Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Bizarre naval move

 
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 >> Bizarre naval move Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 6:13:11 AM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
I have just dicovered that a face-up SCS can be in the 0 box at the end of the turn, and then during the return to base phase, you can: move the SCS to a port, embark a division, continue moving with the embarked division to another port, and then finally return to port in another port if the SCS had a 6 movement and range.

Has this been coded, or am I completely wrong with this interpretation?

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln
Post #: 1
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 6:56:29 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
This is a legal move in WIFFE. I don't know if it has been coded to work in MWIF. Maybe others who played CWIF could comment?

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 2
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 7:12:50 AM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
I feel like

That is a horrible rule, and the FAQ posted says that a unit aborted from combat (therefore disrupted) can embark and transport a unit during the abort in the same fashion. Isn't the clarification a violation of another rule?

I would *not* like to inspect the naval abort digression Steve has to puzzle out due to this.

If you've already done this Steve, you're a hero.

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 3
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 9:14:28 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I feel like

That is a horrible rule, and the FAQ posted says that a unit aborted from combat (therefore disrupted) can embark and transport a unit during the abort in the same fashion. Isn't the clarification a violation of another rule?

I would *not* like to inspect the naval abort digression Steve has to puzzle out due to this.

If you've already done this Steve, you're a hero.

Maybe just as well if it is not coded for that instance, although the normal RTB and transport function isn't a big abuse and a lot of players use it. Based on discussions in the Rules Clarification group, a lot of people thought an aborting RTB with transport function was an ugly loophole and the designer seemed to agree but didn't think a clarification on that should be done as it would directly contradict RAW. Maybe if RAW gets re-issued (work that is rumored to be taking place) then the loophole will get patched.

Cheers.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 4
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 9:47:40 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I feel like

That is a horrible rule, and the FAQ posted says that a unit aborted from combat (therefore disrupted) can embark and transport a unit during the abort in the same fashion. Isn't the clarification a violation of another rule?

I would *not* like to inspect the naval abort digression Steve has to puzzle out due to this.

If you've already done this Steve, you're a hero.

Maybe just as well if it is not coded for that instance, although the normal RTB and transport function isn't a big abuse and a lot of players use it. Based on discussions in the Rules Clarification group, a lot of people thought an aborting RTB with transport function was an ugly loophole and the designer seemed to agree but didn't think a clarification on that should be done as it would directly contradict RAW. Maybe if RAW gets re-issued (work that is rumored to be taking place) then the loophole will get patched.

Cheers.

Yes for normal return to base. No for when aborting. I do not know if the code from CWIF for this works. If it doesn;t, then I'll implement it.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 5
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 1:42:38 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I have just dicovered that a face-up SCS can be in the 0 box at the end of the turn, and then during the return to base phase, you can: move the SCS to a port, embark a division, continue moving with the embarked division to another port, and then finally return to port in another port if the SCS had a 6 movement and range.

Has this been coded, or am I completely wrong with this interpretation?

It used to work in CWiF.

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 6
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 1:50:26 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
That is a horrible rule, and the FAQ posted says that a unit aborted from combat (therefore disrupted) can embark and transport a unit during the abort in the same fashion. Isn't the clarification a violation of another rule?

The ship is disrupted when it reach the port, that's why it is allowed. At the moment it passes through the first port and embark the unit, it is still organized and can still load units.

11.5.8
"A Your unit aborts. At the end of the combat round, return it to base according to the return to base rules (see 13.4).
Turn the aborted unit (and any cargo) face-down."

13.4
"Units may return to base during naval movement, after aborting from combat and during this step. You return units to base like a normal naval move except in reverse."

11.4.5
"A TRS can embark face-up units it starts the impulse stacked with, or it can embark them when it moves through the port they’re in."


(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 7
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 1:54:16 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
I think that the unit should be disrupted (i.e. turned face down) as the first step of the Abort combat result, not as the last.

Because a A result means that the units sufferend some combat damages that makes them needing to go back to port for repairs, so embarking units on the way seems not to be a valid option for these ships.

But as RAW is written now, this is allowed.

This may not be allowed sometime soon because the issue have been raised to Harry and he agreed that it was not good, so if MWiF disrupted aborted units from combat as the first step of the Abort process, I would agree.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 8
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 6:11:00 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I think that the unit should be disrupted (i.e. turned face down) as the first step of the Abort combat result, not as the last.

Because a A result means that the units sufferend some combat damages that makes them needing to go back to port for repairs, so embarking units on the way seems not to be a valid option for these ships.

But as RAW is written now, this is allowed.

This may not be allowed sometime soon because the issue have been raised to Harry and he agreed that it was not good, so if MWiF disrupted aborted units from combat as the first step of the Abort process, I would agree.

Yes, disorganizing aborted naval units before they start their return to port would work, and is an easy way to explain this rule to players.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 9
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 7:00:42 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
I've never been to Wifcon but I found out about this rule last night after playing this game since 1988. Close to 20 different people, and 20 years and I learn a new (IMO indecent) trick that isn't optional.

Worse, I could return a division from the UK to Manila during end of turn by abusing the rule. To pile on the situation, during end of turn everyone is moved to a lower box or returned to base, making the interception of the around-the-world tour less possible.

The Wifzen doesn't appeal to me either because if you escort a convoy for 4 turns (8 months), ending up in the 0 box and then miraculously have fuel to return to a port embark and transport a unit to another port a few thousand miles away; well you probably know what I'm getting at.

An option is to play without SCS transport which would greatly reduce the ability to (use or abuse?) the rule, as the rule would only affect transports.

Thank you all for clarification.

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 10
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 7:40:54 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

I've never been to Wifcon but I found out about this rule last night after playing this game since 1988. Close to 20 different people, and 20 years and I learn a new (IMO indecent) trick that isn't optional.

Worse, I could return a division from the UK to Manila during end of turn by abusing the rule. To pile on the situation, during end of turn everyone is moved to a lower box or returned to base, making the interception of the around-the-world tour less possible.

The Wifzen doesn't appeal to me either because if you escort a convoy for 4 turns (8 months), ending up in the 0 box and then miraculously have fuel to return to a port embark and transport a unit to another port a few thousand miles away; well you probably know what I'm getting at.

An option is to play without SCS transport which would greatly reduce the ability to (use or abuse?) the rule, as the rule would only affect transports.

Thank you all for clarification.

Perhaps the caveat should be that any unit so transported is disorganized and unavailable for additional transport?

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 11
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 10:07:52 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
People should also be aware of this move - I wasn't - that you can move a TRS out to sea with cargo, have the units move off the transport, reorganize the transport at sea, the next turn you can return to base moving a unit from one port to another. This is very helpful to Germany who doesn't do naval actions often. In this way, with 1 naval move you can transport 2 corps units to Finland over 2 turns.

IMHO this ability should be clearly outlined in the rules, not the product of referencing several rules and interpreting them. All of this is based on the key phrase, "You return units to base like a normal naval move except in reverse." I don't find the language particularly clear.

On the otherhand I do not propose changing anything either, I'm sure Steve is well past code freeze for features or changes.

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 12
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 11:08:26 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

People should also be aware of this move - I wasn't - that you can move a TRS out to sea with cargo, have the units move off the transport, reorganize the transport at sea, the next turn you can return to base moving a unit from one port to another. This is very helpful to Germany who doesn't do naval actions often. In this way, with 1 naval move you can transport 2 corps units to Finland over 2 turns.

IMHO this ability should be clearly outlined in the rules, not the product of referencing several rules and interpreting them. All of this is based on the key phrase, "You return units to base like a normal naval move except in reverse." I don't find the language particularly clear.

On the otherhand I do not propose changing anything either, I'm sure Steve is well past code freeze for features or changes.


You are not allowed to reorganize units at sea unless you play an offensive and that seems an expensive way for Germany to transport units to Finland.

From 11.18.4 Reorganising:
"You can never reorganise aircraft or naval units at sea - they must be in a hex (exception: Offensive chits in a naval action ~ see 16.2)."

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 13
RE: Bizarre naval move - 4/30/2009 11:29:08 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
People should also be aware of this move - I wasn't - that you can move a TRS out to sea with cargo, have the units move off the transport, reorganize the transport at sea, the next turn you can return to base moving a unit from one port to another. This is very helpful to Germany who doesn't do naval actions often. In this way, with 1 naval move you can transport 2 corps units to Finland over 2 turns.

You are not allowed to reorganize units at sea unless you play an offensive and that seems an expensive way for Germany to transport units to Finland.

From 11.18.4 Reorganising:
"You can never reorganise aircraft or naval units at sea - they must be in a hex (exception: Offensive chits in a naval action ~ see 16.2)."

And you need to be organized to load units. Disorganized ships can't load units.

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 14
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 8:09:15 AM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
Nice. Where was 11.18.4 when I needed it?

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 15
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 8:17:38 AM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
People should also be aware of this move - I wasn't - that you can move a TRS out to sea with cargo, have the units move off the transport, reorganize the transport at sea, the next turn you can return to base moving a unit from one port to another. This is very helpful to Germany who doesn't do naval actions often. In this way, with 1 naval move you can transport 2 corps units to Finland over 2 turns.

You are not allowed to reorganize units at sea unless you play an offensive and that seems an expensive way for Germany to transport units to Finland.

From 11.18.4 Reorganising:
"You can never reorganise aircraft or naval units at sea - they must be in a hex (exception: Offensive chits in a naval action ~ see 16.2)."

And you need to be organized to load units. Disorganized ships can't load units.

quote:

From 11.18.4 Reorganising:
"You can never reorganise aircraft or naval units at sea - they must be in a hex (exception: Offensive chits in a naval action ~ see 16.2)."


I just read 16.2 and it doesn't seem to provide any reorganization bonus or change. What does the exception refer to?

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 16
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 8:26:21 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
I just read 16.2 and it doesn't seem to provide any reorganization bonus or change. What does the exception refer to?

There are 2 versions of the naval OC, and MWiF will have the older one (that reorged ships at sea and in ports) as an available option.
If you read the latest version of RAW, it is no more described as it was replaced.
You can read it in the latest printed booklet that still have the older version.

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 17
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 10:03:59 AM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
I just read 16.2 and it doesn't seem to provide any reorganization bonus or change. What does the exception refer to?

There are 2 versions of the naval OC, and MWiF will have the older one (that reorged ships at sea and in ports) as an available option.
If you read the latest version of RAW, it is no more described as it was replaced.
You can read it in the latest printed booklet that still have the older version.


This is from RaW-7m. Is this the latest version of the rules?

16.2 Naval action
If you play an offensive chit at the start of a naval action, specify 1 of your face-up HQs that is in a port hex. Immediately turn face-up every naval unit controlled by your major power (CVPiF/SiF option 56: and carrier plane on a CV) in that port, in one sea area the port borders, and in every port adjacent to that sea area. If the port borders 2 or more areas, you choose which gets this benefit.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 18
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 10:23:38 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm
This is from RaW-7m. Is this the latest version of the rules?

16.2 Naval action
If you play an offensive chit at the start of a naval action, specify 1 of your face-up HQs that is in a port hex. Immediately turn face-up every naval unit controlled by your major power (CVPiF/SiF option 56: and carrier plane on a CV) in that port, in one sea area the port borders, and in every port adjacent to that sea area. If the port borders 2 or more areas, you choose which gets this benefit.


The latest RAW are :

RAW7 aug04, released in August 2004 at ADG's Website. It only exist in electronic version.
RAW7m released on 8th May 2003 at ADG's Website). It only exist in electronic version.
RAW7a released on 1st May 2003 as a printed and binded (previous versions were loose sheets of papers to be put into a binder).

The complete history of WiF FE rules versions (as well as any other game component, counters, maps...) can be found at : http://pagesperso-orange.fr/froon/WiF/wif.htm

I don't know from where you had RAW7m, but you should dump it and download the latest instead.
If you have the printed rulebook, this is RAW7a indeed, but there are only a couple of differences between RAW7a and RAW7m (I don't know why Harry came with the "m" subversion, but instead it should have been a "b" because RAW7m is just after RAW7a, and there never were b, c, d... versions.


Here is the latest rulebook's naval offensive chit rule :

This is from RAW7 aug04 (available as a free download at ADG's website) :
**************************************
16.2 Naval action
If you play an offensive chit at the start of a naval action, specify one of your face up HQs that is in a port hex. Any naval or aircraft units stacked in that hex that initiates a naval combat (see 11.5.2) may demand a re-roll of the search dice (see 11.5.5) by both sides, in any round of combat this impulse.
Re-rolling of naval search dice may be demanded any number of times this impulse provided that the total number demanded does not exceed the HQ's reorganisation value.

Example: Nimitz is in Pearl Harbor stacked with 3 SCS and a P-38G FTR. Jay plays a naval offensive chit on Nimitz at the start of his naval action. The Lighting flies into the 4 box of the Hawaiian Islands and the 3 SCSs into the 4 box of the Marshalls sea area, both of which contain Japanese and US units. During the naval combat step the US picks the Marshall Sea area and they both roll search die. The Japanese roll a 2 to a US roll of 10.
Jay demands a re-roll. This time he rolls a 5 while Kasigi rolls a 3. This commits the entire Japanese navy but only the US carrier fleet in the 4 box is included. Jay could take a risk and use up Nimitz's third and last re-roll on another roll, but decides to save this for later rounds (or even to help the Lightning in the Hawaiian Islands) on the (wise) assumption that the search re-roll might end up worse rather than better.
**************************************

Which was corrected in an errata published in the latest ADG Annual, the 2008 Annual, to become :
**************************************
Offensive Chit on a Naval Action (WiF 16.2)
If you use an offensive in a Naval impulse on an HQ in a port, any naval or aircraft units that start stacked in that port that initiate a naval combat may require one or both sides to roll extra dice in any round of naval combat this impulse.
After naval movement but before any combats, place numbered production markers in each sea zone containing one or more units that started stacked with the HQ. The total value of markers placed may not exceed the HQs reorganization value.
In each round of naval combat, immediately after any roll (search, air-to-air, anti-aircraft, or defense) by either side is made, the player conducting the naval offensive may reduce a marker’s value by 1 to demand a re-roll. Re-rolls may be re-rolled. Any markers left in the sea area after the end of
naval combat there are destroyed.

Example: Nimitz is in Pearl Harbor stacked with 3 SCS and a P-38G FTR. Jay plays a naval offensive on Nimitz at the start of his naval action. Jay flies the Lighting into the 4 box of the Hawaiian Islands, and moves the 3 SCSs into the 4 box of the Marshalls sea area. At the end of naval movement, Jay
places a ‘1’ marker in the Hawaiian Is. and a ‘2’ marker in the Marshalls. During naval combat Jay initiates a search in the Marshalls. Jay rolls a 4 and decides to keep it. Kasigi then rolls a 2. Jay demands a re-roll and Kasigi rolls a 9. Jay decides to save his additional marker for a subsequent search, but the remaining Japanese ships abort after the first round of combat. The remaining marker is destroyed.
**************************************

The difference is that the latest version allows you to re-roll other die rolls, not only search rolls.

I kind of prefered the older version that you quoted, the one that reorganized ships.

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 19
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 12:17:01 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
I do not know from where I got 7m. I got RAW7 aug04 but from somewhere I got the idea that it was replaced by another version.

And since 7m had the same rule (16.2) as RAC I reasoned that 7m might be the latest version.

Thank you Froonp for your awesome WiF knowledge. As always.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 20
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 1:12:58 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm
And since 7m had the same rule (16.2) as RAC I reasoned that 7m might be the latest version.


Here is 16.2 from RAC version 20 from 13 April 2009 (the latest) :
***********************************************************
16.2 Naval action
If you play an offensive chit at the start of a naval action, specify one of your organized HQs that is in a port hex. Any naval or aircraft unit stacked in that hex that initiates a naval combat (see 11.5.2) may require one or both sides to re-roll dice in any round of naval combat this impulse. The number of re-rolls available is equal to the specified HQ’s reorganization value.
After naval movement, but before any combats, you allocate the available re-rolls to sea areas that contain a naval or aircraft unit that: (1) started the impulse stacked with the designated HQ and (2) will initiate naval combat in the sea area. The total re-rolls allocated can not exceed the specified HQ’s reorganization value.
In each round of naval combat, immediately after any roll (search, air-to-air, anti-aircraft, or defense) is made by either side in a sea area, the player conducting the naval offense may spend one of his available re-rolls in that sea area by demanding a re-roll. This reduces the number of re-rolls available in the sea area. Re-rolls may be re-rolled. Any re-rolls still available at the end of the impulse are discarded.

Example: Nimitz is in Pearl Harbor stacked with 3 SCS and a P-38G FTR. Jay plays a naval offensive on Nimitz at the start of his naval action. Jay flies the Lightning into the 4 box of the Hawaiian Islands and moves the 3 SCSs into the 4 box of the Marshalls sea area. At the end of naval movement, Jay allocates 1 re-roll to the Hawaiian Islands, and 2 re-rolls to the Marshalls. During naval combat Jay initiates a search in the Marshalls using one of the SCS units. Jay rolls a 4 and decides to keep it. Kasigi then rolls a 2. Jay demands a re-roll and Kasigi rolls a 9. Jay decides to save his additional re-roll for a subsequent search. However, all the Japanese ships abort after the first round of combat so the remaining re-roll in the Marshalls is discarded.
***********************************************************

Here is 16.2 from RAW7m (I kept each and every version of RAW that was published, for reference) :
***********************************************************
If you play an offensive chit at the start of a naval action, specify 1 of your face-up HQs that is in a port hex. Immediately turn face-up every naval unit controlled by your major power (CVPiF/SiF option 56: and carrier plane on a CV) in that port, in one sea area the port borders, and in every port adjacent to that sea area. If the port borders 2 or more areas, you choose which gets this benefit.
***********************************************************

Not the same.

Your RAC must be outdated.

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 21
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 1:16:40 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
Having quoted both the RAC's 16.2 and the latest (Annual 2008) 16.2, I notice that RAC 20's 16.2 was not modified to include this errata. It still only mentions search rolls when the latest version also other rolls (search, air-to-air, anti-aircraft, or defense).

Is this deliberate, or was it forgotten ?

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 22
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 3:09:25 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Not the same.

Your RAC must be outdated.



Indeed it was.

It annoys me is that I had the updated RAC with the latest version of MWiF and I did not look there instead.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 23
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 5:12:24 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
Apparantly I didn't understand the bizarre naval move: It's been redefined for me to be:

The way you use 1 naval move to get to ship 4 Finnish units out is like this (note that this takes place over two turns).

1. Turn 1: move your amph and TRS to the 1-box in the Baltic and pick up two corps from Finland. Debark them with land moves somewhere handy. Latvia maybe.

2. At the end of turn, move the TRS and AMPH down a box to the 0 box.

3. Turn 2: make sure the other two Finnish units you want are in a port (e.g. Helsinki)

4. At the end of turn, rebase your AMPH and TRS into Helsinki, embark 2 more corps or the ski div or something, back to the Baltic, back to a port somewhere (Estonia?).

Ta da. Four units moved, 2 lift, 1 naval move.

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 24
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 5:15:52 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

People should also be aware of this move - I wasn't - that you can move a TRS out to sea with cargo, have the units move off the transport, reorganize the transport at sea, the next turn you can return to base moving a unit from one port to another. This is very helpful to Germany who doesn't do naval actions often. In this way, with 1 naval move you can transport 2 corps units to Finland over 2 turns.

IMHO this ability should be clearly outlined in the rules, not the product of referencing several rules and interpreting them. All of this is based on the key phrase, "You return units to base like a normal naval move except in reverse." I don't find the language particularly clear.

On the otherhand I do not propose changing anything either, I'm sure Steve is well past code freeze for features or changes.


You are not allowed to reorganize units at sea unless you play an offensive and that seems an expensive way for Germany to transport units to Finland.

From 11.18.4 Reorganising:
"You can never reorganise aircraft or naval units at sea - they must be in a hex (exception: Offensive chits in a naval action ~ see 16.2)."



Guess what I found out...

11.18.4 is for the reorganisation step at the end of the impulse (using HQ, ATR and the like), not at the end of the turn which is called final reorganisation and is rule 13.5.
13.5 says: "Turn all face down units face-up (including units that have stayed at sea and units that are out of supply)".

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 25
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 5:31:18 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Apparantly I didn't understand the bizarre naval move: It's been redefined for me to be:

The way you use 1 naval move to get to ship 4 Finnish units out is like this (note that this takes place over two turns).

1. Turn 1: move your amph and TRS to the 1-box in the Baltic and pick up two corps from Finland. Debark them with land moves somewhere handy. Latvia maybe.

2. At the end of turn, move the TRS and AMPH down a box to the 0 box.

And they are reorganized.

quote:

3. Turn 2: make sure the other two Finnish units you want are in a port (e.g. Helsinki)

4. At the end of turn, rebase your AMPH and TRS into Helsinki, embark 2 more corps or the ski div or something, back to the Baltic, back to a port somewhere (Estonia?).

Ta da. Four units moved, 2 lift, 1 naval move.

2 TRS, 4 units moved, 2 naval moves (the rebase of step 4 is also a naval move), over 2 turns.

Nothing special here, you could have done the same without using this "trick" you call it, that is normal rule.

What you have discovered here, is that it allow to transport units without choosing a Combined or Naval action. Great, welcome to the naval oriented player's club, but it is common play for every self respecting CW player

The downside of such a manoeuver is that you have to stay at sea all the turn, which can be unhealthy depending on the sea area. You could also have transported those 4 units with those 2 TRS over 2 turns, and without staying at sea too, but needing to choose a naval or combined action. You have the choice.

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 26
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 5:54:54 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Great, welcome to the naval oriented player's club, but it is common play for every self respecting CW player

Hey, I think I just made a "snide remark" that Willy was talking about in the other thread

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 27
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 7:01:49 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
Your snide detector is functioning

Never seen a person do that move in 20 years... nearly 20 different game partners. Surprizing eh?

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 28
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/1/2009 7:29:25 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Apparantly I didn't understand the bizarre naval move: It's been redefined for me to be:

The way you use 1 naval move to get to ship 4 Finnish units out is like this (note that this takes place over two turns).

1. Turn 1: move your amph and TRS to the 1-box in the Baltic and pick up two corps from Finland. Debark them with land moves somewhere handy. Latvia maybe.

2. At the end of turn, move the TRS and AMPH down a box to the 0 box.

And they are reorganized.

quote:

3. Turn 2: make sure the other two Finnish units you want are in a port (e.g. Helsinki)

4. At the end of turn, rebase your AMPH and TRS into Helsinki, embark 2 more corps or the ski div or something, back to the Baltic, back to a port somewhere (Estonia?).

Ta da. Four units moved, 2 lift, 1 naval move.

2 TRS, 4 units moved, 2 naval moves (the rebase of step 4 is also a naval move), over 2 turns.

Nothing special here, you could have done the same without using this "trick" you call it, that is normal rule.

What you have discovered here, is that it allow to transport units without choosing a Combined or Naval action. Great, welcome to the naval oriented player's club, but it is common play for every self respecting CW player

The downside of such a manoeuver is that you have to stay at sea all the turn, which can be unhealthy depending on the sea area. You could also have transported those 4 units with those 2 TRS over 2 turns, and without staying at sea too, but needing to choose a naval or combined action. You have the choice.


If step 4 is at return to base you get the last two corps into Finland without making another naval move. So 4 corps into Finland for 1 naval moce is possible but take some time.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 29
RE: Bizarre naval move - 5/2/2009 12:55:20 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Your snide detector is functioning

Never seen a person do that move in 20 years... nearly 20 different game partners. Surprizing eh?

Wonderful - that's likely 20 other people you can "educate" by doing it to them.

And as Patrice says, it took the same number of naval moves and the same number of turns. But if someone was utterly desperate and willing to take naval actions and flip HQs, they can get all kinds of units from one side to the other side of a sea area. There are other tricks like breaking down INF corps the turn before, and taking the INF Divs on SCSs and the Mot Divs on TRSs and then recombining the units.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Bizarre naval move Page: [1] 2   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

1.734