Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Here is one I posted on the WiF list and it is currently running 3 to 2 as a "Yes".

Situation: Turkey is aligned with Germany. In Turkey, CW units are attacking a German mountain corps which has a flipped Italian ATR in its hex. May Turkish planes provide Ground Support?

There are 2 points in RAW section 18 which seem to apply.
Non-cooperating units cannot:
1. stack in the same hex, at any time that stacking limits apply
2. be committed to any combat or mission that the other unit is, or will be, involved in this step.

However, there are no stacking limits for either ground supporting air units and their escorts nor for these same units in combination with the units they are supporting.

So it comes down to the meaning of "involved". The Italian ATR is not involved in defending the hex but it could be destroyed if the CW units advance after combat.

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99
I already said on the WiF discussion list that I thought the Turks could fly ground support. I say this because even though the Italian ATR has a stake in the combat (it stands to get destroyed if the CW takes the hex) it is not involved in the combat in the sense that it is not contributing in any way to the outcome of the combat. Italian ground troops would be another matter, of course.

This issue makes me think that RAW needs to be adjusted in this regard when it comes to mixed forces. I think that RAW's exclusive-OR approach ought to be changed to an inclusive-OR approach.

For example, if France doesn't fall or the Americans liberate it, then the French do not cooperate with the CW. So, a hex with US and French land units together could not, under RAW, receive CW ground support (or even have CW fighters intercept/CAP during any tactical air phase).

This makes no sense to me whatsoever; I think that it is the presence of cooperating units that should define whether or not aircraft can fly missions to hexes. In the above example, the presence or absence of American units ought to define when and where CW forces can fly missions, rather than the presence of French ones (in mixed groups, anyway - I have no problem with the CW being unable to fly to support the French when on their own, even if by 1944 it's kind of silly).

It may be there for game balance reasons, but it strikes me as rather ahistorical and also goes against the team-play grain of the game.

quote:


Germany does not want to liberate Portugal. Instead they wish to cede
control of the hexes to Portugal so that Lisbon will become a
secondary supply source for Italy (since Portugal is aligned to Italy).

Germany, Do you want to Liberate Portugal ?
- If you do, it will be aligned to you, and you will incorporate its force pool into yours, and its capital will be a secondary supply source for Germany.
- If you don't, it will become a red partisan country, and you will still be able to revert it to its original controlling Major Power.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jaguar

Partisans in Eastern Poland:

If Polish Partisans can be placed into Eastern Poland, then should not the Soviet units in Eastern Poland be included in the garrison valuation for determing partisan availability?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

NOTE: The rules state that the modifiers to the die role are affected by the total garrison IN THE COUNTRY.


If the USSR has occupied Eastern Poland:

Polish Partisans are created in Poland NOT Eastern Poland.

Partisans cannot enter Eastern Poland it is part of the USSR.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

NOTE: The rules state that the modifiers to the die role are affected by the total garrison IN THE COUNTRY.


If the USSR has occupied Eastern Poland:

Polish Partisans are created in Poland NOT Eastern Poland.

Partisans cannot enter Eastern Poland it is part of the USSR.

quote:

patrice

Even if Eastern Poland is conquered by Russia, Poland itself is conquered by Germany. Eastern Poland is a subdivision of Poland, and is part of Poland from what 19.5.1 does not say.

quote:

patrice

quote:



If a partisan can't appear in Eastern Poland, can it move there after it has appeared and thereby be out of reach for the German forces?

I think that nothing in the rule prevent this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck

Well, if Eastern Poland is considered a Territory, Polish troops will not be able to use Brest-Litovsk or Lvov as primary supply sources. Heck, they wouldn't even be secondary supply sources for the poor Poles... I don't think this would be a good idea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Well, I think that Mziln's way is the best way to have a sound solution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck

Well, if Eastern Poland is considered a Territory, Polish troops will not be able to use Brest-Litovsk or Lvov as primary supply sources. Heck, they wouldn't even be secondary supply sources for the poor Poles... I don't think this would be a good idea.

Eastern Poland only exist once the Russians enter it (and so, create it). This is similar for Bessarabia, who does not exist as a WiF entity before the Russians enter it, and make it part of Russia.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Well, I think that Mziln's way is the best way to have a sound solution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck

Well, if Eastern Poland is considered a Territory, Polish troops will not be able to use Brest-Litovsk or Lvov as primary supply sources. Heck, they wouldn't even be secondary supply sources for the poor Poles... I don't think this would be a good idea.

Eastern Poland only exist once the Russians enter it (and so, create it). This is similar for Bessarabia, who does not exist as a WiF entity before the Russians enter it, and make it part of Russia.

quote:

This was discussed again recently on the WiF list and although I agree it could use clarification and may well be unintended by the designers, the present rules in RAW do provide the answers.
1. East Poland is part of Poland (nothing else having been specified in RAW) and so it can be subject to partisans.
2. Russians don't count for the anti-partisan garrison because the CW must be the controller of the partisan and per RAW: "A unit has a garrison value only if it is face-up and not in the ZOC of an enemy unit. The unit must also be on the opposite side to the major power that will control the partisan."
3. Thus the partisan can be placed in East Poland, but cannot go inside the Nazi-Soviet pact area because per RAW 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."
4. The CW is placing the partisan and RAW says that: "The controlling major power can place a partisan unit in any enemy controlled hex in its country that is not in an enemy ZOC. If there are no such hexes, put the partisan back into the force pool." It also says: "Partisans are always at war with the conquering major power (and it's aligned minors) even if the partisan's controlling major power is not at war with the conquerer." This last quote proves that the "enemy controlled hexes" are relative to the partisan - not to the CW.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

This was discussed again recently on the WiF list and although I agree it could use clarification and may well be unintended by the designers, the present rules in RAW do provide the answers.
1. East Poland is part of Poland (nothing else having been specified in RAW) and so it can be subject to partisans.
2. Russians don't count for the anti-partisan garrison because the CW must be the controller of the partisan and per RAW: "A unit has a garrison value only if it is face-up and not in the ZOC of an enemy unit. The unit must also be on the opposite side to the major power that will control the partisan."
3. Thus the partisan can be placed in East Poland, but cannot go inside the Nazi-Soviet pact area because per RAW 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."
4. The CW is placing the partisan and RAW says that: "The controlling major power can place a partisan unit in any enemy controlled hex in its country that is not in an enemy ZOC. If there are no such hexes, put the partisan back into the force pool." It also says: "Partisans are always at war with the conquering major power (and it's aligned minors) even if the partisan's controlling major power is not at war with the conquerer." This last quote proves that the "enemy controlled hexes" are relative to the partisan - not to the CW.

So we may not like it, but RAW allows it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

This was discussed again recently on the WiF list and although I agree it could use clarification and may well be unintended by the designers, the present rules in RAW do provide the answers.
1. East Poland is part of Poland (nothing else having been specified in RAW) and so it can be subject to partisans.
2. Russians don't count for the anti-partisan garrison because the CW must be the controller of the partisan and per RAW: "A unit has a garrison value only if it is face-up and not in the ZOC of an enemy unit. The unit must also be on the opposite side to the major power that will control the partisan."
3. Thus the partisan can be placed in East Poland, but cannot go inside the Nazi-Soviet pact area because per RAW 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."
4. The CW is placing the partisan and RAW says that: "The controlling major power can place a partisan unit in any enemy controlled hex in its country that is not in an enemy ZOC. If there are no such hexes, put the partisan back into the force pool." It also says: "Partisans are always at war with the conquering major power (and it's aligned minors) even if the partisan's controlling major power is not at war with the conquerer." This last quote proves that the "enemy controlled hexes" are relative to the partisan - not to the CW.

Well, seems to me that if "The controlling major power can place a partisan unit in any enemy controlled hex in its country that is not in an enemy ZOC. ", then no PART can be placed into Eastern Poland, as Eastern Poland is not an "enemy controlled hex", as it is controlled by Russia.

There is, pending, the problem of how is Eastern Poland "liberated" by Germany, that is removed from being conquered by Russia, and when does it become part of Poland again.

quote:

As per the RaW Eastern Poland is not a Major or Minor power it does not meet the requirements. That would leave it as a territory.

(1) Poland is the source for partisans not Eastern Poland. Eastern Poland will only exist when the USSR conqueres it.

quote:

(2) USSR garison values would count if you are allowed to put partisans in Eastern Poland because you are puting them in a USSR conquered controled area.

quote:

Using your example when did the CW sign a neutrality pact with Germany or the USSR?

quote:

If E. Poland were considered a territory - this solves this issue. Does that mean Occupied France is a Minor Country? Does Bessarabia become a territory once taken by Germany from Russia? Be careful that a seemingly simple solution to one problem does not create several more elsewhere.

quote:

The Russians are enemy to the partisans, not the controller of the partisans - that is what #4 above is all about.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

As per the RaW Eastern Poland is not a Major or Minor power it does not meet the requirements. That would leave it as a .

(1) Poland is the source for partisans not Eastern Poland. Eastern Poland will only exist when the USSR conqueres it.

That is one theory that requires clarification from Harry. Against it is arrayed the argument that if that were the case, why not just say so somewhere in rule 19. It's probably easier to simply ask Harry if partisans can be placed in E. Poland. It being a territory or not has no other effect on game play.

quote:

(2) USSR garison values would count if you are allowed to put partisans in Eastern Poland because you are puting them in a USSR conquered controled area.

Not by RAW - "The unit must also be on the opposite side to the major power that will control the partisan." to be counted as part of the garrison. And the Russians are not on the opposite side to the CW.

quote:

Using your example when did the CW sign a neutrality pact with Germany or the USSR?

You miss the point entirely. The CW controls the partisan. The rule says "After you enter into a neutrality pact with a major power" (Germany and Russia do this), "units controlled by other major powers" (the partisans are controled by the CW) "on your side" (CW and Russia are on the same side) "cannot enter hexes that are part of your" (Russia's) "common border with that major power" (Germany) "if they" (the partisans) "are at war with that other major power" (Russia). The partisans are at war with both Germany and Russia because both conquered their country.

If E. Poland were considered a territory - this solves this issue. Does that mean Occupied France is a Minor Country? Does Bessarabia become a territory once taken by Germany from Russia? Be careful that a seemingly simple solution to one problem does not create several more elsewhere.

quote:

Ah but you are forgetting that the USSR is a Neutral Major Power (per the RaW) and not on the same side as the CW.

quote:

Note it says ENTER not PLACED.

quote:

So, this PART, if placed in Eastern Poland would deny the russians the benefits of controlling the hex it is in (as normal PART do). So, I don't see the reason why the CW would put a PART in Eastern Poland to hamper the Russians.