Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005 From: Honolulu, Hawaii Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote:
ORIGINAL: Froonp Well, Paul, I would not say that you're wrong, especially regarding the position of Suchan. There are people supporting the RP on the shore view, others supporting to let it where it was in the first place by the original designers of CWiF. I must admit that I'm in doubt now. Also, I would not want this to be a sign that all RP that Japan could access to in WiF FE that were on the shore because of scale to be moved on the shore here too. There are more than simply this one. Is it really a problem to consider that taking Vlad is necessary to ship the resource ? I understand that it goes agains point #3 that you listed (immediate landing = immediate profit), but it also goes against the gamey strategy of attacking Russia without attacking Vlad (for surrender problems), which is ahistorical & cheesy. The Japanese would have no problems in taking Vlad, and can take it in the first place very easily, so why not leave it this way ? This goes back to my first post on the subject - it is a question of philosophy. If the decision had first been made to absolutely replicate WIFFE, then there would be three map scales - along with all the attendant programming difficulties that would entail. No doubt those difficulties plus the allure of a world-wide single map scale were what drove CWIF and MWIF toward that decision. Once you make that decision (and believe me, I'm not campaigning to reverse it), you automatically make MWIF a different game. I don't have the benefit of having played CWIF to know what the change in unit density does to WIF in the Pacific, but no doubt it must affect things. So now the line is crossed, and the risk you run is to be carried away with all the things that by committee seem to need "fixing" and then the purists may be dissapointed with the game when it is published. The WIF community is not very large and we want MWIF to be successful so one must try not to alienate a portion of an already small user group. As for cheesy, if you have never done the following: - not taken Vlad so the Russian cannot force peace before you take 2 or 3 more undefended RPs - not taken the last factory in France or China that would allow the country to surrender, so that you can complete your plans without that tactic being pulled by the Allies - flown every available Ftr and Nav into the 1-box of the Italian Coast when the Wallies invade - backed out of or did not progress into a DoW'd Russia in MA41 so that they would not get a production boost - attacked in Siberia but not in European Russia so they would not get a production boost - purposely put the Eastern Front Wehrmaht OOS, so Russia would not get a production boost - delayed attacks into E. Prussia in the late game with Russia so Germany would not get a production boost - taken the Italian armed forces out of Italy when it is close to surrender - lent all the Italian BPs to Germany when it is close to surrender - built the "Bordeaux Redoubt" with the CW - done a zillion anti-U.S. entry actions with Ge/It after the U.S. goes to war with Japan, so that their "it's war" table becomes less propitious - etc. etc. THEN, you may cast the first lump of cheese. Fact is, last time I looked, all of those tactics were legal under RAW. Shall the MWIF design repair all those? (I'm sure I could think of more, but I am tired of typing and no doubt you may be growing tired of reading.) I conclude by saying, IMO, all the coastal RPs available to Japan in WIFFE ought to stay that way in MWIF. However, if they don't, I still intend on buying the game. Here comes a lump of cheese - Duck! I have never done any of the things you listed. About the closest I have come is playing it free and easy with the exchange of RP/BP between Italy and Germany, to optimize builds. I tend to play games "straight up" without recourse to controversial interpretations from rules lawyers. I just simply pound on my opponents until they are vanquished. One of the thoughts we had when changing the map scale - and we relied on this quite a bit at times - was that the WIF FE designers were constrained by the larger scale and forced to merge places on the map into a single hex. By going worldwide to the finer scale of the European map, we were able to position places more accurately - an option the was not possible with the larger scale. I do not think of this so much as 'correcting' the WIF FE maps, but rather as taking advantage of the finer detail to do things that I believe the original designers would have done if they hadn't been constrained. This does change the game, specifically in terms of play balance. And we have worried about that a great deal, constantly revisiting decisions in light of new information/ideas (as Patrice is doing with your concern about the placement of the Vlad resource). I might mention here that the position of the resource can be changed rather easily by editing the data files (CSVs), should a player so desire. Though as others have mentioned, whatever decisions are made for the various data fields (and rules interpretations) when MWIF is released are likely to become defacto standards. I worry about that too, having absolutely no desire to become a final arbiter of things WIF. As you point out, once the decision for the European scale worldwide was made, there are unavoidable repercussions. We do the best we can, and listen to all the advice that is given (some of which is for diametrically opposite choices).
_____________________________
Steve Perfection is an elusive goal.
|