Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy Mega Pack releases on SteamDeal of the Week Da Vinci's Art of WarCivil War II Patch 1.4 public BetaHappy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: A few questions about the rules

 
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: A few questions about the rules Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A few questions about the rules - 10/22/2009 3:14:55 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3725
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous


quote:

Effect of neutrality pacts
After you enter into a neutrality pact with a major power, units controlled by other major powers on your side cannot enter hexes that are part of your common border with that major power if they are at war with that other major power. If they are in the common border already, move them immediately to the nearest friendly hex not in the common border in which they can legally stack.
Your common border with another major power consists of every hex you (or your aligned minor countries) control within 3 hexes and/or hexdots of a hex controlled by the other major power (or its aligned minor countries).


Do I understand this right?

A common border is established between the major powers entering into the neutrality pact.

This
common border consists of every hex the involved major powers (or their aligned minor countries) control within 3 hexes and/or hexdots of each other.

Any units controlled by other major powers that are at war with major powers that have entered into a neutrality pact cannot enter this common border in any way.

If they are in the common border already, move them immediately to the nearest friendly hex not in the common border in which they can legally stack.


Pretty much.

"A common border is established between the major powers entering into the neutrality pact." - To be clear, the border is not established by the neutrality pact, it exists before and after wherever the owned hexes (or owned by aligned minors) hexes meet. In fact if a neutral country was in between and was conquered or aligned by one of the Majors having the pact, then the "common border" would move up to the new border. FREX say Rumania is neutral. The Rumanian/Russian border and 3 hexes either side is not part of the common border area. Now Germany aligns Rumania. At that point the common border then includes the area described by 3 hexes either side.

"Any units controlled by other major powers that are at war with major powers that have entered into a neutrality pact cannot enter this common border in any way.

If they are in the common border already, move them immediately to the nearest friendly hex not in the common border in which they can legally stack."
- So let's say Italian units are on German controlled hexes within 3 hexes of the Russian border and Russia is at war with nobody. Now Italy DoWs Russia. Those Italian units must instantly teleport to a hex that is not a German controlled hex within 3 hexes of Russia. If outside already, they cannot move into such hexes or fly over them.

You could even get the teleportation happening after war was declared and fighting had occurred if your supposed "ally" entered into a neutrality pact with your enemy - but I 've never seen that happen.

< Message edited by paulderynck -- 10/22/2009 3:18:13 AM >


_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 91
RE: A few questions about the rules - 10/22/2009 1:48:05 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 654
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
Deleted, mixep-up the threads again, sorry.

< Message edited by micheljq -- 10/22/2009 1:59:20 PM >


_____________________________

Michel Desjardins,
"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde
"History is a set of lies agreed upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte after the battle of Waterloo, june 18th, 1815

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 92
RE: A few questions about the rules - 10/25/2009 3:11:01 AM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1529
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
Major power A and major power B are on the same side.

Major power B DoW's minor power C.

Can major power A use its AMPH to move a land unit of major power B to invade minor power C?



I have looked under 9. Declaring war, 9.9 Multiple states of war, and 11.14 Invasions.



Under 9. Declaring war the RAW says:
You can’t attack its units (exception: see 9.9, multiple states of war).
You can’t bomb factories or resources it controls.
You can’t enter a hex controlled by:
a neutral minor country;
a neutral major power on your side; or
a major power or minor country you’re not yet at war with on the other side.

Under 9.9 Multiple states of war the RAW says “A unit may not enter or attack a hex (or units therein) controlled by a major power on the other side that it isn’t at war with. However it can attack a hex controlled by an enemy major power or minor country even if the hex contains units it is not at war with.

Under 11.14 Invasions the RAW says "Each unit which invades counts as 1 land move. Each invasion counts as 1 land attack".



_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 93
RE: A few questions about the rules - 10/25/2009 3:52:44 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3725
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

Major power A and major power B are on the same side.

Major power B DoW's minor power C.

Can major power A use its AMPH to move a land unit of major power B to invade minor power C?



I have looked under 9. Declaring war, 9.9 Multiple states of war, and 11.14 Invasions.



Under 9. Declaring war the RAW says:
You can’t attack its units (exception: see 9.9, multiple states of war).
You can’t bomb factories or resources it controls.
You can’t enter a hex controlled by:
a neutral minor country;
a neutral major power on your side; or
a major power or minor country you’re not yet at war with on the other side.

Under 9.9 Multiple states of war the RAW says “A unit may not enter or attack a hex (or units therein) controlled by a major power on the other side that it isn’t at war with. However it can attack a hex controlled by an enemy major power or minor country even if the hex contains units it is not at war with.

Under 11.14 Invasions the RAW says "Each unit which invades counts as 1 land move. Each invasion counts as 1 land attack".



Yes, as long as A and B cooperate.. A's AMPH is not attacking or entering C.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 94
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/17/2009 11:51:33 PM   
ullern


Posts: 1752
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
Q1) Has anyone considered if the Annual 2008 errata about marker placement also affects factories. I think it does the way it's worded.

Q2) Is there a stacking limit for Synth oil?

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 95
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/23/2009 11:12:06 AM   
ullern


Posts: 1752
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
Didn't get reply on the prvious questions. But I'll add another one still:

Is there a difference between a ZOC from a neutral unit on the other side and an enemy unit on the other side?
Multiple states of war doesn't specify this. A lot of rules use the words "enemy ZOC."

A typical example where it matters:
German peace keepers in Finland in the Winter War ('39). According to ZOC rules German units will have ZOC that extends into Finnish hexes, but not USSR controlled hexes since Germany is not at war with the USSR. (This is quite clear if you read about where ZOC extends in RAW chapter 2.2) So the USSR would not be affected by German ZOC as long as they only move or trace supply in their own hexes. But how to deal with the German ZOC in Finnish hexes is not clear as the German units does have ZOC, but the ZOC is strictly speaking not enemy to the USSR. Does this mean that the USSR can ignore the German ZOC?


(in reply to ullern)
Post #: 96
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/23/2009 7:05:44 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern

Didn't get reply on the prvious questions. But I'll add another one still:

Is there a difference between a ZOC from a neutral unit on the other side and an enemy unit on the other side?
Multiple states of war doesn't specify this. A lot of rules use the words "enemy ZOC."

A typical example where it matters:
German peace keepers in Finland in the Winter War ('39). According to ZOC rules German units will have ZOC that extends into Finnish hexes, but not USSR controlled hexes since Germany is not at war with the USSR. (This is quite clear if you read about where ZOC extends in RAW chapter 2.2) So the USSR would not be affected by German ZOC as long as they only move or trace supply in their own hexes. But how to deal with the German ZOC in Finnish hexes is not clear as the German units does have ZOC, but the ZOC is strictly speaking not enemy to the USSR. Does this mean that the USSR can ignore the German ZOC?



23. Glossary & Index has this :
*************************
Enemy [a major power or minor country you are at war with]
*************************

(in reply to ullern)
Post #: 97
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/24/2009 11:19:34 AM   
Blorsh


Posts: 19
Joined: 12/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp


quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern

Didn't get reply on the prvious questions. But I'll add another one still:

Is there a difference between a ZOC from a neutral unit on the other side and an enemy unit on the other side?
Multiple states of war doesn't specify this. A lot of rules use the words "enemy ZOC."

A typical example where it matters:
German peace keepers in Finland in the Winter War ('39). According to ZOC rules German units will have ZOC that extends into Finnish hexes, but not USSR controlled hexes since Germany is not at war with the USSR. (This is quite clear if you read about where ZOC extends in RAW chapter 2.2) So the USSR would not be affected by German ZOC as long as they only move or trace supply in their own hexes. But how to deal with the German ZOC in Finnish hexes is not clear as the German units does have ZOC, but the ZOC is strictly speaking not enemy to the USSR. Does this mean that the USSR can ignore the German ZOC?



23. Glossary & Index has this :
*************************
Enemy [a major power or minor country you are at war with]
*************************




So russian unit will have ZOC that extends into Finnish hexes and can make that a german peacekeeper could be out of supply but a german units ZOC will no extend in russian controled hexes so hexes in finland conquered by russian no have german ZOC, isn´t it?

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 98
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/24/2009 7:31:08 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 17949
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blorsh

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp


quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern

Didn't get reply on the prvious questions. But I'll add another one still:

Is there a difference between a ZOC from a neutral unit on the other side and an enemy unit on the other side?
Multiple states of war doesn't specify this. A lot of rules use the words "enemy ZOC."

A typical example where it matters:
German peace keepers in Finland in the Winter War ('39). According to ZOC rules German units will have ZOC that extends into Finnish hexes, but not USSR controlled hexes since Germany is not at war with the USSR. (This is quite clear if you read about where ZOC extends in RAW chapter 2.2) So the USSR would not be affected by German ZOC as long as they only move or trace supply in their own hexes. But how to deal with the German ZOC in Finnish hexes is not clear as the German units does have ZOC, but the ZOC is strictly speaking not enemy to the USSR. Does this mean that the USSR can ignore the German ZOC?



23. Glossary & Index has this :
*************************
Enemy [a major power or minor country you are at war with]
*************************




So russian unit will have ZOC that extends into Finnish hexes and can make that a german peacekeeper could be out of supply but a german units ZOC will no extend in russian controled hexes so hexes in finland conquered by russian no have german ZOC, isn´t it?

Welcome to the forum.

Yeah, I think that is all correct. I'll be redoing the supply routines so they run faster pretty soon. To do that I will have to have complete mastery of this rule. If I learn anything new (that disagrees with what you wrote), I'll post it here. Another case of "No news is good news".

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Blorsh)
Post #: 99
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/25/2009 11:23:14 AM   
Blorsh


Posts: 19
Joined: 12/24/2009
Status: offline
  So IMO, al MWIF the live will be harder for German "peecekeeper" at Finland, because the russian units will have more space (european scale hexes, not ASA like board game) to manouvre around german units, and in the case german units are at coastal hexes and the russian units pass around them, the germans can no cut their supply, so the MWIF will be have different strategies from board game.

  I have the old CWiF, and at China the japanese advance is very different, the game rules are the same, but with different map scale is very different.

  At CWiF there is a bug that when at naval intercepetion the interceptios is succesful is not possible to attack only the moving units, you have to attack naval units at one sea box also, and at rules example:

"Heinz rolls a ‘5’. The other units in the sea-box are not included in the first combat round, so only the moving units will fight."

I expect this will be corrected at MWIF

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 100
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/25/2009 6:19:00 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 17949
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blorsh

  So IMO, al MWIF the live will be harder for German "peecekeeper" at Finland, because the russian units will have more space (european scale hexes, not ASA like board game) to manouvre around german units, and in the case german units are at coastal hexes and the russian units pass around them, the germans can no cut their supply, so the MWIF will be have different strategies from board game.

  I have the old CWiF, and at China the japanese advance is very different, the game rules are the same, but with different map scale is very different.

  At CWiF there is a bug that when at naval intercepetion the interceptios is succesful is not possible to attack only the moving units, you have to attack naval units at one sea box also, and at rules example:

"Heinz rolls a ‘5’. The other units in the sea-box are not included in the first combat round, so only the moving units will fight."

I expect this will be corrected at MWIF


Yeah, the beta testers have reported some problems with naval interception (inherited from CWIF). I have made a lot of changes to the naval interception and naval combat code from CWIF. Somewhere in the threads of this forum there is a detailed explanation of the sequence of play (section 7 of the Players Manual). If you can find that thread, it contains the whole gory story. Here is an except from the Players Manual on naval combat:
===
7.10 Naval Combat Subphases

Naval combat can be initiated from 3 places in the sequence of play: Naval Combat by Phasing Side phase, Naval Combat by Non-Phasing Side phase, and Naval Interception digression. Naval interception digressions can occur during numerous phases. Once a naval interception combat has been resolved, with any naval combat aborts also completed, the sequence of play returns to the phase where the naval interception occurred.

The two naval combat phases start with the selection of a sea area (see section 7.10.1) while naval combat interception digressions skip that subphase and begins with the subphase Naval Air Support by the Initiating Side (see section 7.10.2). Note that the initiating side is the phasing side, except during naval interception combats; then it is the side which moved naval units into the sea area - the side which was intercepted.

7.10.1 Select Sea Area (RAC 11.5.2)

Depending on whether it is the Naval Combat by Phasing Side or Non-Phasing Side, one major power on the phasing/non-phasing side is designated the decision maker for each sea area. The Naval Combat Overview form (see section 8.7.2.28) is shown to all players, although a sea area can be selected for combat only by the designated major power for that sea area (i.e., the major power on the phasing/non-phasing side with the most units in the sea area). That decision maker is also the only one who can decline combat in that sea area.

If any of the decision makers selects a sea area for naval combat, that person designates which naval unit is initiating the combat. Note that the decision maker does not have to choose one of his own units, just one of the units on his side that is eligible to initiate the naval combat. The initiating unit may have been identified previously (e.g., in a naval interception during the naval movement phase, the intercepting unit can be used as the initiating unit in the ensuing Naval Combat by Non-Phasing Side phase). After the initiating unit has been determined, MWIF advances the sequence of play to the subphase Naval Air Support by the Initiating Side.

Once all sea areas where combat may occur have either been selected or declined, the naval combat phase ends and MWIF advances the sequence of play to the next phase (either the Naval Combat by Non-Phasing Side phase or the Strategic Bombing phase).

7.10.2 Naval Air Support by Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.3)

In this subphase the major powers on the initiating side can fly land based air units into the sea area in support of the current naval combat. As ‘interceptors’ these units have only half their normal range. Once all major powers on the initiating side have clicked on the End of Phase button in the main form, this subphase is over and MWIF advances the sequence of play to the subphase Naval Air Support by the Non-Initiating Side.

7.10.3 Naval Air Support by Non-Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.3)

This subphase is the same as the preceding one but for the major powers on the non-initiating side.

7.10.4 Commit Submarines (RAC 11.5.4)

In this subphase both sides decide whether or not to commit their submarines to the combat. The side that initiated the combat decides first. If the naval combat is an interception combat, then the side that successfully intercepted (the non-initiating side) has already decided whether or not to include its subs.

The decision making major power on each side is the major power with the most units in the sea area. The Commit Subs form is used for this decision (see section 8.7.2.11). Once both sides have closed the Commit Subs form, this subphase is over and MWIF advances the sequence of play to the next subphase.

7.10.5 Search Die Rolls (RAC 11.5.5)

The first thing done in this subphase is to make sure that both sides have units committed to the naval combat. It is possible that one side had only submarines and decided to not commit their subs. In that case, the combat is over.

Assuming that a naval combat is still possible, MWIF generates random numbers to simulate rolling dice for the search rolls for both sides. During port attacks the non-phasing side has fixed numbers for their die rolls: 5 for a major port and 3 for a minor port. MWIF figures out which sides had successful search rolls and informs everyone as to what happened.

There are 3 possible outcomes of the search rolls:
• Neither side succeeds - the combat is over.
• Both sides succeed - MWIF records this fact and advances the sequence of play to the next subphase.
• One side succeeds and the other fails - MWIF records who ‘won’ and advances the sequence of play to the next subphase.

7.10.6 Select Included Sea Boxes (RAC 11.5.5)

If both search rolls were successful, then which sea box sections are included is ordained by the rules and recorded by MWIF. If only one side was successful, MWIF lets the winning side choose which sea box sections for the losing side are included in the combat (see section 8.7.2.48). Either way, once the included sea box sections are known, MWIF advances the sequence of play to the next subphase.

7.10.7 US Decides Whether to Include Units (RAC 13.3.2, US Entry Options)

Under certain conditions, the US has the option of including some of its combat units in the naval combat, even though the US is not at war with the Axis. These are US Entry options 11, 20, 29, and 38. It might also have some of its convoys included if US Entry option 32 has been chosen. This subphase is skipped if none of the those US Entry options have been selected or is US Entry option 50, unrestricted naval warfare, has been chosen. The addition of US Entry option 50 means that the US units will have already ben committed in the previous subphase.

Once the US player has decided what, if any, units to include (see section 8.7.2.56), MWIF advances the sequence of play to the next subphase.

7.10.8 Naval Combat Surprise (RAC 11.5.6)

Depending on the search numbers and sea box sections, MWIF calculates which side has surprise points available. There might be none, and if there is only 1, then there is no way to spend it. Either way, MWIF skips this subphase and advances to the Select Combat Type subphase.

If one side has surprise points, the decision maker for that side for this combat now gets the opportunity to spend them (see section 8.7.2.52). One of those choices might be to avoid combat altogether. If that choice is selected, then the combat is over.

Assuming that the combat is not over, MWIF advances the sequence of play to the next subphase as soon as the decision maker closes the Surprise Points form.

7.10.9 Select Combat Type (RAC 11.5.7 & 11.5.6)

Determining the naval combat type is a series of decisions:
1. The side that has surprise may have chosen the naval combat type (if they chose naval air and the weather prevents a naval air combat, then the combat is over).
2. If the weather permits naval air combat, and the initiating side has a unit capable of naval air combat (see RAC section 11.5.7), the initiating side can choose naval air combat.
3. Same as #2 but for the non-initiating side.
4. If the initiating side has a unit capable of submarine combat and the non-initiating side has convoys present, the initiating side can choose submarine combat.
5. Same as #4 but with the roles reversed.
6. If none of the above has been chosen, it is a surface combat.

Once the combat type has been decided MWIF advances the sequence of play based on the combat type:
• Naval air combat - Air-to-air Combat subphase (see section 7.10.10),
• Submarine combat - Anti-air Combat by Non-Initiating Side subphase (see section 7.10.11), or
• Surface combat - Surface Attack by Initiating Side (see section 7.10.15).

7.10.10 Air-to-air Combat (RAC 11.5.9 & 11.5.6)

Naval Air combat starts with identifying all the carrier air units included in the combat and separating them from their carriers; they fly into battle. When not playing with the optional rule Carrier Planes, for each participating carrier MWIF creates a temporary carrier air unit, which players manipulate at various points in the naval air combat (e.g., assigning whether the unit is a fighter or bomber, and arranging units for air-to-air combat). These temporary carrier air units have air-to-air and air-to-sea factors equal to the class of the carrier they represent. The air-to-air factor is used when the temporary air unit flies as a fighter and the air-to-sea factor when it flies as a bomber.

Regardless of whether the optional rule Carrier Planes is being used, MWIF then lets all players, simultaneously, decide which of their engaged air units are flying as fighters and which are flying as bombers. Only fighter-bombers and carrier air units have this flexibility, and even for them there are many cases where the unit must fly as a fighter (e.g., if the unit has an air-to-sea factor of zero).

After all air units have been assigned a role as either fighter or bomber (see section 8.7.2.32 for details of using the Plane Role form), a standard air-to-air combat is performed (see section 7.9). If zero bombers survive the air-to-air combat, MWIF advances the sequence of play to the subphase 7.10.21, Voluntary Side Abort by Initiating Side. Otherwise, the sequence of play advances to the subphase Anti-air Combat by Non-Initiating Side.

7.10.11 Anti-air Combat by Non-Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.9 & 11.5.6)

If there are no bombers from the initiating side remaining in the attack, MWIF skips this subphase and advances the sequence of play to the subphase Anti-air Combat by Initiating Side. Conversely, if there are bombers from the initiating side left, they are subject to anti-aircraft fire (see RAC 11.5.9). Then once again MWIF checks to see if there are bombers from the initiating side remaining in the attack.

If some bombers from the initiating side remain, MWIF advances the sequence of play to the subphase Naval Air Attack by Initiating Side. Otherwise, it skips to the subphase Anti-air Combat by Initiating Side.

7.10.12 Naval Air Attack by Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.9 & 11.5.6)

This subphase executes the actual naval air attack by the initiating side’s bombers on the non-initiating side’s naval units. MWIF uses the naval combat results table to determine what damage was inflicted, if any. The four possible results are: no effect, aborted, damaged, and destroyed.

The team leader for the initiating side chooses the first target and the sides alternate choosing targets thereafter. If one side had the advantage of surprise and spent surprise points to choose a target, then they get to choose the target when normally their opponent would choose. That is, the side that doesn’t have surprise loses its ‘turn’ to choose a target, and the other side chooses 3 in a row (or more if more surprises points were spent on choosing targets). See section 8.7.2.30 for details concerning the use of the Naval Combat Results form.

As the target for each result is determined, MWIF processes those results by generating a random number. Depending on the defense factor of the target and the generated random number, the target either receives the result indicated, or a result “one less” severe. See RAC section 11.5.8 for details about this and other naval combat results. Should convoys receive adverse results, MWIF automatically splits a large convoy unit into smaller ones. For example, if one convoy is destroyed, MWIF will split a 4 point convoy unit into a 3 point unit and a 1 point unit, and destroy the 1 point convoy.

Any aborting land based air units are placed in the Return To Base Stack and returned to a land hex at the end of the combat round. Naval units which have aborted are placed in the Naval Combat Abort Queue and processed after this naval combat is completely over (see section 11.13.6).

Regardless of the naval combat results, all carrier air units are returned to their carriers at the end of the naval combat round. Damaged naval units remain in the sea area and may end up participating in future naval combat rounds of this naval combat. However, once this naval combat is completely over, all damaged naval units are placed in the Naval Abort Queue and processed the same as other units therein (see section 11.13.6).

After this subphase is over, MWIF continues the current naval combat round by advancing the sequence of play to the subphase Anti-air Combat by Initiating Side.

7.10.13 Anti-air Combat by Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.9 & 11.5.6)

This is the same as 7.10.11 except the sides are reversed. When this subphase is over, MWIF advances the sequence of play to either Naval Air Attack by Non-Initiating Side, or skips that subphase and advances to end of naval combat round processing (as described in 7.10.12).

7.10.14 Naval Air Attack by Non-Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.9 & 11.5.6)

This is the same as 7.10.12 except the sides are reversed. When this subphase is over, MWIF advances the sequence of play to the end of naval combat round processing (as described in 7.10.12).

7.10.15 Surface Attack by Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.8 & 11.5.6)

Both sides must have surface naval units included in the combat for this type of combat to take place. If either side does not, then MWIF advances the sequence of play to end of naval combat round. Usually, if MWIF processes to this subphase a naval surface combat occurs.

A surface naval combat is the simplest of the 3 types of naval combat. MWIF counts how many surface factors the initiating side has, counts the number of ships the non-initiating side has, and performs a table lookup using the naval combat results table. The processing of the results is the same as described in section 7.10.12.

After this subphase is over, MWIF continues the current naval combat round by advancing the sequence of play to the subphase Surface Attack by Non-Initiating Side.

7.10.16 Surface Attack by Non-Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.8 & 11.5.6)

This subphase is identical to the previous one except the sides are reversed. When this subphase is over, MWIF advances the sequence of play to the end of naval combat round processing (as described in 7.10.12).

7.10.17 ASW Attack by Non-Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.10, 22.4.19, & 11.5.6)

A submarine naval combat starts with the non-initiating side using its ASW (anti-submarine warfare) units to attack the initiating side’s submarines. Obviously, if the non-initiating side has no ASW units or the initiating side has no submarines, this subphase is skipped. Under those circumstances, MWIF either advances the sequence of play to the Submarine Attack by Initiating Side (if the initiating side has submarines) or to the ASW Attack by Initiating Side subphase (if they do not).

Assuming that both sides have the requisite units for this subphase to occur and using only committed units, MWIF counts the ASW factors of the non-initiating side, counts the submarines on the initiating side, and performs a table lookup using the Naval combat results table. The processing of the results is the same as described in section 7.10.12.

After this subphase is over, MWIF continues the current naval combat round by advancing the sequence of play to the subphase Submarine Attack by Initiating Side.

7.10.18 Submarine Attack by Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.10 & 11.5.6)

In this subphase, using only committed units, MWIF counts the submarine factors on the initiating side, counts of the number of convoys, ASW Escorts, and ASW Carriers on non-initiating side, and performs a table lookup using the Naval combat results table. The processing of the results is the same as described in section 7.10.12.

After this subphase is over, MWIF continues the current naval combat round by advancing the sequence of play to the subphase ASW Attack by Initiating Side.

7.10.19 ASW Attack by Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.10, 22.4.19, & 11.5.6)

This subphase is identical to 7.10.17, except the sides are reversed. After this subphase is over, MWIF continues the current naval combat round by advancing the sequence of play to the subphase Submarine Attack by Non-Initiating Side.

7.10.20 Submarine Attack by Non-Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.10 & 11.5.6)

This subphase is identical to 7.10.18, except the sides are reversed. After this subphase is over, MWIF continues the current naval combat round by advancing the sequence of play to the end of naval combat round processing (as described in 7.10.12).

7.10.21 Voluntary Side Abort by Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.11)

In this subphase, which occurs after each round of naval combat, regardless of type of naval combat, the decision maker on the initiating side has the choice of whether to stay for another round of combat or abort some of his units. If he decides to abort a unit, all of his side’s units that were committed to combat in the immediately preceding round of naval combat must also abort. Regardless of his decision, once he has made it, MWIF advances the sequence of play to Voluntary Side Abort by Non-Initiating Side.

7.10.22 Voluntary Side Abort by Non-Initiating Side (RAC 11.5.11)

Similar to the decision made in the previous subphase, the non-initiating side can choose whether to stay or abort.

If any units at war with each other remain in the sea area, MWIF returns the sequence of play to 7.10.2, Naval Air Support by Initiating Side. If no combatants remain in the sea area, the naval combat is over and MWIF checks whether there are any units in the Naval Combat Abort Queue. If so, MWIF executes a Naval Combat Abort Digression (see section 7.13.6). If the queue is empty, MWIF returns to the point in the sequence of play from which this naval combat originated.

===

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Blorsh)
Post #: 101
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/25/2009 7:17:16 PM   
bj_rohde

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 8/3/2007
From: Norway
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

7.10.5 Search Die Rolls (RAC 11.5.5)

Assuming that a naval combat is still possible, MWIF generates random numbers to simulate rolling dice for the search rolls for both sides. During port attacks the non-phasing side has fixed numbers for their die rolls: 5 for a major port and 3 for a minor port. MWIF figures out which sides had successful search rolls and informs everyone as to what happened.



Been a long while since I've been logged in here, but trying to throw in my thoughts anyway:
The numbers '3' and '5' for minor/major ports in port attacks are representations of the sea boxes, not die rolls, IIRC?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 102
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/25/2009 11:16:26 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 17949
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bj_rohde


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

7.10.5 Search Die Rolls (RAC 11.5.5)

Assuming that a naval combat is still possible, MWIF generates random numbers to simulate rolling dice for the search rolls for both sides. During port attacks the non-phasing side has fixed numbers for their die rolls: 5 for a major port and 3 for a minor port. MWIF figures out which sides had successful search rolls and informs everyone as to what happened.



Been a long while since I've been logged in here, but trying to throw in my thoughts anyway:
The numbers '3' and '5' for minor/major ports in port attacks are representations of the sea boxes, not die rolls, IIRC?

Yes. Thanks - I'll rewrite that text.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to bj_rohde)
Post #: 103
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/26/2009 9:19:59 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3725
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blorsh

  So IMO, al MWIF the live will be harder for German "peecekeeper" at Finland, because the russian units will have more space (european scale hexes, not ASA like board game) to manouvre around german units, and in the case german units are at coastal hexes and the russian units pass around them, the germans can no cut their supply, so the MWIF will be have different strategies from board game.


Truly. So good play would dictate stacking a German peacekeeper with a Finnish corps wherever possible.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Blorsh)
Post #: 104
RE: A few questions about the rules - 12/29/2009 7:32:25 AM   
Blorsh


Posts: 19
Joined: 12/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Blorsh

  So IMO, al MWIF the live will be harder for German "peecekeeper" at Finland, because the russian units will have more space (european scale hexes, not ASA like board game) to manouvre around german units, and in the case german units are at coastal hexes and the russian units pass around them, the germans can no cut their supply, so the MWIF will be have different strategies from board game.


Truly. So good play would dictate stacking a German peacekeeper with a Finnish corps wherever possible.


At MWiF map scale ok, but at the board game ASA map scale (near Murmansk) if you need 2 corps (or an HQ) to make a ZOC a finnish corp and a German corp (not at war with Russia) will create a valid ZOC? So be cautios with good or bad play, that is no so clear.


(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 105
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/8/2010 8:50:28 PM   
marcejap


Posts: 18
Joined: 12/21/2009
Status: offline
Question about the rules:

France. Territories (like Algeria) are considered aligned minor countries, and don't give supply to any other units (even co-operating units, if any).

Vichy: as above.

Free-France: when Vichy is installed, the french playes chose a new home country. This give supply to co-operating units (CW and US). What about the other FF territories? Are them also FF home countries? Or are them FF aligned minor countries?

Vichy collapsed: all territories (not conquered by the axis, of course) become FF home countries? Or are all FF aligned minor countries?

Thank you in advance.
marce

(in reply to Blorsh)
Post #: 106
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/8/2010 10:43:43 PM   
sajbalk


Posts: 264
Joined: 7/11/2005
From: Davenport, Iowa
Status: offline
Algeria is a minoir country and gives secondary supply to French units and primary supply to Algerian units.

As for Vichy, the new French home country is a primay supply source for the CW and the US. The other countries do nothing for the US or the CW. Similarly, a German aligned Rumania does not give supply to Italy.

When Vichy is collapsed, all Vichy minors become French minors.




quote:

ORIGINAL: marcejap

Question about the rules:

France. Territories (like Algeria) are considered aligned minor countries, and don't give supply to any other units (even co-operating units, if any).

Vichy: as above.

Free-France: when Vichy is installed, the french playes chose a new home country. This give supply to co-operating units (CW and US). What about the other FF territories? Are them also FF home countries? Or are them FF aligned minor countries?

Vichy collapsed: all territories (not conquered by the axis, of course) become FF home countries? Or are all FF aligned minor countries?

Thank you in advance.
marce




_____________________________

Steve Balk
Iowa, USA

(in reply to marcejap)
Post #: 107
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/11/2010 4:43:55 PM   
Breunor

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 11/19/2009
Status: offline
Marce,

I just wanted to be careful here with 'WIFFE English'. IIn WIFFE, Algeria is not a 'territory' (even though I know you are using the term generically. The distinction can be seen in rule 2.5.

From RAW 7

2.5 Control

Entities

There are 2 geographical entities in the game ~ home countries and territories. Home countries have capital cities, territories do not.

A home country consists of every hex that a MAR could reach from the capital of that home country without crossing a red political boundary or entering a hex containing the name of another major power (e.g. all of mainland China including Japanese occupied China is part of the Chinese home nation, but Hainan and Formosa are not).



So, a major power can control home countries (Minors countries) and territories. The minor capital is a secondary supply source. (Sorry, I can't swear that these rules haven't been overridden by some other provision but I'm pretty sure it works that way.) Obviously, by definition, a territory can't have a capital so it can't provide a secondary supply source.

(in reply to marcejap)
Post #: 108
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/19/2010 1:10:52 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 731
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
A new question:

If you are using air combat optional rule 22 (bouncing combat) as per 14.3.3, after the first DC, the combat sequence is stopped to do the Bouncing Combat if selected. Ok, then lets imagine...

1)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and there is no effect
- Player 2 shoots the bouncing and aborts the only plane remaining of Player 1
- Player 2 gets a 20 and kills? Player 1 (aborted?) fighter

In this case we are asuming that Player 1 fighter was aborted in the bouncing and thus, can not get an effect of the last dices of Player 2 . Are we playing correctly? If it works like we are actually playing, it looks to me like unfair, don't you think so?

2)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and shoots down the one remaining enemy fighter (or bomber)
- Player 2 answers the bouncing attack (No effect)
- Player 2 ... answers the regular attack (once dead in the bouncing)? or does not because it is already destroyed?

Again, terrible disadvantages for the second player to play IMO...

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 1/19/2010 2:23:48 PM >

(in reply to Breunor)
Post #: 109
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/19/2010 10:29:53 PM   
ullern


Posts: 1752
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

A new question:

If you are using air combat optional rule 22 (bouncing combat) as per 14.3.3, after the first DC, the combat sequence is stopped to do the Bouncing Combat if selected. Ok, then lets imagine...

1)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and there is no effect
- Player 2 shoots the bouncing and aborts the only plane remaining of Player 1
- Player 2 gets a 20 and kills? Player 1 (aborted?) fighter

In this case we are asuming that Player 1 fighter was aborted in the bouncing and thus, can not get an effect of the last dices of Player 2 . Are we playing correctly? If it works like we are actually playing, it looks to me like unfair, don't you think so?


You are playing it correct. I don't think it's unfair. I play with bounce combat, but I decline bounce combat maybe 30% of the time. If I was Player 2 I would probably decline bounce combat in this situation. I know I can score only one hit on my oponent, so rolling twice will not help me - will only help him. I must be really desperate for a +1 bonus in the combat to fight this bounce combat.


quote:


2)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and shoots down the one remaining enemy fighter (or bomber)
- Player 2 answers the bouncing attack (No effect)
- Player 2 ... answers the regular attack (once dead in the bouncing)? or does not because it is already destroyed?

Again, terrible disadvantages for the second player to play IMO...


In your second bullet Player 1 can not shoot down the one remaining bomber, because Player 2 can only choose bounce combat if he has fighters left.

I would give Player 2 that last dice roll, and that is what has happened every time my group has run into that situation.

But I might be playing it wrong because the rules are not perfectly clear. The general A2A combat rule says you get the second dice roll despite results Player 1 inflicts. But the FAQ says you recalculate the A2A combat values immediately after a bounce, and what exactly is your combat value with all your aircraft already shot down?

From my perspective it would just seem more logical that the regular dice roll is something that already happened, you just don't know the results yet, therefore the dice roll should not be modified. But we should hear the comments from the rules clarification group I think.


< Message edited by ullern -- 1/19/2010 10:30:40 PM >

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 110
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 1:21:50 AM   
christo

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 11/24/2005
From: adelaide, australia
Status: offline
I must admit that I play this differently. The rules state that regular combat is interrupted and thus the results of the bounce combat are applied prior to the continuation of normal air to air combat. As you say in your post, the odds are recalculated after bounce combat. The only way for odds to be different is if a plane has been aborted or destroyed.


"After this combat, if the bouncing fighter is not aborted or destroyed it must be placed in the rear of the line of fighters from which it came...
<snip> (similar comment re bombers)
After the bounce combat you resume the air to air sequence of play"


Thus in the first example there was no player 1 plane left to have a second go at during the regular phase of combat.
In your second example, the bouncing fighter had its go during the bounce combat but because it was shot down it was not there for a second go during the regular combat.

This is a quote from 14.3.3 bounce combat from the adg website.

Christo


quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

A new question:

If you are using air combat optional rule 22 (bouncing combat) as per 14.3.3, after the first DC, the combat sequence is stopped to do the Bouncing Combat if selected. Ok, then lets imagine...

1)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and there is no effect
- Player 2 shoots the bouncing and aborts the only plane remaining of Player 1
- Player 2 gets a 20 and kills? Player 1 (aborted?) fighter

In this case we are asuming that Player 1 fighter was aborted in the bouncing and thus, can not get an effect of the last dices of Player 2 . Are we playing correctly? If it works like we are actually playing, it looks to me like unfair, don't you think so?


You are playing it correct. I don't think it's unfair. I play with bounce combat, but I decline bounce combat maybe 30% of the time. If I was Player 2 I would probably decline bounce combat in this situation. I know I can score only one hit on my oponent, so rolling twice will not help me - will only help him. I must be really desperate for a +1 bonus in the combat to fight this bounce combat.


quote:


2)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and shoots down the one remaining enemy fighter (or bomber)
- Player 2 answers the bouncing attack (No effect)
- Player 2 ... answers the regular attack (once dead in the bouncing)? or does not because it is already destroyed?

Again, terrible disadvantages for the second player to play IMO...


In your second bullet Player 1 can not shoot down the one remaining bomber, because Player 2 can only choose bounce combat if he has fighters left.

I would give Player 2 that last dice roll, and that is what has happened every time my group has run into that situation.

But I might be playing it wrong because the rules are not perfectly clear. The general A2A combat rule says you get the second dice roll despite results Player 1 inflicts. But the FAQ says you recalculate the A2A combat values immediately after a bounce, and what exactly is your combat value with all your aircraft already shot down?

From my perspective it would just seem more logical that the regular dice roll is something that already happened, you just don't know the results yet, therefore the dice roll should not be modified. But we should hear the comments from the rules clarification group I think.



(in reply to ullern)
Post #: 111
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 1:44:43 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 1590
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
am I the only one who flat out hates Bounce Combat? I am never a fan of trying to make the game overly tactical. A WiF air mission is a sustained set of multiple bombing attacks, not a dogfight.


Sorry OT, no rules question there.

(in reply to christo)
Post #: 112
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 2:40:57 AM   
Taxman66


Posts: 132
Joined: 3/19/2008
Status: offline
I don't care for it either. IMO, it's just an unecessary extra layer of complication.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 113
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 3:34:42 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3725
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

A new question:

If you are using air combat optional rule 22 (bouncing combat) as per 14.3.3, after the first DC, the combat sequence is stopped to do the Bouncing Combat if selected. Ok, then lets imagine...

1)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and there is no effect
- Player 2 shoots the bouncing and aborts the only plane remaining of Player 1
- Player 2 gets a 20 and kills? Player 1 (aborted?) fighter

In this case we are asuming that Player 1 fighter was aborted in the bouncing and thus, can not get an effect of the last dices of Player 2 . Are we playing correctly? If it works like we are actually playing, it looks to me like unfair, don't you think so?

You are correct. You cannot shoot down a plane that has already been aborted. This is no different than getting an AX after the juiciest target has already cleared through.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio
2)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and shoots down the one remaining enemy fighter (or bomber)
- Player 2 answers the bouncing attack (No effect)
- Player 2 ... answers the regular attack (once dead in the bouncing)? or does not because it is already destroyed?

Again, terrible disadvantages for the second player to play IMO...

I agree with Ullern. It is a good question for the Rules group.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 114
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 3:40:09 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3725
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: christo

I must admit that I play this differently. The rules state that regular combat is interrupted and thus the results of the bounce combat are applied prior to the continuation of normal air to air combat. As you say in your post, the odds are recalculated after bounce combat. The only way for odds to be different is if a plane has been aborted or destroyed.

No, the odds can also change if you do the Bounce with your lead fighter. At first we wondered about this but there is nothing to prevent doing a Bounce if you only have one fighter so, clearly, it is legal to do a Bounce with your lead fighter when you have several. We have seen this kind of odds change many times.

BTW we like Bounce combat, but since it is an optional rule, those who don't are free to play without it.


_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to christo)
Post #: 115
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 8:34:31 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

am I the only one who flat out hates Bounce Combat? I am never a fan of trying to make the game overly tactical. A WiF air mission is a sustained set of multiple bombing attacks, not a dogfight.


Sorry OT, no rules question there.

I like it a lot because it makes back up fighters and bombers no more safe.
Without the bounce rule, the back bombers are virtually immune to adverse effects, with the bounce rule, the other side can transform one of his bomber wings claering to the target against one of his fighter wings clearing to any enemy wing. This is great to the game. Stukas and Lancasters can no longer hide behind a crappy bomber.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 116
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 8:34:34 AM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 731
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

A new question:

If you are using air combat optional rule 22 (bouncing combat) as per 14.3.3, after the first DC, the combat sequence is stopped to do the Bouncing Combat if selected. Ok, then lets imagine...

1)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and there is no effect
- Player 2 shoots the bouncing and aborts the only plane remaining of Player 1
- Player 2 gets a 20 and kills? Player 1 (aborted?) fighter

In this case we are asuming that Player 1 fighter was aborted in the bouncing and thus, can not get an effect of the last dices of Player 2 . Are we playing correctly? If it works like we are actually playing, it looks to me like unfair, don't you think so?


You are playing it correct. I don't think it's unfair. I play with bounce combat, but I decline bounce combat maybe 30% of the time. If I was Player 2 I would probably decline bounce combat in this situation. I know I can score only one hit on my oponent, so rolling twice will not help me - will only help him. I must be really desperate for a +1 bonus in the combat to fight this bounce combat.


quote:


2)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and shoots down the one remaining enemy fighter (or bomber)
- Player 2 answers the bouncing attack (No effect)
- Player 2 ... answers the regular attack (once dead in the bouncing)? or does not because it is already destroyed?

Again, terrible disadvantages for the second player to play IMO...


In your second bullet Player 1 can not shoot down the one remaining bomber, because Player 2 can only choose bounce combat if he has fighters left.

I would give Player 2 that last dice roll, and that is what has happened every time my group has run into that situation.

But I might be playing it wrong because the rules are not perfectly clear. The general A2A combat rule says you get the second dice roll despite results Player 1 inflicts. But the FAQ says you recalculate the A2A combat values immediately after a bounce, and what exactly is your combat value with all your aircraft already shot down?

From my perspective it would just seem more logical that the regular dice roll is something that already happened, you just don't know the results yet, therefore the dice roll should not be modified. But we should hear the comments from the rules clarification group I think.




Thanks for your comments.

It would seem that in the first case it is like you say. Anyway, I still think it's unfair that Player 1 shoots twice before Player 2 does and Player 2 may only have 1 oportunity to retailate (depending if the bouncing combat result is null or if it is abort/hit and the number of enemy planes left). Although I like the optional rule generally, I don't like this.

Many times I reject asking for a bouncing, specially if the bombing is crucial for my plans, but if it is not, you don't need to be desperate to make a bouncing. If you have a fighter and the enemy has several planes, you can take the risk to be downed in the bouncing, on the possible reward of downing an enemy plane in the regular combat just like before plus previously having a bouncing that you can direct against a bomber or a weaker fighter.

With the stukas, you can easily get a +6/-6 modified table for that bouncing or if you bounce attack the second fighter I sometimes get a +3/-3 supposing my front figter is 6 and his are 6 and 4 for example.

Ok, I think I saw some info about the Rules Group I will probably ask there.


Thanks all!!!

(in reply to ullern)
Post #: 117
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 8:37:50 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio
2)
Player 1  gets an 11 and Player 2 decides bouncing combat.
- Player 1 shoots the bouncing and shoots down the one remaining enemy fighter (or bomber)
- Player 2 answers the bouncing attack (No effect)
- Player 2 ... answers the regular attack (once dead in the bouncing)? or does not because it is already destroyed?

Again, terrible disadvantages for the second player to play IMO...

Does not because already destroyed.
He was not obliged to call a bounce. You never are obliged.
A bounce is a call for more blood, so you don't complain when it is your own. You tried your luck and lost.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 118
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 8:43:28 AM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 731
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
I thought that for just some more blood there was already the "enhanced combat".

EDIT: I cannot find the Enhanced Fight in the RAW 7 but we are playing with this (supposed) rule because one of the players entioned it (maybe from the Annual?), it exists, no? somebody else heard about it?

Froonp: I assume nobody is forced to ask for a bouncing, but anyway, wether you want to use the rule or not, Player 1 has advantage because whereas if Player 2 asks for a bouncing he gives inmediately another shot to Player 1, and he may get two or only one rounds in exchange, if it is Player 1 who asks for a bouncing after a player 2 "11" result, he does not suffer that penalty, both had their regular combat phase, and both have now the bouncing combat chance .

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 1/20/2010 9:06:30 AM >

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 119
RE: A few questions about the rules - 1/20/2010 8:55:36 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

I thought that for just some more blood there was already the "enhanced combat".

Well, Jose, the bounce rule predates the "enhanced combat" by a lot of years.
The bounce rule is an official optional rule that is in the rulebook since 2000 (RAW6), and the "enhanced combat" is just an Annual 2008's "house of rules" optional rule that came out last year.

The bounce rule was already "more fight / more blood" in its time, and the "enhanced combat" is for people that want again more "more fight / more blood".

There are a lot of people that complain that there are not enough looses in air to air combats, and that as a result of this there are too much air units on the map in the latter years of the game. The "enhanced combat" is for them.

My personal opinion is that Bounce combat is just fine, just enough "more fight / more blood" for my taste, and just enough unfairness added to air to air combat.

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: A few questions about the rules 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

0.164