Matrix Games Forums

Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching Deal of the Week Battle Academy Battle Academy 2 Out now!Legions of Steel ready for betaBattle Academy 2 gets trailers and Steam page!Deal of the Week Germany at War
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: AI for MWiF - China

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: AI for MWiF - China Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 7/13/2007 9:03:21 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7899
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

but the Soviets should run the ChiComms towards acquring their own nice Red victory cities at the end, not towards running feints designed to help the Nationalists get them.

I agree.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 91
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 7/13/2007 10:54:34 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 18342
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

but the Soviets should run the ChiComms towards acquring their own nice Red victory cities at the end, not towards running feints designed to help the Nationalists get them.

I agree.


You are welcome to continue this discussion.

However, as a point of information, I have decided that the AIO opponents, 1 per major power, will never concern themselves with which major power gets victory cities. Well, at least not in so far as being influenced by which of its major pwoers is going to 'win'. The AIO wins or loses. Its major powers are merely tools towards that end. There are of course conditions where the AIO will prefer one major power over another to capture a victory city - due to other considerations. But counting up the victory cities for each major power at the end of the game is not one of them.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 92
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 7/13/2007 11:38:43 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2246
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
Yes, counting up victory cities, vying over them, and having the war-time alliance vs. the Axis come apart at the seams because of them seems to be best left to the human players.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 93
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 7/15/2007 7:11:18 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 1676
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
I agree with Steve completely. I only mentioned it to contrast with some of the thoughts expressed in the Italy thread.

At the end of the game I do sometimes have the Soviets help the ChiComms via long-range bombers performing Ground Strikes (when the USSR is doing super-combineds or air impulses) in front of the ChiComm units. Conversely ChiComm units and/or Partisans can manuever in ways helpful to a Russian ground campaign in the Far East.

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 94
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/10/2008 9:10:47 PM   
peskpesk


Posts: 1416
Joined: 7/17/2003
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:


I am thinking now in terms of 4 line segments for the Chinese frontline:
1 - South/SW to prevent Japanese advances from from Bruma and Indo-China
2 - South/SE to prevent Japanese advances from Canton and Hainan
3 - East to prevent Japanese advances from Hangchow, Wuhan, and Kaifeng
4 - NE to prevent advances from Kaifeng and Taiyuan.


So how should the units be distributed among the 4 fronts during a 1939 setup? Suggestion any one?

China
Chiang,
Mao,
5/1 INF,
5/1 MIL,
2/1 GAR,
2 Cav
1 FTR-2 1 PIL 1 Gun,
1 Inf,
1 Oil

Note 1: #/# = Nationalist/Communist

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 95
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/10/2008 9:16:36 PM   
wfzimmerman


Posts: 649
Joined: 10/22/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
Any port these NSU's are in should be considered a major port.


I am not too familiar with the workings of these NSUs during WWII, but since they're not considered Major Ports in WiFFE (the board game), they won't be in MWiF (the computer game) either.

I think they represent the artificial harbor the Allies built at Normandy.


I always assumed they represented the portion of the US fleet train that was able to support several hundred (!) ships at atolls like Ulithi.

_____________________________

Contribute to the Steve H. thank you book! http://www.nimblebooks.com/wordpress/2009/04/contribute-to-the-wargamers-wwii-quiz-book/

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 96
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/10/2008 10:07:28 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7899
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I think they represent the artificial harbor the Allies built at Normandy.

I always assumed they represented the portion of the US fleet train that was able to support several hundred (!) ships at atolls like Ulithi.

I think they represent a bit of both. There are 2 of them, so we may assume they are both. But I'd tend to lend toward wfzimmerman WiFzen.

(in reply to wfzimmerman)
Post #: 97
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/10/2008 10:38:36 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2246
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
peskpesk, someone else put up a map with their thoughts on setting up the Chinese, although I do not recall if it was for the 1939 scenario or some later one. Regretably, it was not in this thread!

< Message edited by composer99 -- 6/10/2008 10:40:50 PM >


_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 98
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/11/2008 12:10:00 AM   
wosung

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
You meant this one?

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1770272&mpage=1��

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1140817&mpage=14&key=
(around post No. 400)

And please keep in mind, that the course of Yellow River was corrected, thanks to Marcus, to represent the 1938 flood.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1140817&mpage=23&key=
(post No. 662)

Regards

< Message edited by wosung -- 6/11/2008 12:20:25 AM >

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 99
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/11/2008 11:23:36 PM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1182
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline
For China or Japan to be victorious there are a few guildlines that i keep in my mind, while setting up and playing.

1. Japanese land units overall are more mobile than the majority of Chinese units. Japan also works with interior lines. This means Japan can change its focus faster and more often during the game. China has to plan ahead and keep a situational awareness well in advance of Japan.

2. HQ's are the key to victory. No HQ, no victory. Always know where they are and where they can go.
Japan has the most mobile HQ in the game (Yamashita), and if placed in China, will give headaches to the Chinese player. China has the very versatile (Stilwell), which can bring into play US units on mainland China. For Japan, (Yamashita), is probably the 1 HQ i will advance build as early as possible. Even if its not a China 1st strategy, there is none better for the Japanese. As China, i want to know where it is at all times.

3. Weather.
One of the most important elements of the game is knowing what weather zone you are in, what weather zone your enemy is in, and using that knowledge to leverage a battle to your favor. The "borders" of weather zones are a prime axis for attacking. Defending these axis are critcal.

In China the "North Monsoon/Temperate", in Southern China will make or break any offensive, Japanese or Chinese.
If the player is not timing his moves with the weather changes, you will see stagnation and retreat. Sometimes the weather will just shutdown entire offensives. Its just the luck of the game you are currently playing, deal with it and make the hard decsions.

4. Partisans. Japan cannot ignore these pesky units. China has a clear advantage here. Partisans can be the deathknell to a Japan that does'nt plan for them. Don't leave air units flipped and without at least a ZOC. Don't have Naval units in port flipped and alone. Secure that supply line or see your offensive grind to a halt. Be ready to deal with partisans. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.

5. Maneuver is your best means for gaining ground in China. Flipped units can be moved around and mopped up. Always seek to surround then attack. Flipping units is desired, but not always in the dice roll.

6. Airpower, Japan has the clear advantage, but not with quality only quantity. It will not last forever. Eventually Japan will strip down the Air power in China. For China, fighters are the air unit of choice, later bombers can be addded. Oil will make the use of air power a hard choice for both sides.

7. Which brings us to the whole Japan vs China question.
China has basically a single minded approach. Defend, Build up, Attack.
Defend until its apparent Japan has exhausted its forward motion in China. There will be a transistion where parity in land forces has been achieved. This is the build up phase. Don't be hasty and push the parity into offensive action. Build up a little excess, airpower & oil are the prime concerns. Then push the attack. Broad front and unrelenting. China liberation is primary. Indochina, Manchuria, Korea, Burma secondary.

Japan has many options.
Going for the Knockout blow 100% china or bust.
Limited offensive to secure lines of supply, cities, resources.
Attacking Communist Chinese forces to eliminate them from the field while strategically bombing Factories.
The radical but not unheard of defend/backhand blow with the goal of a large navy/airforce to combat the Allies. So many options.

These are just some of my opinons of the China/Japan situation.
Feel free to comment, oppose, revise, make fun, of any of the above.

_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 100
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/12/2008 1:02:41 AM   
wosung

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
From my very limited experience with CWIF, I think these are good observations.

Esp. the defence against partisans, it seems to me, can be a major undertaking for Japan, guarding resources, lines of communication, cities, harbors and air units.

Can partisans only move in enemy controlled hexes? If yes, this probably would mean, Japan is better off to leave the Chinese partisan controlled coastal area (Chekiang/Kwanghsi provinces) behind the frontline as it is, to avoid partisans there?!

Can partisans change the affiliation of Warlords? Even if not, regular Chinese/Chicom play could take into account the possibility of "harvest" additional land units by occupation of warlord cities (Peking, Shanghai).

Late war play of both Chinese and Jap perhaps should take into account potential US operations along the Chinese coast line?!

I also think, Jap and Chinese strategic planning on mainland China should take into account enemy strategy:

Chinese Offensivenss/Defensiveness could depend on Japan's built priorities (land /naval units) and Japan's posture on mainland Asia.

Perhaps Japanese grand planning (continental/maritime strategy) partly should consider Chinese setup ( forward, exposed, quickly beatable y/n), aside of German strategy (Med/Barb).

Regards




(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 101
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/12/2008 1:25:46 AM   
sajbalk


Posts: 264
Joined: 7/11/2005
From: Davenport, Iowa
Status: offline
>>Can partisans only move in enemy controlled hexes? If yes, this probably would mean, Japan is better off to leave the Chinese partisan controlled coastal area (Chekiang/Kwanghsi provinces) behind the frontline as it is, to avoid partisans there?!

Yes, partisans can move in enemy-controlled hexes. In WiFFE, leaving the amount of controlled land in China to a minimum is a good way of limiting partisans.

>>Can partisans change the affiliation of Warlords? Even if not, regular Chinese/Chicom play could take into account the possibility of "harvest" additional land units by occupation of warlord cities (Peking, Shanghai).


No, partisans do not change control of a hex, they simply take away the control from the owner. So, Warlords will not vanish. Partisans will be a much bigger problem in MWiF because Japan would need to use many more land units to ZOC its rear.



_____________________________

Steve Balk
Iowa, USA

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 102
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/12/2008 8:47:40 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7899
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WarHunter
For China or Japan to be victorious there are a few guildlines that i keep in my mind, while setting up and playing.

Is this taken from CWiF play, or from WiF FE play experience ?

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 103
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/12/2008 8:49:59 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7899
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung
Can partisans only move in enemy controlled hexes? If yes, this probably would mean, Japan is better off to leave the Chinese partisan controlled coastal area (Chekiang/Kwanghsi provinces) behind the frontline as it is, to avoid partisans there?!

They can move in enemy controlled hexes, and in friendly controlled hexes. They have no limitation to enemy controlled hexes.

quote:

Can partisans change the affiliation of Warlords? Even if not, regular Chinese/Chicom play could take into account the possibility of "harvest" additional land units by occupation of warlord cities (Peking, Shanghai).

No they can't.

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 104
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/12/2008 8:55:01 AM   
WarHunter


Posts: 1182
Joined: 3/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Is this taken from CWiF play, or from WiF FE play experience ?


Its from Playing both CWif and Wif FE. Started playing back at the 2nd edition. Still have CWif on my Computer.



_____________________________


“We never felt like we were losing until we were actually dead.”
Marcus Luttrell

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 105
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/12/2008 6:40:37 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 1676
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
I like how the new map will make the theater more of a classical strategy struggle, kind of like, hmmm, an ancient Chinese strategy game perhaps?

(in reply to WarHunter)
Post #: 106
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/14/2009 2:34:52 PM   
Subetai

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 9/18/2006
Status: offline
There is an important possibility for the China - Japan theatre that MWIF allows for more than the boardgame, and that is mutual peace between China and Japan (this might have been discussed elsewhere but can't find it).  Why this might occur is addressed below.

CC and NC will have one AIO (which I agree with), but in a board game the CC are played by the RU (and the NC usually by the US). This means that if (for whatever reason) the JP player offers a peace, it rarely happens, because its not in the RU or US interest for a peace. The point of this post is to suggest that if the JP players offers a peace (lets say back to 1936 borders - so just Manchuria and none of Occupied China), that the Chinese AIO (CC and NC) would most times agree. (Happy to have historial discussion off line).

The CC and NC would then try to occupy the vacated cities, and importantly Shanghai (Victory City). This is then consistent with the AIO trying to do the best for ITSELF (and not be abused by the RU or US player)!

Why would JP offer this? Cost benefit analysis! The cost to conquer, or at least capture more resources in China, is high. As is the effort to garrison China. The JP player could well assess that, in say early 1942 (to use historial timelines) that the new resources captured (importantly oil - none in China) in the south are enough to maintain the war effort (bearing in mind a reduced land unit requirement).

THis is not a gamey strategy, but entirely plausable and within the rules of the game.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 107
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/15/2009 7:50:48 AM   
Greywolf

 

Posts: 105
Joined: 11/15/2000
Status: offline
Hum, so basically the Japan accept to surrender large area and ressource in order not to spent more...

Except that he already spend a lot to get them when you start the game in 1936 with Day of Decision.

Why would the Chinese AIO see it as a benefice to accept Japanese peace offer ? he is part of the Allied team and his job is to keep Japan occupied as much as he can.

I am not sure either that Japan would really really appreciate to have US fleet airplanes and troups based in China where he wont be able to attack them. China could DOW Italy to stay active, receiving support and LL from US to build up air and naval(sub) power. It would require Japanese garrison to protect Manchuria and Hainan/Formosa ( if he keep one of them ). Any effort of the Japanese toward India would be made far more difficult to sustain if troups have to start from Japan and Neutral Chinese can help garrison CW possession before the US can take the entry, making any landing harder.

China could also DOW Vichy and take French Indo-China perhaps even before Japan could make his claim, but I need to check the map and chinese counter to be sure.

All in All, accepting a peace treaty doesnt sound like the best thing to propose for Japan, but perhaps not as bad to accept for China. But I think the AiO will never ever consider it.

_____________________________

Lt. Col. Ivan 'Greywolf' Kerensky

(in reply to Subetai)
Post #: 108
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/15/2009 8:14:38 AM   
Caquineur


Posts: 95
Joined: 4/21/2009
From: Aix en Provence, France, Europe
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf
... China could DOW Italy
...
China could also DOW Vichy ...

If I'm not mistaken, China can't declare war

(in reply to Greywolf)
Post #: 109
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/15/2009 8:19:29 AM   
Orm


Posts: 6116
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

Hum, so basically the Japan accept to surrender large area and ressource in order not to spent more...

Except that he already spend a lot to get them when you start the game in 1936 with Day of Decision.

Why would the Chinese AIO see it as a benefice to accept Japanese peace offer ? he is part of the Allied team and his job is to keep Japan occupied as much as he can.

I am not sure either that Japan would really really appreciate to have US fleet airplanes and troups based in China where he wont be able to attack them. China could DOW Italy to stay active, receiving support and LL from US to build up air and naval(sub) power. It would require Japanese garrison to protect Manchuria and Hainan/Formosa ( if he keep one of them ). Any effort of the Japanese toward India would be made far more difficult to sustain if troups have to start from Japan and Neutral Chinese can help garrison CW possession before the US can take the entry, making any landing harder.

China could also DOW Vichy and take French Indo-China perhaps even before Japan could make his claim, but I need to check the map and chinese counter to be sure.

All in All, accepting a peace treaty doesnt sound like the best thing to propose for Japan, but perhaps not as bad to accept for China. But I think the AiO will never ever consider it.


If China becomes neutral it stays neutral until the Axis players so decide. China as a neutral major power do not co-operate with USA.

Cut from RAW:
9.1 Neutral major powers
A neutral major power can’t co-operate with any other major power
9.2 How to declare war
China may not declare war.

(in reply to Greywolf)
Post #: 110
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/15/2009 9:52:38 AM   
Greywolf

 

Posts: 105
Joined: 11/15/2000
Status: offline
Ok, so absolutely no reason for a Chinese player or AI to accept a Japanese Peace Proposal... except to serve as Peacekeeper in Asia or unsunkable carrier for US planes in 1941... Except I am pretty sure they are not allowed to flight mission against Japan from neutral China...

Who want to seat on the bench all match ?

_____________________________

Lt. Col. Ivan 'Greywolf' Kerensky

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 111
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/15/2009 11:37:10 AM   
Subetai

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 9/18/2006
Status: offline
The reason the Chinese AIO accepts this is because it may be the best way for it to achieve ITS victory conditions, not those of RU or US. Now obviously a person playing China would not accept or, as you say, they'll sit on the bench all match.

Why MIGHT JP offer this? To permanently secure that flank. NO attacks, by CC, NC or anyone else from that area, thereby allowing JP to deploy forces elsewhere. Yes, less production, but also less outlay. This may be a better way for JP to achieve its victory conditions.

Remember this is not a compulsory peace a la Option 50.

As Steve has said, he is programing each individual AIO to look after itself first (I think I have quoted you correctly?)

(in reply to Greywolf)
Post #: 112
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/15/2009 12:35:04 PM   
Greywolf

 

Posts: 105
Joined: 11/15/2000
Status: offline
Ok, but remember that each AiO want to win the game, and accepting a peace proposal by Japan only mean a win if China could DoW it later on.

In fact I wonder what peace proposal the AI should consider at all, except compulsary ones and perhaps a Japan-Russian non-aggression pact there is no real reason to accept any peace proposal in the game.

With your idea, France and Germany could just come to peace in 1939, each one gaining advantage of it. France will take Italy VPs and Germany will have a free reign on the East...

BTW I didn't read China will have bids for it-self in MWiF, if that is so the victory condition for US and USSR should be revised.
WWII was Total War, and so should be WiF...

_____________________________

Lt. Col. Ivan 'Greywolf' Kerensky

(in reply to Subetai)
Post #: 113
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/15/2009 3:10:55 PM   
Gurggulk


Posts: 41
Joined: 5/28/2009
Status: offline
Subetai, Nice posts on thinking outside the box. Many a time our group disscussed possible ideas for many nations, large and small. Some workable, some not.

The Nippon nation can be forced off the Chinese mainland, for that reason alone, an olive branch to the China Allies, seems like a great idea for the axis, not so for the allies. But looks are decieving.

Considering the Allies advantage to taking this peace treaty, there are a couple.

1. Chunking will never fall. Axis can never get a Sudden Death Auto Victory over the allies.
2. USSR will never have to consider the CC for moves during a Combined impluse, when at peace.
3. Burma Oil will never have to be sent to China.

These may not seem like a lot, but it adds up.

Nippon is forced to deploy without the benefit of any China ports, airfields and Flanking position over SE Asia. This is not to be taken lightly.

I would probaly rate this possible AI response to about 2%. As this is a wargame, a peace treaty will probably not be accepted by China.

(in reply to Greywolf)
Post #: 114
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/15/2009 5:14:08 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 1676
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
I'm pretty sure the AI will only play in 2-player mode, and then things like a separate peace are rather irrelevant.

This sometimes happens by default between Japan and China for several years when Japan pursues other strategic directions and China is unable to gain much traction against them until their build-up really gets big.

I like the newest twist on the Chinese Attack Weakness optional rule, but that is not a part of MWiF.

(in reply to Gurggulk)
Post #: 115
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/17/2009 11:12:35 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7899
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Subetai

There is an important possibility for the China - Japan theatre that MWIF allows for more than the boardgame, and that is mutual peace between China and Japan (this might have been discussed elsewhere but can't find it).  Why this might occur is addressed below.

CC and NC will have one AIO (which I agree with), but in a board game the CC are played by the RU (and the NC usually by the US). This means that if (for whatever reason) the JP player offers a peace, it rarely happens, because its not in the RU or US interest for a peace. The point of this post is to suggest that if the JP players offers a peace (lets say back to 1936 borders - so just Manchuria and none of Occupied China), that the Chinese AIO (CC and NC) would most times agree. (Happy to have historial discussion off line).

The CC and NC would then try to occupy the vacated cities, and importantly Shanghai (Victory City). This is then consistent with the AIO trying to do the best for ITSELF (and not be abused by the RU or US player)!

Why would JP offer this? Cost benefit analysis! The cost to conquer, or at least capture more resources in China, is high. As is the effort to garrison China. The JP player could well assess that, in say early 1942 (to use historial timelines) that the new resources captured (importantly oil - none in China) in the south are enough to maintain the war effort (bearing in mind a reduced land unit requirement).

THis is not a gamey strategy, but entirely plausable and within the rules of the game.


I see a big drawback for Japan that should not be ignored, this is that suddenly Japan becomes neutral, which means :
- Forced to choose combined actions until at war with another major power. No more naval nor land actions.
- Forced to put back all MIL and reserve units in the force pool, which represent a good amount of lost BP.

Both of which for me are reasons why I would never ask that as the Japanese.

(in reply to Subetai)
Post #: 116
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/17/2009 11:30:49 PM   
Orm


Posts: 6116
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I see a big drawback for Japan that should not be ignored, this is that suddenly Japan becomes neutral, which means :
- Forced to choose combined actions until at war with another major power. No more naval nor land actions.
- Forced to put back all MIL and reserve units in the force pool, which represent a good amount of lost BP.

Both of which for me are reasons why I would never ask that as the Japanese.



I seem to recall a rule change that says that on map militia (and reserve?) units, when a major power becomes neutral, are moved to the reserve pool and treated as reserve units the next time the major power goes to war.

I am to tired to go looking for the rule now. But I am pretty sure one of you can tell me if I am mistaken or not.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 117
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/18/2009 1:32:21 AM   
michaelbaldur


Posts: 3751
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I see a big drawback for Japan that should not be ignored, this is that suddenly Japan becomes neutral, which means :
- Forced to choose combined actions until at war with another major power. No more naval nor land actions.
- Forced to put back all MIL and reserve units in the force pool, which represent a good amount of lost BP.

Both of which for me are reasons why I would never ask that as the Japanese.



I seem to recall a rule change that says that on map militia (and reserve?) units, when a major power becomes neutral, are moved to the reserve pool and treated as reserve units the next time the major power goes to war.

I am to tired to go looking for the rule now. But I am pretty sure one of you can tell me if I am mistaken or not.


only reserve militz

If you are now a neutral major power, remove any MIL units you have on the map or on the production circle that have ‘Res’ on their back and place them in the reserve pool. Remove all your remaining MIL units from the game until you are next at war (see 4.1.2).

_____________________________

Peyton manning is a God and the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 118
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/18/2009 4:35:20 AM   
christo

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 11/24/2005
From: adelaide, australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I see a big drawback for Japan that should not be ignored, this is that suddenly Japan becomes neutral, which means :
- Forced to choose combined actions until at war with another major power. No more naval nor land actions.
- Forced to put back all MIL and reserve units in the force pool, which represent a good amount of lost BP.

Both of which for me are reasons why I would never ask that as the Japanese.



I seem to recall a rule change that says that on map militia (and reserve?) units, when a major power becomes neutral, are moved to the reserve pool and treated as reserve units the next time the major power goes to war.

I am to tired to go looking for the rule now. But I am pretty sure one of you can tell me if I am mistaken or not.


only reserve militz

If you are now a neutral major power, remove any MIL units you have on the map or on the production circle that have ‘Res’ on their back and place them in the reserve pool. Remove all your remaining MIL units from the game until you are next at war (see 4.1.2).


I'm with Orm. Was it in the rules that came with the 2008 Annual that put any newly built (ie non reserve) on the reserve list in the event of peace?

Christo

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 119
RE: AI for MWiF - China - 6/18/2009 2:12:35 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 662
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subetai

There is an important possibility for the China - Japan theatre that MWIF allows for more than the boardgame, and that is mutual peace between China and Japan (this might have been discussed elsewhere but can't find it).  Why this might occur is addressed below.

CC and NC will have one AIO (which I agree with), but in a board game the CC are played by the RU (and the NC usually by the US). This means that if (for whatever reason) the JP player offers a peace, it rarely happens, because its not in the RU or US interest for a peace. The point of this post is to suggest that if the JP players offers a peace (lets say back to 1936 borders - so just Manchuria and none of Occupied China), that the Chinese AIO (CC and NC) would most times agree. (Happy to have historial discussion off line).

The CC and NC would then try to occupy the vacated cities, and importantly Shanghai (Victory City). This is then consistent with the AIO trying to do the best for ITSELF (and not be abused by the RU or US player)!

Why would JP offer this? Cost benefit analysis! The cost to conquer, or at least capture more resources in China, is high. As is the effort to garrison China. The JP player could well assess that, in say early 1942 (to use historial timelines) that the new resources captured (importantly oil - none in China) in the south are enough to maintain the war effort (bearing in mind a reduced land unit requirement).

THis is not a gamey strategy, but entirely plausable and within the rules of the game.



Your strategy can be interesting. You should test it in one of your campaigns against players and tell us if it was successfull or not.

(in reply to Subetai)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: AI for MWiF - China Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.117