Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Two new topics:

1. With unlimited divisional breakdown, are minors also given this ability?

2. Under RAW 5.1, if USSR DOW Hungary, GER may choose to receive another USSR oil or keep another GER build point per turn. Also under RAW 5.1 there is another section that states if GER aligns Hungary, the USSR gives GER one less resource per turn.

If the USSR DOW a neutral Hungary, which GER then aligns, how do these sections interact?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Two new topics:

1. With unlimited divisional breakdown, are minors also given this ability?

2. Under RAW 5.1, if USSR DOW Hungary, GER may choose to receive another USSR oil or keep another GER build point per turn. Also under RAW 5.1 there is another section that states if GER aligns Hungary, the USSR gives GER one less resource per turn.

If the USSR DOW a neutral Hungary, which GER then aligns, how do these sections interact?

Why not asking this question to the rules discussion group too, where Harry could have his word ? I'd like t hear him about this issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Two new topics:

1. With unlimited divisional breakdown, are minors also given this ability?

2. Under RAW 5.1, if USSR DOW Hungary, GER may choose to receive another USSR oil or keep another GER build point per turn. Also under RAW 5.1 there is another section that states if GER aligns Hungary, the USSR gives GER one less resource per turn.

If the USSR DOW a neutral Hungary, which GER then aligns, how do these sections interact?

Why not asking this question to the rules discussion group too, where Harry could have his word ? I'd like t hear him about this issue.

Interesting. They appear contradictory but both effects can be implemented so that's what I'd do. I think as Germany I'd give up a resource and take an oil, and also I'd align Hungary to Italy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

Why Italy though?

If the Germans align it they can send in the dreaded 'peacekeepers' (in this case I like them) and passively fight Russians. Also they CAN break the pact, but they don't HAVE to.

As always, iirc

quote:

  
To trace a basic supply path overseas, the unit must be in a coastal hex or trace the path via a port. To trace a railway path overseas, the secondary source must be in a coastal hex or trace the path via a port.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Another one. I read in the RAW:

quote:

  
To trace a basic supply path overseas, the unit must be in a coastal hex or trace the path via a port. To trace a railway path overseas, the secondary source must be in a coastal hex or trace the path via a port.

We have lately been restricting the meaning of this rule to an HQ; but re-reading it, I can not see why not any other unit could not trace supply path all the same, as I think we used to play this in the past. Am I right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Another tricky one:

Q: Can you trace a basic path across sea to an HQ on a coast and then a railway path overland to a supply source?

A: Yes but ONLY if the HQ is in a port.

The reason being "The port hex you trace the overseas supply path into does count against your 4 hex limit." In other words, the presence of an HQ on a coast does not make that hex into a port. However you can trace a basic path overland to an HQ on a coast and then trace a basic path from the HQ overseas to a port.

I have one opponent who continually forgets this fine distinction.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Another tricky one:

Q: Can you trace a basic path across sea to an HQ on a coast and then a railway path overland to a supply source?

A: Yes but ONLY if the HQ is in a port.

The reason being "The port hex you trace the overseas supply path into does count against your 4 hex limit." In other words, the presence of an HQ on a coast does not make that hex into a port. However you can trace a basic path overland to an HQ on a coast and then trace a basic path from the HQ overseas to a port.

I have one opponent who continually forgets this fine distinction.

Couldn't the HQ act as a secondary supply source? If it could, then it could trace to a primary using a railway supply path.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Another tricky one:

Q: Can you trace a basic path across sea to an HQ on a coast and then a railway path overland to a supply source?

A: Yes but ONLY if the HQ is in a port.

The reason being "The port hex you trace the overseas supply path into does count against your 4 hex limit." In other words, the presence of an HQ on a coast does not make that hex into a port. However you can trace a basic path overland to an HQ on a coast and then trace a basic path from the HQ overseas to a port.

I have one opponent who continually forgets this fine distinction.

Couldn't the HQ act as a secondary supply source? If it could, then it could trace to a primary using a railway supply path.

Only if it is in a port or within basic supply range less one from the port. You must trace overseas supply paths to a port. Of course you could trace to a port and then to an HQ as a secondary supply source, but the point of the example was that it is a mistake to think you can trace overseas directly to an HQ in a coastal hex if that hex does not contain a port. I guess the mistake is caused by being able to trace either a basic or RR path overseas from an HQ in a coastal hex that is not a port.

I have seen this come up in the Black Sea where other units on coastal hexes attempted to trace a basic path overseas to an HQ that was not in a port but on the coast. The weather was rain and the HQ was two hexes away from a port which indeed was connected by rail to a primary source. But the basic supply distance for the tracing units to get to the secondary supply source (the HQ) was greater than 2 and thus they were OOS even though the HQ could trace a valid RR path.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

It seems to me that the presence of the HQ is irrelevant. The overseas supply path must end in a port. What happens after that is just the normal/other rules related to supply.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.o.pdf
 
In every other case, when one or more major powers declare war on a minor country, choose an active major power on the other side to align with it.
 
If there is more than one eligible major power, offer the minor to the major power whose capital city is closest to the minor’s capital (any home country in the case of the Commonwealth). If it declines, offer it to the next closest, and so on.
 
If every eligible major power declines, the minor (and all its controlled minors and territories) is immediately conquered by the attacking major power (see 13.7.1).
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.o.pdf
 
If a neutral minor can align with your major power (see 19.6, 19.7 and 19.8), you can declare that it is aligning with you. You can only declare one minor aligned with your major power in each friendly impulse.
 
Your major power controls a minor that aligns with it exactly as if another major power had declared war on it.
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

 
This is an attempt, for me, to get a clarification of the rules and not an attempt to bash them.
 
 
Lets say I’m wrong on Aligning Minor Powers and use the RAW.
 
 
I have stated you can only "align" the following:
 
Axis minor countries that can be aligned: Argentina, Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Rumania, Persia and Iraq, Siam, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, and Yugoslavia.

Allied minor countries that can be aligned: Brazil, Bulgaria, Central America, Mexico, Mongolia, and Yugoslavia.
 
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.o.pdf
 
In every other case, when one or more major powers declare war on a minor country, choose an active major power on the other side to align with it.
 
If there is more than one eligible major power, offer the minor to the major power whose capital city is closest to the minor’s capital (any home country in the case of the Commonwealth). If it declines, offer it to the next closest, and so on.
 
If every eligible major power declines, the minor (and all its controlled minors and territories) is immediately conquered by the attacking major power (see 13.7.1).
 

 
But…
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: WiFFE-RAW-7.o.pdf
 
If a neutral minor can align with your major power (see 19.6, 19.7 and 19.8), you can declare that it is aligning with you. You can only declare one minor aligned with your major power in each friendly impulse.
 
Your major power controls a minor that aligns with it exactly as if another major power had declared war on it.
 

 
When the U.S. and U.S.S.R are neutral major powers and the CW and France are the only active major powers.
 
 
This would mean that the CW could align one (1) minor power and France could align one (1) minor power.
 
 
Does this mean when Germany DOWs more than two (2) neutral minor powers.
 
Any DOWed minor power not aligned by the CW or France would be immediately compleatly conquered by Germany?
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk
Honestly, I have never had this question come up, and I agree the designer could have used clearer language (i.e. "except in response to an Allied DOW" in the last sentence of 19.7 and "except in response to an Axis DOW" in the last sentence of 19.8.

I am hopeful the designer hasl followed my interpretation of this language.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk
Honestly, I have never had this question come up, and I agree the designer could have used clearer language (i.e. "except in response to an Allied DOW" in the last sentence of 19.7 and "except in response to an Axis DOW" in the last sentence of 19.8.

I am hopeful the designer hasl followed my interpretation of this language.

Steve, IMO RAW 9.8 is clear that the limitation is not on alignements that are consequences of DoWs. I don't think that the designer have made anything wrong, I think that people mix & confuse things because the same words (aligning) are used. But looking from where they come, everything is clear IMO.

IMO the designer is just in a logic where he tries to avoid redundencies and hopes to keep the rulebook less than 1,000 pages.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk
Honestly, I have never had this question come up, and I agree the designer could have used clearer language (i.e. "except in response to an Allied DOW" in the last sentence of 19.7 and "except in response to an Axis DOW" in the last sentence of 19.8.

I am hopeful the designer hasl followed my interpretation of this language.

Steve, IMO RAW 9.8 is clear that the limitation is not on alignements that are consequences of DoWs. I don't think that the designer have made anything wrong, I think that people mix & confuse things because the same words (aligning) are used. But looking from where they come, everything is clear IMO.

IMO the designer is just in a logic where he tries to avoid redundencies and hopes to keep the rulebook less than 1,000 pages.

I had a lot of trouble figuring out the precise rules for the DOW phase, but this was not a point of confusion for me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 9.9 Multiple states of war

A unit may not enter or attack a hex (or units therein) controlled by a major power on the other side that it isn’t at war with. However it can attack a hex controlled by an enemy major power or minor country even if the hex contains units it is not at war with.

In attacking such a hex, you must fight all units there, but both sides ignore the fact that you may not be at war with all of them. This means that each side could fly air missions to the hex and use shore bombardment etc. as if they were all at war.

Example 1: There are 2 Commonwealth land units and a face-down LND in Nice. Italy declares war on France and wants to attack Nice. Italian aircraft ground strike the hex. They can be intercepted by Commonwealth (but not French ~ see 18) fighters. Both the Commonwealth and Italy can fl y aircraft in ground support to the hex.

If the Italians win the combat and advance into the hex, the face-down Commonwealth LND will be destroyed. Commonwealth units will no be able to counter attack to recapture the hex (unless they declare war on Italy) because they can’t attack a hex controlled by a major power they aren’t at war with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

In Example 1 as cited:

(1) From context, France is assumed to control Nice (this ought to be spelled out explicitly; however it isn't and there's not much we can do about that).
(2) The CW units are in Nice and are subject to foreign troop commitment.

If, on the other hand, the CW controlled Nice, in example 1 as cited since Italy only declared war on France it would be unable to attack Nice.


As for your more general question I hope this answer helps: Yes, major power A can attack the minor power it declared war on even if it is not at war with major power B.

Concrete example: USSR declares war on Finland in July/August 1940 after its borderlands claims are rejected.

Finland is aligned/controlled by Germany.

USSR is not at war with Germany.

USSR may still attack Finnish hexes without declaring war on Germany.

I hope that clears things up - clear as mud anyway!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

In Example 1 as cited:

(1) From context, France is assumed to control Nice (this ought to be spelled out explicitly; however it isn't and there's not much we can do about that).
(2) The CW units are in Nice and are subject to foreign troop commitment.

If, on the other hand, the CW controlled Nice, in example 1 as cited since Italy only declared war on France it would be unable to attack Nice.


As for your more general question I hope this answer helps: Yes, major power A can attack the minor power it declared war on even if it is not at war with major power B.

Concrete example: USSR declares war on Finland in July/August 1940 after its borderlands claims are rejected.

Finland is aligned/controlled by Germany.

USSR is not at war with Germany.

USSR may still attack Finnish hexes without declaring war on Germany.

I hope that clears things up - clear as mud anyway!

I think this is partially relevant.
---
Here's something that I had to fix recently (provided by the beta testers): a german sub is stacked in an Italian port with many Italian ships. The CW declares war on Italy and launches a port attack using carrier air units (actual carrier air units and not temporary ones, since the optional rule for carrier air units is being used). The Italians can not intercept even though they are at already war with the French, because they are surprised by the CW. If the French had joined with the CW in the attack, then the Italians could send up their fighters to intercept. A nearby German fighter can intercept because they are at war with the CW already. However, that is only because there is a German sub in the port. Without the presence of the German sub, they would not be allowed to help the surprised Italian fleet. Depending on the die rolls for naval combat surprise (since this is a port attack) the Axis may be able to avoid the combat entirely. But if they do not have enough surprise points to do that, then there may be an air-to-air combat in which they can use surprise points to assist the German fighter. Or they could save their surprise points and use them for column shifts in either the anti-aircraft subphase or when the port attack "goes in". Now the Italians can use their anti-aircraft division that is adjacent to the attacked port, even though they are surprised, and in combination with the atacked ships AA there will always be an anti-aircraft subphase, though the strength of the defending AA will be halved because they are surprised. Note that if a German AA unit were available, or if any German ships in the port had AA, then the German units would not have their AA halved. This is all preliminary to the actual port attack combat results and returning the various air units back to base. Writing the code to deal with this kind of stuff is where I spend most of my time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

The Pions-WiF-AiF-PatiF Excell spreadsheet lists CVP

Yr1 Sz1
Yr2 Sz2
Yr3 Sz3

Are these the years and adjusted sizes for CVP?

For a French F3F would:
Yr1 ~ 1933 be the initial year for the CVP size and Sz1 ~ Orange 2 be the initial size.
Yr2 ~ 1935 be the year the CVP size changed and Sz2 ~ Lt Blue 1 be the adjusted size.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

The Pions-WiF-AiF-PatiF Excell spreadsheet lists CVP

Yr1 Sz1
Yr2 Sz2
Yr3 Sz3

Are these the years and adjusted sizes for CVP?

For a French F3F would:
Yr1 ~ 1933 be the initial year for the CVP size and Sz1 ~ Orange 2 be the initial size.
Yr2 ~ 1935 be the year the CVP size changed and Sz2 ~ Lt Blue 1 be the adjusted size.