Shannon V. OKeets
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
ORIGINAL: brian brian
I think the new scale in China and the Urals will help illustrate that the standard WiF rule on Partisans needs some work...just not counting units for garrison within two hexes of an enemy unit would be a simple, but big, change. The new map and the size of the Japanese army will reveal Japanese strategic dreams to be ... dreams actually.
Also Napoleon would have loved commanding the attacking side in WiF...we all love simple supply rules, so we can be Patton, rather than Montgomery.
Land-based air was deadly against Subs ... but WiF already makes it more of a gimmee than it should be due to the units, the rules system, and their building structure rather than the number of bases to fly them from. I hope the new Portugese GARRison unit is in MWiF but I can't remember. Subs should be more dangerous in the game, where you need too many surprise points to sink something valuable. In real WWII, Subs sank over a dozen carriers. You will never see that happen in a game of WiF.
About the subs versus carriers, ...
- Each SUB unit in WIF represents multiple submarines.
- The time line for a naval combat is usually 2 months (there may be multiple combats in a sea areas during a turn, but that is uncommon).
- In WIF subs, surface ships, and land based air often fight together against naval units (e.g., carriers).
So, while the instances of a WIF SUB attacking and sinking a carrier are rare, the involvement of a SUB in a naval combat that sinks a carrier is less rare. Although I have to agree that WIF players do not build SUBs for the purpose of attacking enemy carriers.
Perfection is an elusive goal.