Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

Italy, especially if the involved in the war early on and the Mediterranean is not closed, needs NAV and FTRs's to survive. The positioning of the Air units is vital to the offensive and defensive capabilities of Italy.

If we ignore the critical Italian Cost Sea area there are a very limited numbers of hexes where the air units can go in order to maximize their potential and still be relatively safe and in supply; Mainland Italy and Sicily are the only two places left.

Due to their poor range the Euro Axis FTRs need to be adjacent to hex-dot in a sea area else they have no chance to reach the 2 box or better (later in war they need not be so close), a 4 range FTR makes it. The Euro Axis NAVs have a better range and can often reach the 3 box or better if they are one hex away to hex-dot in a sea area, a 9 range NAV makes it.

Below I have suggested starting hexes for Italian FTRs and NAVs (see the image) from where they beast can threaten/defend Western or Eastern Mediterranean sea. The Flying boats are not subject to the limitations, they are often best placed at costal hexes where other air units can’t stack at all and the where the same costal hex also is adjacent to a hex-dot in a sea area.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
I notice the map peskpesk post #344 ~ August 23, 2013 does not reflect the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea as being adjacent.

Is this going to be corrected?

No, not needed, check under naval movement restrictions: "You can’t move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean if:
• the units are Axis controlled, the Allies have played US entry action 38 (see 13.3.3) and the Allies control Suez; or
• a major power you are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal."

Obviously, as long as the restrictions are not active, then you can move naval units between the two.

quote:

11.4.4 Naval movement restrictions
1. You can’t move naval units between Kiel and the North Sea if an enemy major power controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Kiel Canal.

2. You can’t move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean, if a major power you are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal.

3. You can’t move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea (even via Panderma) unless Istanbul is friendly controlled.

4. You can’t move naval units between the Baltic Sea and the North Sea (even via Fredrikshavn or Kristiansand) if major powers you are at war with control at least 2 of Oslo, Copenhagen and Kiel.

5. You can’t move surface naval units (SUBs aren’t restricted) between the Western Mediterranean and Cape St. Vincent (even via Tangier) if a major power you are at war with controls Gibraltar.

6. You can’t move naval units between the North Sea and the Bay of Biscay (even via Brest or Plymouth) if a major power you are at war with controls London.

7. After the US has closed the Panama canal (see 13.3.2, entry option 33), you can only move naval units between the Gulf of Panama and the Caribbean Sea if:
* Its controlling major power is at war with the USA and lets you; or, if none,
* The US player lets you.

The “even via” clauses apply only when attempting to move between sea zones through the port in a single naval move. A unit can move into the port from a sea zone in one step and then move out to sea in the other sea zone in a later step.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


If anyone else here has trouble believing that you can move directly from the East Med to the Red Sea and vice versa (in the absence of the aforementioned restrictions) please step forward.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

The quote is from the new rules which is all I had on hand in my present location. You can find the identical wording with slight reference changes in RAW7 under Naval Movement Restrictions. But of course you know that - you're just trying to be difficult as usual.

If anyone else here has trouble believing that you can move directly from the East Med to the Red Sea and vice versa (in the absence of the aforementioned restrictions) please step forward.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

The quote is from the new rules which is all I had on hand in my present location. You can find the identical wording with slight reference changes in RAW7 under Naval Movement Restrictions. But of course you know that - you're just trying to be difficult as usual.

If anyone else here has trouble believing that you can move directly from the East Med to the Red Sea and vice versa (in the absence of the aforementioned restrictions) please step forward.

paulderynck if you would read instead of just posting you might notice I have posted from the RAW all of 11.4.4 Naval movement restrictions.

If I understand your post correctly you are saying in order to play this game you have to have:
Bought all the Australian Design Group WiF products.
Become a member the WiF Yahoo Group.
Read all the WiF Yahoo Groups posts.
Read all the posts here at the MWiF Forums.
Been a member of MWiF final beta.

Or you are attached to another object by an inclined plane, wrapped helically around an axis.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

No, not needed, check under naval movement restrictions: "You can’t move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean if:
• the units are Axis controlled, the Allies have played US entry action 38 (see 13.3.3) and the Allies control Suez; or
• a major power you are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal."

Obviously, as long as the restrictions are not active, then you can move naval units between the two.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

The quote is from the new rules which is all I had on hand in my present location. You can find the identical wording with slight reference changes in RAW7 under Naval Movement Restrictions. But of course you know that - you're just trying to be difficult as usual.

If anyone else here has trouble believing that you can move directly from the East Med to the Red Sea and vice versa (in the absence of the aforementioned restrictions) please step forward.

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Extraneous:

This is not the first time where you have incorrectly interpreted the rules and, instead of admitting the error and moving on, created a quagmire of posts doubling down on your incorrect position and, what's more, constructing strawmen versions of the criticisms against your claims to argue against.

Frankly, it appears you don't know the rules very well, despite your propensity to copy/paste them at length. There's nothing wrong with such lack of knowledge, per se. But when others attempt to correct your misapprehensions, your typical MO is as I have described immediately above. And that is tiresome to read and respond to. It certainly does not contribute to an environment of constructive discussion - rather, it positively hinders it.

In future, please consider the possibility that you might be incorrect before posting if you are about to make a claim regarding the rules of the game. If, after such consideration, you must post, which is fine as far as it goes - if you have an uncertainty about the rules better to post it and have it resolved - please refrain from doing so on the AI threads where it is almost certainly off-topic (on the basis that the AI knows the rules). Use another thread or create your own.

People asking questions about the rules is fine, even questions that might be regarded as silly or as having self-evident answers. What you have been doing here, with respect to the adjacency of the E. Med & Red Sea, or elsewhere with other rules, has been something other than asking questions for the sake of improving your understanding, and as such it certainly is not fine. Instead, it is a waste of time and effort.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Can agree that these sea areas are adjacent in game terms and move on to more interesting aspects of the Italian strategic plan?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

Sure lets move on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

I notice the map peskpesk post #344 ~ August 23, 2013 does not reflect the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea as being adjacent.

Is this going to be corrected?

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

You can't just cede Sicily to the Allies though. It is a great base for their air planes and the Allies have good incentives to follow the historical path via landing there first. Also, the Allies need to have more units in Italy than the Italians have left. A small Allied beachhead that also manages to take a factory won't be big enough to hold enough Allied units to have a greater garrison value than the Italian units; especially if German units hold the front line in Allied ZoC - units in ZoC don't count, so the Allies need a 'rear area' of Italian hexes to build up garrison value. Sicily is perfect for that.

Sicily is good to defend with Italian MIL. If lost they can reappear in northern Italy the next turn. Though those same MIL are also good to have near their home city for that reason. The resources in Italy are irrelevant by the time the Allies are landing on the Italian beaches. Only the factory hexes matter at that point.

One note on defending Trieste - if Yugoslavia is conquered, normally an Axis unit must garrison the adjacent resource hex against Yugoslavian partisans. This puts an extra notional factor on both Pola and Trieste, which goes a long way in an area Allied air normally can't reach very well. Woe are the Italians if the USA sends a lot of their long-range FTRs to Europe rather than the Pacific though.

The most important area to defend are those within range of Allied FTR cover, so a lot can depend on what air bases the Allies already have. Next one must decide where to put the tanks. They are nice on a possible counterattack of course, but they are also nice to have that defensive odds shift even on an assault. The Allied 'funnies' aren't available until late '43, iirc, so they can't blitz invade against MECH until at least then. For that reason I sometimes put the Italian MECH in the hex adjacent to Taranto where it adds ZoC to Taranto and Bari, though this area needs additional units in the long run. It is one area of Italy that Axis reinforcements can't reach that easily, compared to the rest of the 'Boot' where the units defending the coast can be a bit more mutually supportive after a landing. But it is a good hex for it start out on the defense in 1941 into 42, when a concern is more of an Allied raid on such a sensitive spot as the boot-heel. Later, another unit with tanks is needed in the Rome area of course.

An ART unit is also good in the Naples/Taranto area, where the Allies will most likely go for the factory hex they need. Ditto for any Italian Engineers available. After the specialized units are carefully distributed, the Axis needs infantry - everywhere, and that's the challenge.


Edit: the Axis need a unit in that last NW hex of Yugoslavia so a Yugo PART can't walk into the hex and block transport of the resource in Pola. This unit is then part of the planning of the initial Italian beach defenses, which must grow over time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

With the same number of units, I'd instead put the two from the mountains on the Adriatic coast into Palermo and Messina. If Sicily goes, the Allies get a host of airbases and can virtually guarantee the garrison condition for Italian surrender by RTBing there from surrounding sea zones. Not defending Palermo is a strategic error because without it, all the units in Sicily can easily be put out of supply by taking Messina (or in WiFFE, if using the Limited Access Across Straits option).

Keeping land based air (LBA) around that can double the defense against an invasion into the mountains on the Adriatic coast is easier than keeping them in range of Sicily (not to mention out of range of Allied LBA fighters). Thus an Allied invasion there can still be risky, plus is easily encircled by units in strong defensive terrain.

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

The "heel" hexes are 8 hexes from Malta (and Taranto 7), and 9+ hexes from Allied airbases in Tunisia.

By contrast they are 5-7 hexes from most hexes in Sicily.

That change in range makes a big difference - that many more Allied planes in easy range, especially bombers flying at normal range instead of extended. The easier a time the Allies have taking Sicily, the easier it will be for them to invade around Taranto later.

If the Allies want to invade the heel (and that would be my natural inclination as an Allied player) they want to do so with a degree of certainty that their invasion into clear hexes can't be blitzed off. So that means having the airpower to flip every Axis unit in sight, especially bombers and blitz units.

Personally, I think they'll find it much easier to muster that airpower if they have turned Sicily into a staging ground.