no ships to attack (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Tech Support


TeaLeaf -> no ships to attack (4/21/2017 5:57:17 PM)

In the bay of Bengal, the allies initiate a search with their patrolling submarines.
they find the Japanese with a '1' Japan finds nothing with a '10' (allies are lucky, yes, but searches so far this turn have been favouring the axis exactly the other way around so this is only justice served).

Anyway, Allies select the Japanese 2-box with 1TRS and 1FTR and spend 4 surprise points to select a submarine combat.
With 8 surprise points left, I thought the Allies should be able to select a target (the Japanese TRS) instead of getting a message that 'there are no ships to atack', thus ending the combat round?
AFAIK, Allies should first be asked if they want to select a target by spending surprise points. If they do, they fight on the '0' ships row and if they don't... well, then the combat round should be over with the message that 'there are no ships to atack'.

Recreate with the savegame if you wish!

Jagdtiger14 -> RE: no ships to attack (4/21/2017 6:27:04 PM)

You need to select a surface combat, not submarine combat (submarine combat = cp's only). Remember that your submarine attack factors are reduced by one in a surface combat. Since the TRS is the only surface unit, no need to select target...just increase your naval combat results for maximum effect.

paulderynck -> RE: no ships to attack (4/21/2017 6:45:32 PM)

A good trick if there are CPs included and you have the surprise points is to select submarine combat and use the surprise points to pick a non-CP target that's also in the zero box.

But without CPs involved, selecting submarine combat is worthless.

TeaLeaf -> RE: no ships to attack (4/21/2017 9:05:15 PM)

Hmmm, darn I never played (not even knew it exists) that 'subtract 1 from submarine combatfactors during Surface Combat'...
Good to know, a valuable piece of information!

However, reading from RAW (11.5.10):


"If no convoy points are included (only possible if you spent surprise
points to choose a submarine combat ~ see 11.5.7) then you fight on the
0 ships row."

I can't see how selecting a submarine combat versus a TRS (only) results in no combat -with sufficient surprise points left to select a target, that is.
Unless I have missed another line in the rulesbook.

And seeing that the submarine CRT progresses much quicker into the higher columns than the surface CRT does (even more so with the -1 on each sub's combat factors in surface combat), it is kind of important to know if the above quoted rule is working as designed in MWiF or not.

paulderynck -> RE: no ships to attack (4/21/2017 10:30:56 PM)

It is working as designed. This one has been ruled on by ADG many times.

TeaLeaf -> RE: no ships to attack (4/22/2017 11:18:57 AM)

I believe you, of course.
Just wondering why ADG left the qouted paragraph in the rulebook then. Better to remove it completely. Especially if it has been ruled on many times!
Guess they overlooked it with rules revisions.

paulderynck -> RE: no ships to attack (4/22/2017 5:58:26 PM)

It is gone - in RAW8.

There are references to no combat allowed if no CPs. FREX in 11.5.7: "You can choose the combat type if you spend 4 surprise points. You can even choose a combat type not normally allowed (e.g. SUB combat even if no enemy convoy points are included)" which means there is no combat and you go back to searching. This too is explained better in RAW8.

And in 11.5.10: "Losses inflicted by the SUB side can only be taken on convoys (unless someone spends 3 surprise points to inflict them on another target). If convoy points can take no further losses, ignore any remaining losses (unless you spend surprise points to select another target)." which means you'd need 3 surprise to pick each target that's also in the zero box with the CPs.

TeaLeaf -> RE: no ships to attack (4/22/2017 7:05:03 PM)

It is indeed!
Just downloaded RAW8 from ADG's. Much better! You think it can be included in MWiF? When I am playing I must admit I prefer to consult the rules in-game ;-).

Best not to have contradicting rules in one rulebook!
Otherwise, the number of people that 'think (or thought) to know how to play this game' quickly increases beyond 1 ;-).

Page: [1]

Valid CSS!

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI