Matrix Games Forums

Happy 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!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser Trailer
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 - USA

 
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 - USA Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/23/2011 8:08:05 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1527
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

But here is an idea on peskpesk’s post #154. (Feel free to flame me on this bit of Rule Lawership)

quote:

5.1 Trade agreements
Japan-USA
The USA and Japan start the game with an agreement in place to exchange a Japanese build point for US resources. The USA must supply Japan with 4 resources each turn. Two of them must be oil resources. These amounts can be reduced, or avoided entirely, by certain US entry options (see 13.3.2 US entry options). Japan must lend lease the USA with 1 build point a turn until the USA embargoes strategic materials (see 13.3.2 US entry options, entry option 13 Embargo on strategic materials).


To avoid US entry penalties (see below), the USA must have enough convoy points in the West Coast, Mendocino, Hawaiian Islands and Central Pacific ocean sea areas to transport the resources to Japan. Similarly, Japan must have enough convoy points in the Japanese Coast sea area to transport the build point to the USA.


Ship the resources from the Philippines to Japan using the 2 CP.

USA – 12x CP (6x Tankers, 6x CP)
Honolulu – 15x CP (7x Tankers, 8x CP)


Venezuela-USA Trade agreement
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea – Port of Mobile
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea - Port of New Orleans
Oil resource to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea – Port of Saint Louis


Japan-USA Trade agreement

1 Build point from Japan (4x CP) Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu) - Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Port of San Francisco

2 Oil resources to Japan (8x Tankers) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (2x Tankers from USA) – Mendocino (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Hawaiian Islands (2x Tankers from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (2x Tankers from Honolulu)

1 resource to Japan (4x CP) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu)

1 resource to Japan (2x CP) Coast of Philippines – Bismarck Sea (1x CP from Honolulu) - The Marianas (1x CP from Honolulu)


This would change the reserve to 1x Tanker and 4x CP. And you would be able to save 1x Oil per turn.






Well if no one has a problem with that then how this?

quote:

5.1 Trade agreements
Japan-USA
The USA and Japan start the game with an agreement in place to exchange a Japanese build point for US resources. The USA must supply Japan with 4 resources each turn. Two of them must be oil resources. These amounts can be reduced, or avoided entirely, by certain US entry options (see 13.3.2 US entry options). Japan must lend lease the USA with 1 build point a turn until the USA embargoes strategic materials (see 13.3.2 US entry options, entry option 13 Embargo on strategic materials).


To avoid US entry penalties (see below), the USA must have enough convoy points in the West Coast, Mendocino, Hawaiian Islands and Central Pacific ocean sea areas to transport the resources to Japan. Similarly, Japan must have enough convoy points in the Japanese Coast sea area to transport the build point to the USA.


Ship the resources from the Philippines to Japan using 2x CP from Honolulu.
Ship the Oil from Alaska to Japan using 3x Tankers (2x Tankers from Honolulu, 1 Tanker from USA).

Venezuela-USA Trade agreement
1x Oil to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea – Port of Mobile
1x Oil to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea - Port of New Orleans
1x Oil to USA (1x Tanker from USA) Coast of Venezuela - Caribbean Sea – Port of Saint Louis


Japan-USA Trade agreement
1 Build point from Japan (4x CP) Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu) - Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Port of San Francisco

1x Oil to Japan (4x Tankers) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (1x Tanker from USA) – Mendocino (1x Tanker from Honolulu) – Hawaiian Islands (1x Tanker from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (1x Tanker from Honolulu)
1x Oil to Japan (3x Tankers) Coast of Alaska - Gulf of Alaska (1x Tanker from USA) – Bering Sea (1x Tanker from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (1x Tanker from Honolulu)

1 resource to Japan (4x CP) Port of San Francisco - West Coast (1x CP from USA) – Mendocino (1x CP from USA) – Hawaiian Islands (1x CP from Honolulu) – Central Pacific (1x CP from Honolulu)
1 resource to Japan (2x CP) Coast of Philippines – Bismarck Sea (1x CP from Honolulu) - The Marianas (1x CP from Honolulu)


Honolulu – 7x Tankers
5x Tankers from Honolulu (2x Tankers reserve)

USA – 6x Tankers
5x Tankers from USA (1x Tanker reserve)

Honolulu – 8x CP
6x CP from Honolulu (2x CP reserve)

USA – 6x CP
4x CP from USA (2x CP reserve)

This would change the reserve to 3x Tankers and 4x CP. And you would be able to save 1x Oil per turn.

-2x Oil Japan-USA Trade agreement
16x Oil for USA
3x Oil for USA Venezuela-USA Trade agreement

-2x Resources Japan-USA Trade agreement
23x Resources for USA

19x Oil
23x Resources
Total Oil/Resources 42
Total Factories 41

1x Oil per turn saved.


USA produces 10bp and gets 1bp from the Japan-USA Trade agreement for a total of 11bp

< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/23/2011 8:16:20 PM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to hjaco)
Post #: 181
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/25/2011 11:26:12 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3706
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
I will always build a factory early with the USA. Look at the production multipliers. As soon as the US can gear up, that factory pays back 1 BP (or more) a turn for the entire remainder of the game. A Synth by comparison - is a complete waste.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to hjaco)
Post #: 182
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/25/2011 3:42:56 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1527
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

13.3.2 US Entry Options and 13.3.3 US Entry Actions

Sept/Oct 1939 1st Impulse

1939 From Froonp’s PionsWiF-Aif-PatiF Excel spreadsheet
1 Zero 3%
9 Ones 30%
7 Twos 23%
6 Threes 20%
6 Fours 20%
1 Five 3%

It has been stated the average US entry chit draw is a 2. Even if all the twos are drawn the average will not change much since the lower numbers will not be selected.

Therefore to use an average for the US entry chit value for the start up US entry pool drawings is misleading.

In other words your start up using an average US entry chit value of 2 would look like this:

US entry pool Ge/It 2 + 2 = 4
US entry pool Ja 2


Using a chit combination system the results are not the same.

Single chit combination
Total value of chits (71) divided by number of chits (30) = Average value of chit 2.4 rounded down to 2

Two-chit combination

To get a total of 1 there is a 2% chance for 1 possible combination (0,1)
To get a total of 2 there is an 8% chance for 5 possible combinations (1x 0,2; 4x 1,1)
To get a total of 3 there is an 11% chance for 7 possible combinations (1x 0,3; 6x 1,2)
To get a total of 4 there is a 20% chance for 13 possible combinations (1x 0,4; 6x 1,3; 3x 2,2)
To get a total of 5 there is a 20% chance for 13 possible combinations (1x 0,5; 6x 1,4; 6x 2,3)
To get a total of 6 there is a 16% chance for 10 possible combinations (1x 1,5; 6x 2,4; 3x 3,3)
To get a total of 7 there is an 11% chance for 7 possible combinations (1x 2,5; 6x 3,4)
To get a total of 8 there is an 11% chance for 7 possible combinations (3,5; 4,4)
To get a total of 9 there is a 2% chance for 1 possible combination (0,5)

Example: To get a total of 2 there is an 8% chance for 5 possible combinations (1x 0,2; 4x 1,1).
Means that there is an 8% chance for 1 two-chit combination (0,2) and 4 Two-chit combinations (1,1) that will equal 2 when you draw.

Low Two-chit combination total 1 (0, 1) plus High Two-chit combination total 9 (4, 5) divided by number of chits drawn (2) = Average value of two chits 5

US entry pool Ge/It 5
US entry pool Ja 2


quote:

9.3 Compulsory declarations
Germany must declare war on Poland in the first impulse of any game that starts in Sep/Oct 1939. No major power may make any other declaration of war in that impulse.

France and the Commonwealth must declare war on Germany on their first impulse after Germany has declared war on Poland. No major power may make any other declarations of war in that impulse.


Axis Side
Japan can declare that Siam is aligning with Japan during any Axis declaration of war step if Siam is neutral.

9.3 Compulsory declarations
20. Germany declares war on Poland (1 US entry chit added and a 20% chance a second US entry chit will be added to the US entry pool (Ge/It).


Allied Side
9.3 Compulsory declarations
25. CW or France or both declare war on Germany
(90% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)

Possible
13.3.3 US Entry Actions:
26. USSR controls East Poland
(70% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It) (This option must be chosen before 27. USSR controls Nazi-Soviet Pact areas (the Balkan States))
27. USSR controls Nazi-Soviet Pact areas (the Balkan States) (40% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)




Possible options that might be taken that have been discussed at length in the MWiF forums

Sept/Oct 1939 2nd Impulse

Axis Side 13.3.3 US Entry Actions:

1. Japan occupies Indo-China (1 US entry chit is added and there is a 20% chance a second US entry chit will be added to the US entry pool Ja)
9. Japan declares war on USSR (70% chance a US entry chit will be added to the US entry pool Ja)
20. Germany declares war on Denmark (30% chance a US entry chit will be added to the US entry pool Ge/It)

Allied Side 13.3.3 US Entry Actions:
31. USSR declares war on Persia (90% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)
31. USSR declares war on Turkey (2 US entry chits removed and an 50% chance a third US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)
32. CW declares war on Denmark (50% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It for each DoW)
32. CW declares war on Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania (50% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It for each DoW)


19.6 Soviet border rectification:
USSR claims Bessarabia If Rumania denies the claim the 31. USSR declares war on Rumania (1 US entry chit removed and an 80% chance a second US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)
USSR claims the Finnish borderlands. If Finland denies the claim the 31. USSR declares war on Finland (1 US entry chit removed and an 80% chance a second US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)


Have I missed any?


< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/30/2011 3:45:30 PM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 183
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/25/2011 3:43:37 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1527
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I will always build a factory early with the USA. Look at the production multipliers. As soon as the US can gear up, that factory pays back 1 BP (or more) a turn for the entire remainder of the game. A Synth by comparison - is a complete waste.


Should I include that as an Economic Option?


_____________________________

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

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 184
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/26/2011 1:00:15 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3706
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I will always build a factory early with the USA. Look at the production multipliers. As soon as the US can gear up, that factory pays back 1 BP (or more) a turn for the entire remainder of the game. A Synth by comparison - is a complete waste.


Should I include that as an Economic Option?


Sure. No self-respecting U.S. AI should be without it.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 185
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/26/2011 3:30:30 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1527
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Strategies

Maintain at least 2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool and 1x US entry marker Ja entry pool to receive the benefit from the entry and tension pools.

The entry and tension pools

The US has a Japanese entry pool and a Germany/Italy entry pool. Your entry level against an Axis major power equals 1.5 times the value of the markers you’ve put in its entry pool plus half the value of the markers in the other pool.

The primary strategy of the United States in World War II that should be given to the defeat of the Axis powers.

2x US entry markers in the Ge/It entry pool, 1 US entry marker Ja in the entry pool.

Asia first strategy: New US entry markers would be placed in the Ja entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ge/It entry pool.

Balanced strategy: New US entry markers would be divided between the Ge/It and the Ja entry pool trying to maintain a 1 to 1 ratio.

Europe first strategy: New US entry markers would be placed in the Ge/It entry pool as long as 1x US entry marker is in the Ja entry pool.



Repair Pool
CV Saratoga 2bp/2 turns
BB Maryland 2bp/2 turns
BB Colorado 2bp/2 turns


Scrap all: BF2C, F3F, SBC-4, P-26, and P-35.


Production

The USA starts with 10 Build points (bp) and 1 from the Japan-US trade agreement for a total 11bp.

Asia first strategy: Production would be centered on Naval units.

Balanced strategy: Production would be divided between air units and Naval units.

Europe first strategy: Production would be centered on air units.

(These may be substituted for any of the above strategies)
Economic option Synth-oil: Synth-oil 8bp/6 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns
Economic option Factory: Factory 8bp/4 turns; 1x CP 3bp/3 turns (from 22.2 Factory destruction & construction (option 30) WiFFE-RAW-7.pdf)





_____________________________

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

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 186
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/26/2011 4:32:25 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 654
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I will always build a factory early with the USA. Look at the production multipliers. As soon as the US can gear up, that factory pays back 1 BP (or more) a turn for the entire remainder of the game. A Synth by comparison - is a complete waste.


Should I include that as an Economic Option?


Sure. No self-respecting U.S. AI should be without it.


In 1944 USA often produces 80BP per turn, isn't that enough already? The 8BP you spend for another factory can be used to build CVs, CVPs, airplanes for when USA enter the war. In 1941-42, you need those 8BPs to be on map as ships or airplanes, etc, that counts also.


< Message edited by micheljq -- 1/26/2011 4:33:01 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 #: 187
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/26/2011 7:50:40 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3706
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I will always build a factory early with the USA. Look at the production multipliers. As soon as the US can gear up, that factory pays back 1 BP (or more) a turn for the entire remainder of the game. A Synth by comparison - is a complete waste.


Should I include that as an Economic Option?


Sure. No self-respecting U.S. AI should be without it.


In 1944 USA often produces 80BP per turn, isn't that enough already? The 8BP you spend for another factory can be used to build CVs, CVPs, airplanes for when USA enter the war. In 1941-42, you need those 8BPs to be on map as ships or airplanes, etc, that counts also.


You can never have enough BPs with the U.S. The 8 you spend will be paid back the first 8 turns after you gear-up. After that the rest is all gravy. That is why you should build the factory the earlier, the better.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 188
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/27/2011 3:41:20 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 654
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
Personaly I am not convinced this is the best strategy for the USA, I mean building and additional factory. I would rather spent those BPs on something else. I do not want to penalize my early fleet build, I want to have as many CV, BBs and CVP ready as possible for when I enter the war especially against the japanese, there are builds I don't want to delay and BPs are scarce on the early turns. This is my personal opinion of course, it's worth what it's worth, but I would not say this strategy is bad, just that I do not think that the USA should use this strategy in every campaign.

_____________________________

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 #: 189
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/27/2011 6:49:28 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 17934
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Consider the following:




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 190
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/27/2011 7:52:03 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 654
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
Hi Shannon, this figures can be taken a way or other I guess. In the end it pays off BP wise, it begins to payoff in SO43? In SO43, we may already know which side will win, in some cases the fact that USA have 13 more or so BPs or not at this point will not necessarly change the situation. What's the point for USA to have more BPs in 1943 and later if USSR is destroyed in 1942 for example?

Or let's say Japan takes Honolulu and Pago Pago in the beginning of 1942 because you did not garrison them adequately? Would someone regret that factory he built early?

1BP in 1939 is worth more than 1BP in 1944 strategically speaking, if you count that the armies early on are much smaller.

Just my 2 cents.

< Message edited by micheljq -- 1/27/2011 7:56:55 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 Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 191
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/27/2011 8:51:02 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 17934
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq

Hi Shannon, this figures can be taken a way or other I guess. In the end it pays off BP wise, it begins to payoff in SO43? In SO43, we may already know which side will win, in some cases the fact that USA have 13 more or so BPs or not at this point will not necessarly change the situation. What's the point for USA to have more BPs in 1943 and later if USSR is destroyed in 1942 for example?

Or let's say Japan takes Honolulu and Pago Pago in the beginning of 1942 because you did not garrison them adequately? Would someone regret that factory he built early?

1BP in 1939 is worth more than 1BP in 1944 strategically speaking, if you count that the armies early on are much smaller.

Just my 2 cents.

I meant my post to be informative. You could vary it by not building either the synthetic oil plant or the factory. But then you would have to make new estimates of any gain in BPs later. You can also vary when the various conditions for increasing the US production multiple occur.

I did not have a particular opinion on the matter.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 192
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/27/2011 8:52:42 PM   
ullern


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq

Personaly I am not convinced this is the best strategy for the USA, I mean building and additional factory. I would rather spent those BPs on something else. I do not want to penalize my early fleet build, I want to have as many CV, BBs and CVP ready as possible for when I enter the war especially against the japanese, there are builds I don't want to delay and BPs are scarce on the early turns. This is my personal opinion of course, it's worth what it's worth, but I would not say this strategy is bad, just that I do not think that the USA should use this strategy in every campaign.


I agree completely. There are a million ways to play WIF sensibly, and I for one usually spend around 6 to 10 oil per turn for reorg with the US (after full war). And often I lend some resources to the USSR too. If we do the math: After aligning other minors USA got 48 resources and 43 factories. But subtract 10 resources on average and you're down to something like 38 pp, which is the sustainable amount after full war. But USA always have a pool of stored oil which helps keep production in pp higher in the beginning, but if you spend 16 oil to pay for your factory just to break even for the factory, your pool of oil will empty much faster.

I consider I have absolutely no use for a new factory. In my current game there was only five turns from Gear Up to full war. Which means the factory would not have paid off pre war. And after full war USA fared better than usual, meaning that USA did a lot of operations resulting in oil usage quite a bit higher than normal, so even though I stored the maximum amount of oil and only made 40 pp on average, the oil pool was emptied in just 6 turns.

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 193
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/27/2011 9:00:45 PM   
hjaco

 

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline
The issue is that US economy and production can not be considered seperately.

The axis have first crack at victory and although Japan can do a lot of damage which can deny a win you can really loose the game in Europe.

So by focusing too much US production towards the Pacific (which can certainly be fun) you risk loosing in Europe i.e. its out of your hand to help out.

The infamous factory is only a "good" investment if you solely focus on US production but what do you do if Winnie needs resources to get at full production because Adolf goes heavily west? Thats my main reasoning for building the US Synth as well as the first CW Synth. When you know whether they are needed or not its too late to build them.

So the reasoning is not production wise but rather whether how much US focus should be put towards Europe.

Just another five cents

< Message edited by hjaco -- 1/27/2011 9:02:28 PM >

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 194
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/27/2011 11:47:33 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3706
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
I have a US build plan that builds the factory, all the BBs, CVs and TRSs and AMPHs (some of the latter two are only in the construction pool depending on when first gear-up happens). Plus odds are you can draw the 5-1 white print (WP) MIL when building the first two MILs one at a time. Nimitz, the 5-1 WP MIL and the Engineer are the best you can do to garrison Pearl with this plan, and that's pretty good. So even with the factory and all the ships, you can manage 2, 4 or 6 BPs (6 would be unlucky) to build the WP 5-1 MIL. Even then there are BPs left for some pilots and all the long-range NAVs.

As for lending oil, the US can only save 1 of their own a turn while neutral and needs only 38 resources to produce maximum when the PM is 0.25. They can send the Philippine resource to Japan which leaves 22 resources and 18 oil after the lends to Japan. Save one oil and you still waste an oil a turn unless you need it for re-org. Once you can lend to the CW and France, you can forego saving the one of your own if you really need to - also by then you may have reduced the resources that need to be sent to Japan and they turn into lent oil for the CW and France.

Re-run Shannon's spreadsheet without wasting 8 BPs on the Synth and see what happens.


_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to hjaco)
Post #: 195
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 12:40:00 AM   
lordzyplon

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 7/6/2006
Status: offline
You mean GAR, right? MIL come in when war is declared.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 196
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 1:20:47 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 1590
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
what's this about sending the Philippine resource to Japan? I thought the rules basically dictate setting up the convoys to send it from the USA?



As I wrote before, I build the Synth and never a factory. I play with RaW oil and the west will need all it can get by the end, even after picking the entry option for lending to the CW and sending as much oil as possible to Canada for storage. Having the US Synth early makes it easier to lend to the CW and USSR, and that's where the game is won or lost.....in the middle years of the war, on the European map, and without a lot of the green counters yet. A guaranteed extra resource in the USA is better than dicey convoy lines to some of the ones in the CW empire.

(in reply to lordzyplon)
Post #: 197
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 5:49:53 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3706
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: lordzyplon

You mean GAR, right? MIL come in when war is declared.

Yes - sorry I did mean Garrison units.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to lordzyplon)
Post #: 198
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 5:57:00 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3706
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

what's this about sending the Philippine resource to Japan? I thought the rules basically dictate setting up the convoys to send it from the USA?

Not exactly. The rules say you must set up the convoys a certain way and maintain them that way, but there are two CONV left over that can make a chain to link the Phillipines to the main chain, and that is not illegal. It takes a turn or two to get them in place.

quote:


As I wrote before, I build the Synth and never a factory. I play with RaW oil and the west will need all it can get by the end, even after picking the entry option for lending to the CW and sending as much oil as possible to Canada for storage. Having the US Synth early makes it easier to lend to the CW and USSR, and that's where the game is won or lost.....in the middle years of the war, on the European map, and without a lot of the green counters yet. A guaranteed extra resource in the USA is better than dicey convoy lines to some of the ones in the CW empire.

To each their own clearly. I've always played RAW oil as well and my experience has been that this is not a problem. This could well be due to different playing styles. Perhaps less accent on the sub war against the Allies combined with fairly judicious re-oiling policies, especially for naval units.

Edit: Also You can't lend oil to the CW until USE Option 15 is passed and even then it ought to go to the UK to build up a stock there as contingency for a bad turn for convoy losses. Secondly, with the latest errata you can't lend oil from the U.S. to Russia until Russia is at war, even if you've passed USE Option 19, because you can't use U.S. convoys to deliver it, and you can't use CW or French convoys to deliver it unless Russia is active, and Russia is not likely to build a CONV and place all 4 it would then have in Vlad - which is the shortest route to get oil from the U.S. using Russian Convoys.

< Message edited by paulderynck -- 1/28/2011 6:05:17 AM >


_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 199
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 7:24:42 AM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1527
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

5.1 Trade agreements
Japan-USA
The USA and Japan start the game with an agreement in place to exchange a Japanese build point for US resources. (A) The USA must supply Japan with 4 resources each turn. Two of them must be oil resources. These amounts can be reduced, or avoided entirely, by certain US entry options (see 13.3.2 US entry options). Japan must lend lease the USA with 1 build point a turn until the USA embargoes strategic materials (see 13.3.2 US entry options, entry option 13. Embargo on strategic materials).

(B) To avoid US entry penalties (see below), the USA must have enough convoy points in the West Coast, Mendocino, Hawaiian Islands and Central Pacific ocean sea areas to transport the resources to Japan. Similarly, Japan must have enough convoy points in the Japanese Coast sea area to transport the build point to the USA.



Remember I admitted this was Rule Lawership:

(A) The rules say that the oil and resources must be SUPPLIED by the USA they do not say they have to COME FROM the USA.

(B) After allocating the oil from Alaska and the resource from the Philippines the other oil and resource must come from the USA (via: West Coast, Mendocino, Hawaiian Islands and Central Pacific).

Therefore less CP are REQUIRED for the “West Coast, Mendocino, Hawaiian Islands and Central Pacific” Convoy line.


quote:

Shannon V. Okeets

What are the numbers in the far right column?

1 ~ Turn 1
s ~ September/October
Build Synth Oil
-8 ~ Cost 8bp
-8 ~ ???



paulderynck is right about loaning resources 13.3.2 US entry options, 15. Resources to western Allies.


With a 1x Tanker and 4x CP reserve you have a choice to make.

(1) Set up a Convoy line to send a build point to China, which will take more than 1 turn.

(2) Immediately set up a Convoy line to send a build point or a resource to the CW (Great Britain).



< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/28/2011 7:41:49 AM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 200
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 12:24:21 PM   
hjaco

 

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline
Well playing style is ceertainly different which is the way it should be.

A few notes though.

Most allied players place 3 US entry chits in Europe at start to choose option 15 - resources to western allies ASAP to boost French production, maximize attrition on Germany and delay them for as long as possible in France so that option will usually be chosen earlier rather than later. In some situations it may even make sense for US to go down 1 BP in production in order to lend even more resources to CW and France as they will end up with higher production multiples and those BP can be used directly against the axis right from the beginning.

The Lend Lease to Russia has been made more or less void now and if Adolf fights Russia early Winnie should be able to take care of the Lend Lease. We agree on that.

Back to my point. Say Adolf takes Gibraltar in summer 41' which is a viable scenario and goes heavily for surface, SUB, NAV and a late 42' Barbarossa. This will effectively cut convoys from Africa until Gibraltar is back in allied hands and any competent Japan player should later harass the convoys from Australia and maybe even send some long range raiders to Europe as Suez would be axis controlled. So you have only the resources from the Americas and UK to fuel your production and reorganisation. No matter how you put it there is only so many resources to go around so you will loose out production wise in this scenario by building a factory and not any Synths.

My argument is not that the AI should built a Synth in any game but that should be a component on how much focus the AI will put in Europe. So in a Pacific first let Winnie take care of himself otherwise build it.

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 201
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 1:18:06 PM   
michaelbaldur


Posts: 3565
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: online

another important thing is US gearing. if you start with a synth/ factories you will destroy your naval gearing. ...

and it will take a year to be up to 5-6 naval units a turn. which means around 20 less naval units between sep 39 and 41 ...

it also means that USA can´t build as many transporters/ amph before the war starts.


how that there are the same hexes everywhere .... the range from USA have changed which means that must planes can´t rebase to UK or to the pacific...

so USA need all of it´s transporters and amph ...

this is mostly because the American map was not at the right scale ...

so if I were a German player and I see that USA losses it´s naval gearing... I would react by not DOW on Denmark... which means that USA can´t rebase though Greenland... and force them to sail all air units ...with it´s fewer transporters ...


another point with the changed to the American map is that USA need to use more naval moved. because it´s reinforcements are spread out in more cities ....

so USA almost always need to use a naval or super combined to get it´s reinforcement send to the battlefields ...


_____________________________

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 hjaco)
Post #: 202
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 4:58:12 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1527
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Original: michaelbaldur

(A) Another important thing is US gearing. if you start with a synth/factories you will destroy your naval gearing...

And it will take a year to be up to 5-6 naval units a turn. Which means around 20 less naval units between sep 39 and 41 ...

it also means that USA can’t build as many TRS/AMPH (Transports/Amphibious units) before the war starts.


How that there are the same hexes everywhere... The range from the USA has changed, which means that must planes can’t rebase to UK or to the pacific...

so USA need all of it’s TRS and AMPH...

this is mostly because the American map was not at the right scale...

(b) So if I were a German player and I see that USA losses it’s naval gearing... I would react by not DOW on Denmark... which means that USA can’t rebase though Greenland... and force them to sail all air units ...with it’s fewer transporters ...


Another point with the changes to the American map is that USA need to use more naval moves. Because USA reinforcements are spread out in more cities....

So the USA almost always needs to use a naval or super combined to get their reinforcement sent to the battlefields...



You make good points but...

quote:

13.6.5 Building units
Naval units

The production cost of convoys is not shown on the counter. They take only one cycle to produce and cost 1 build point per convoy point. They take 4 turns to build. If you aren’t playing with Ships in Flames you have to build them in multiples of 5.


Here is what is available to be built at the end of “1939 September/October”.

Cost and time to build:
Repair CV Saratoga 2bp/2 Turns
Repair BB Maryland 2bp/2 Turns
Repair BB Colorado 2bp/2 Turns
CP 1bp/4 turns each
Tanker 1bp/5 turns each
12x TRN [fd] 2bp/3 turns each
3x AMPH (1939-1940) 3bp/3 or 4 turns

Construction Pool (ready for 2nd cycle)
BB Wyoming 3bp/6 turns
CVL Langley 2bp/6 turns

Naval Force Pool (ready for 1st cycle)
CV Hornet 2bp/6 turns
BB Indiana 2bp/6 turns
BB Massachusetts 2bp/6 turns
BB South Dakota 2bp/6 turns


(A) That’s why I have the CP (or Tankers) built with the factory/synth-oil.

Producing 3x CP/Tankers will keep the Naval gearing limit at 2 (3x CP or Tankers = 2 ships). If the economic option is chosen during production “1939 September/October” the Naval gearing limit for “1939 November/December” will be a 3.


(B) The only way you will know that the USA has decided to build a factory or synth-oil is at the beginning of the turn. What happens when you don’t know what the USA player is going to build?


Basically what are Germanys plans on “1939 September/October 2nd impulse” not “1939 November/December 1st impulse”?

If the AI knows that Germany has DoW’ed Denmark then building a factory or synth-oil is an option.



< Message edited by Extraneous -- 1/28/2011 5:00:19 PM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 203
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 5:13:53 PM   
Froonp


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
Axis Side
Possible 13.3.3 US Entry Actions:
20. Germany declares war on Denmark (30% chance a US entry chit will be added to the US entry pool Ge/It)

Allied Side
Possible 13.3.3 US Entry Actions:
31. USSR declares war on Persia (90% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)
31. USSR declares war on Turkey (2 US entry chits removed and an 50% chance a third US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)
32. CW declares war on Denmark (50% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It for each DoW)
32. CW declares war on Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania (50% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It for each DoW)


What's this ? Which sane Russian player would DoD Turkey in S/O 39 ? or at all ?
Same for the CW declaring war as above.

Where is this going ????

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 204
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 1/28/2011 11:25:24 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1527
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp


quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
Axis Side
Possible 13.3.3 US Entry Actions:
20. Germany declares war on Denmark (30% chance a US entry chit will be added to the US entry pool Ge/It)

Allied Side
Possible 13.3.3 US Entry Actions:
31. USSR declares war on Persia (90% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)
31. USSR declares war on Turkey (2 US entry chits removed and an 50% chance a third US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It)
32. CW declares war on Denmark (50% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It for each DoW)
32. CW declares war on Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania (50% chance a US entry chit will be removed from the US entry pool Ge/It for each DoW)


What's this ? Which sane Russian player would DoD Turkey in S/O 39 ? or at all ?
Same for the CW declaring war as above.

Where is this going ????



Please note these are possible situations that have been discussed in the MWiF forums.

I am not setting the date in stone this is the soonest they could occur.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 205
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 2/2/2011 4:47:56 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2071
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
I declared war on Turkey as the CW in a Days of Decision game once. To force Germany to declare war on me for US entry effects (and scheduling).

I would also add that it is not inconceivable for a USSR player or Allied side to DoW Turkey or the Baltics, although it is certainly unlikely to occur at the start of the game.

It is the sort of thing I would want the AIO to analyze, even if it almost never implemented such an action.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 206
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 2/2/2011 8:40:57 PM   
hjaco

 

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline
Strange things sure happen in WIF. I have been playing WIF for almost 20 years and have still to see the allies declaring war on Turkey aside from a late war DOW in a tight objective game to grab Istanbul.

What arguments is there for the allies to attack Turkey?

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 207
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 2/2/2011 9:52:06 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 3706
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
I saw it happen when the Germans had just attained the objectives needed to allow them to align Turkey on their next impulse. It was a "pre-emptive" strike by the CW and US and was pretty effective because then they had a surprise impulse against the Turks. Usually if Germany can align Turkey, the Axis can be halfway to Jerusalem that same impulse.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to hjaco)
Post #: 208
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 2/3/2011 12:04:09 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 1590
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
the USA likes to attack Turkey at times as part of a western advance into the Balkans, which both spreads out the German land units and grabs several objectives before the Russians can (you could somewhat accurately call it the Churchill Strategy, though he preferred an attack into Yugoslavia and Greece to attempt to woo the Turks onto the Allied side). the Turks can't hold all of the entry points (ports) against multiple para corps. In the long run the place holds an objective hex, a red factory and two resources.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 209
RE: AI for MWiF - USA - 2/3/2011 1:25:58 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 654
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
I saw USSR attack Turkey once. That was a game where the Axis was controlling the Med, USSR wanted to pass on eastern Turkey and attack the Axis in Irak. The soviets were able to get near Mosul in 1945, I do not remember if they took it and as myself I do not find it was a great strategy. USSR should have concentrate all it's forces on Germany.

_____________________________

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 brian brian)
Post #: 210
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: AI for MWiF - USA Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   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

0.121