Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Minor country reorganization

 
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 >> Tech Support >> Minor country reorganization Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 3:15:15 AM   
Courtenay


Posts: 4003
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
Rule 11.18.4 states:
quote:

However, you double the reorganization cost of a unit if any reorganization point came from a co-operating major power or minor country.
Does this rule mean that reorganization costs are doubled if a reorganization point came from a cooperating major power or any minor country, or does it mean that the costs are doubled only if the reorganization point came from a cooperating major power or a cooperating minor country? That is, does the adjective "cooperating" apply to both "major power" and "minor country", or only to "major power"? In particular, if a minor country reorganizes its own units, should the reorganization cost be doubled?

I thought not, but MWIF disagrees, and when I parsed the rule I realized the rule was ambiguous.


_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....
Post #: 1
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 3:30:59 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
would need a more specific example...

A minor country HQ would reorganize units based on the action choice of its controlling Major Power. So a minor country aircraft would require 2 re-org points after a Land impulse, for example. ?

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 2
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 3:38:55 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Rule 11.18.4 states:
quote:

However, you double the reorganization cost of a unit if any reorganization point came from a co-operating major power or minor country.
Does this rule mean that reorganization costs are doubled if a reorganization point came from a cooperating major power or any minor country, or does it mean that the costs are doubled only if the reorganization point came from a cooperating major power or a cooperating minor country? That is, does the adjective "cooperating" apply to both "major power" and "minor country", or only to "major power"? In particular, if a minor country reorganizes its own units, should the reorganization cost be doubled?

I thought not, but MWIF disagrees, and when I parsed the rule I realized the rule was ambiguous.


These rules were a royal pain to code. The beta testers kept finding subtleties that required me for refine the code. There is no easy way to explain how the calculations are done, because the calculations are very difficult to do.

Action choice, unit type for unit being reorganized, unit type of HQ providing reorganization points, ATR type that provides reorganization points, cooperating major powers, minor countries, offensive chit used. These all affect the points required by the unit and the point(s) provided by the reorganizing unit. The points spent in the naval, air, and HQ reorganization phases are cumulative, so the program has to keep that straight too.

Trying to figure this out precisely in your head will give you a headache. My advice is just use the reorganization points as simply as possible and don't try to do anything 'clever' with them to eek out one more reorganized unit. In the long run, this will save you a lot of time, effort, and grief.

< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 12/5/2013 4:40:07 AM >


_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 3
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 6:24:46 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
It's not that difficult. Unit is same country as the HQ - minimum re-org points. Different country unit from the HQ (and cooperates, of course) - double. In both cases the cost is as per the action choice of the unit.

Edit: I meant not difficult to understand playing over the board - I'm sure coding it was an entirely different can of worms.

< Message edited by paulderynck -- 12/5/2013 7:26:54 AM >


_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 4
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 11:17:08 AM   
Courtenay


Posts: 4003
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
quote:

It's not that difficult. Unit is same country as the HQ - minimum re-org points. Different country unit from the HQ (and cooperates, of course) - double. In both cases the cost is as per the action choice of the unit.
That's what I thought. In that case MWIF has a bug. Look at the picture. It costs the Dutch TRS 2 reorganization points to reorganize the British BB, which is correct, as this is a naval move, and the TRS is a different nationality. Unfortunately, the two Dutch ships are also 2 reorganization points, when they should be 1. (The CW aligned the Netherlands.)




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 5
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 12:10:01 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
I think it's not a bug.

AFAIK, you cannot ally Netherlands to CW unless they are at war (we are not supposed to be talking about NEI) so these ships are most probably British ships of Netherlands origin.

If this is the case, the cost if I remember well should be 1 point for any of them pure CW ships and CW formerly Netherlands ships, or 2 for any of them if the impulse is not a naval impulse.

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 12/5/2013 1:13:05 PM >

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 6
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 12:24:37 PM   
Centuur


Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

I think it's not a bug.

AFAIK, you cannot ally Netherlands to CW unless they are at war (we are not supposed to be talking about NEI) so these ships are most probably British ships of Netherlands origin.

If this is the case, the cost if I remember well should be 1 point for any of them pure CW ships and CW formerly Netherlands ships, or 2 for any of them if the impulse is not a naval impulse.


In a naval impulse it costs 1 point to reorganise any ship of the same nationality and 2 to reorganise a ship of a different nationality. So it's a bug.




< Message edited by Centuur -- 12/5/2013 1:25:56 PM >


_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 7
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 12:46:52 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
Ok, you re saying the same ruling that i wrote in my previous post, although I was wondering whether it's a naval impulse or not. Now I double-checked post #5 and he says it's naval. Ok, it's wrong. But not because of being a minor country reorganizing a major.

The only way CW can align the Netherlands in this version of WIF (no DoD) is if the Netherlands is declared war. And considering that the Netherlands has only one land unit most probably the Netherlands has being incompletely conquered and those ships are CW's so they don't have the minor country rule doesn't apply.

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 12/5/2013 1:48:35 PM >

(in reply to Centuur)
Post #: 8
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 2:33:19 PM   
Centuur


Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Ok, you re saying the same ruling that i wrote in my previous post, although I was wondering whether it's a naval impulse or not. Now I double-checked post #5 and he says it's naval. Ok, it's wrong. But not because of being a minor country reorganizing a major.

The only way CW can align the Netherlands in this version of WIF (no DoD) is if the Netherlands is declared war. And considering that the Netherlands has only one land unit most probably the Netherlands has being incompletely conquered and those ships are CW's so they don't have the minor country rule doesn't apply.

But the ships only become CW if the Netherland is completely conquered. I don't think Dutch Guyana and NEI have been conquered by the Axis...

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 9
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 4:05:00 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
Really?

I guess you must be right 'cause being your country Netherlands you probably paid much more attention to this details. Then we have been playing it wrong for more tan 10 years... I guess people treat them like CW because there is very few aspects (being reorganization one of those) where it affects the gameplay.

We consider them 100% british even with an incomplete conquest, I guess because of the special ruling of the Netherlands in the game (NEI creation).

(in reply to Centuur)
Post #: 10
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 4:05:10 PM   
Courtenay


Posts: 4003
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline
The screenshot was taken the same turn that Germany declared war on the Netherlands. The Netherlands had been overrun, but the conquest phase hadn't happened yet, so the Netherlands units were still their own, not British.


_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to Centuur)
Post #: 11
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 6:06:29 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
Ok, then I would agree with Centuur.

Centuur, I spoke with the guy who is supposed to know more on WIF in my group and he disagrees with you, in his opinion had the Netherlands lost their lands in Europe and NEI been created the NED ships are CW, no Ned anymore. Of course he has been mistaken sometimes, but maybe I will ask this at the mail list...

(in reply to Courtenay)
Post #: 12
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 7:44:12 PM   
Centuur


Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Ok, then I would agree with Centuur.

Centuur, I spoke with the guy who is supposed to know more on WIF in my group and he disagrees with you, in his opinion had the Netherlands lost their lands in Europe and NEI been created the NED ships are CW, no Ned anymore. Of course he has been mistaken sometimes, but maybe I will ask this at the mail list...


I've seen your question in that forum. I'm pretty sure I'm right with this...

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 13
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 8:03:08 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
You were right and we were not. Sigh.

For those who may be interested, this rule would apply for those minor countries who control other minors, like Belgium, Spain and Portugal, because they can convert the minor controlled in their new "home countries". Wouldn't be the case of Denmark, for example, because although D. controls Greenland, that is not another subordinate minor but a territory.

(in reply to Centuur)
Post #: 14
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 8:56:47 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
Yes it's a bug. Courtenay can you send in a saved game, please.

Mind you I can't see this one getting a high priority...

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 15
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/5/2013 9:03:33 PM   
paulderynck


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Really?

I guess you must be right 'cause being your country Netherlands you probably paid much more attention to this details. Then we have been playing it wrong for more tan 10 years... I guess people treat them like CW because there is very few aspects (being reorganization one of those) where it affects the gameplay.

We consider them 100% british even with an incomplete conquest, I guess because of the special ruling of the Netherlands in the game (NEI creation).

Well that TRS can be plenty annoying because it does not stack with US or FF and will not transport their units and does not even transport CW Terriotrials except the ones from the CW majors...

And with MWiF the PITA will go on for a long time because of the existence of Dutch Guyana in all games, whereas the above problem is often gone in the boardgame when JP conquers NEI.

BTW in case anyone is wondering, if the Netherlands does not choose one of its minors as its new home country, instead choosing a CW major... let's say Canada!... it does not solve the problem (even if they choose the UK)!


_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 16
RE: Minor country reorganization - 12/31/2013 8:47:34 PM   
Lucky13


Posts: 8
Joined: 12/24/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Rule 11.18.4 states:
quote:

However, you double the reorganization cost of a unit if any reorganization point came from a co-operating major power or minor country.
Does this rule mean that reorganization costs are doubled if a reorganization point came from a cooperating major power or any minor country, or does it mean that the costs are doubled only if the reorganization point came from a cooperating major power or a cooperating minor country? That is, does the adjective "cooperating" apply to both "major power" and "minor country", or only to "major power"? In particular, if a minor country reorganizes its own units, should the reorganization cost be doubled?

I thought not, but MWIF disagrees, and when I parsed the rule I realized the rule was ambiguous.


These rules were a royal pain to code. The beta testers kept finding subtleties that required me for refine the code. There is no easy way to explain how the calculations are done, because the calculations are very difficult to do.

Action choice, unit type for unit being reorganized, unit type of HQ providing reorganization points, ATR type that provides reorganization points, cooperating major powers, minor countries, offensive chit used. These all affect the points required by the unit and the point(s) provided by the reorganizing unit. The points spent in the naval, air, and HQ reorganization phases are cumulative, so the program has to keep that straight too.

Trying to figure this out precisely in your head will give you a headache. My advice is just use the reorganization points as simply as possible and don't try to do anything 'clever' with them to eek out one more reorganized unit. In the long run, this will save you a lot of time, effort, and grief.


Ever heard of KISS ?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 17
RE: Minor country reorganization - 1/1/2014 6:12:38 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
That was never an option in WiF, the boardgame.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Lucky13)
Post #: 18
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Tech Support >> Minor country reorganization Page: [1]
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

1.813