply by 20% (rounded up)
b. Turn to “idle” the same amount of non-oil resources for that turn. For example, if China has 7 producing factory, then it has to put on idle 2 more non-oil resources (1.4 rounded to 2), while Germany with 28 factories producing would have to put 6 more resources on idle (5.6 rounded to 6).
6. One unavoidable variation, there is no bombing or capture of saved oil, but oil production sites can be bombed as per standard rules. It is assumed that oil is stored in a multitude of spots.