RE: New to the game - Basic Questions

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions

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 >> WIF School >> RE: New to the game - Basic Questions

Page: << < prev 36 37 [38] 39 40 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 7/5/2021 7:17:52 PM

paulderynck

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Just picked and starting reading a newly released book by Daniel Jackson, "Fallen Tigers". This book focuses on the US air war in China and Burma during WW2 and the large number of US pilots who went down deep in occupied China, were helped and rescued by the Chinese. This book also contrasts the size of large raids late in the war between the China-Burma-India (CBI) theater and European Theater of Operations (ETO). A large CBI raid might have been a dozen or two bombers escorted by a half-dozen to dozen fighters. In contrast, a large ETO raid was composed of 1000's of planes.

Also, covered was the Japanese push into and conquest of Burma. I believe originally 3 regiments crossed the border into Burma and captured Lashio, which was the western terminus of the Burma road. In all I believe it was 3 IJA divisions, equivalent to a crops that conquered Burma and threaten India.

Of course as I reading these types of books, I'm always thinking of how it relates to MWiF. Or actually how MWiF relates to actual WW2 history. In this particular case I was thinking about unit scale. Section 1.2 of the "Rules as Coded" states that a land unit represents an army or corps and optional division units represent smaller units. An aircraft unit represents 250 aircraft in 1939 which gradually increases to 500 aircraft by 1945.

It feels to me that these number are more applicable to the Western and Eastern Fronts. For North Africa, the Arctic (e.g., Norway & Finland) and especially CBI I think MWiF ground and air units really represent significantly smaller numbers. For me that's one of the beauties of MWiF is how a the size of a given unit counter represents is a function of theater. Now, one might ask how do you reconcile that the unit counter costs the same regardless of theater? For me the answer is logistics. That is, it costs more and takes more effort to get and keep that unit supplied, not to mention it's support logistics, in the more remote theaters where unit size is smaller.

Anyway, not really a question but something I thought was interesting and wish to share.

Always seemed to me the count of WiF "corps" for many of the Wallies actually aligns better with the number of divisions that they fielded. Then when you add WiF "divisions", in many cases you get more total divisions then they had.

< Message edited by paulderynck -- 7/5/2021 7:34:50 PM >

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1111

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 7/5/2021 8:25:44 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Just picked and starting reading a newly released book by Daniel Jackson, "Fallen Tigers". This book focuses on the US air war in China and Burma during WW2 and the large number of US pilots who went down deep in occupied China, were helped and rescued by the Chinese. This book also contrasts the size of large raids late in the war between the China-Burma-India (CBI) theater and European Theater of Operations (ETO). A large CBI raid might have been a dozen or two bombers escorted by a half-dozen to dozen fighters. In contrast, a large ETO raid was composed of 1000's of planes.

Also, covered was the Japanese push into and conquest of Burma. I believe originally 3 regiments crossed the border into Burma and captured Lashio, which was the western terminus of the Burma road. In all I believe it was 3 IJA divisions, equivalent to a crops that conquered Burma and threaten India.

Of course as I reading these types of books, I'm always thinking of how it relates to MWiF. Or actually how MWiF relates to actual WW2 history. In this particular case I was thinking about unit scale. Section 1.2 of the "Rules as Coded" states that a land unit represents an army or corps and optional division units represent smaller units. An aircraft unit represents 250 aircraft in 1939 which gradually increases to 500 aircraft by 1945.

It feels to me that these number are more applicable to the Western and Eastern Fronts. For North Africa, the Arctic (e.g., Norway & Finland) and especially CBI I think MWiF ground and air units really represent significantly smaller numbers. For me that's one of the beauties of MWiF is how a the size of a given unit counter represents is a function of theater. Now, one might ask how do you reconcile that the unit counter costs the same regardless of theater? For me the answer is logistics. That is, it costs more and takes more effort to get and keep that unit supplied, not to mention it's support logistics, in the more remote theaters where unit size is smaller.

Anyway, not really a question but something I thought was interesting and wish to share.

Always seemed to me the count of WiF "corps" for many of the Wallies actually aligns better with the number of divisions that they fielded. Then when you add WiF "divisions", in many cases you get more total divisions then they had.

So maybe one way to look at these divisions are as smaller units.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 1112

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 7/6/2021 10:30:23 PM

paulderynck

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

Just drop an 'X' from all of them.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1113

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/18/2021 5:55:41 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Though I've been playing MWiF since 2014 (7+ years) there's still a few things I'm a bit fuzzy on wrt/rules since I haven't had to enforce them myself. One specific area is in air-to-air combat when you take a result "one lower" than rolled due to, for example, twin engine fighter or night combat (non night-fighter).

I understand the 7 possible results, which are: AX, DX, AA, DA, AC, DC and NE.

So if I take a result 1 less are the following correct?
(1) AX becomes DX?
(2) DX becomes AA?
(3) AA becomes DA?
(4) AC becomes DC?
(5) What about DC and NE?

Also, what about PX results? I see in the 0; +2,3; +6,7 columns that there are a mixture of DX results when the PIL dies and the PIL (could) live. How is that handled when having to take a result 1 less? For example, if your were fighting in the 0 column and your opponent rolled a 20 (AX/PX) would the next lower result be an 18 (DX/PX)? Or would it be a 16/17 (DX/PIL survives)?

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 1114

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/18/2021 6:59:38 PM

Centuur

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Though I've been playing MWiF since 2014 (7+ years) there's still a few things I'm a bit fuzzy on wrt/rules since I haven't had to enforce them myself. One specific area is in air-to-air combat when you take a result "one lower" than rolled due to, for example, twin engine fighter or night combat (non night-fighter).

I understand the 7 possible results, which are: AX, DX, AA, DA, AC, DC and NE.

So if I take a result 1 less are the following correct?
(1) AX becomes DX?
(2) DX becomes AA?
(3) AA becomes DA?
(4) AC becomes DC?
(5) What about DC and NE?

Also, what about PX results? I see in the 0; +2,3; +6,7 columns that there are a mixture of DX results when the PIL dies and the PIL (could) live. How is that handled when having to take a result 1 less? For example, if your were fighting in the 0 column and your opponent rolled a 20 (AX/PX) would the next lower result be an 18 (DX/PX)? Or would it be a 16/17 (DX/PIL survives)?

RAW:

Option 53: (Twin-engined fighters) In air-to-air combat during the
day, all front fighters with an orange air-to-air rating achieve one
result less than normal when the front enemy fighter in the combat
does not have an orange air-to-air rating. In these cases an AX result
becomes a DX, a DX becomes an AA, an AA becomes a DA and so
on. A DC result is unaffected.

The pilot will only survive if the aircraft isn't destroyed. So if the result is AX PX, that result will become a DX PX. If the result was a DX PX, it becomes an AA and the pilot doesn't die. The die roll itself doesn't matter, it's the result of the die roll which gets changed.

DC doesn't change (the result is unaffected) and NE of course stays to be a NE result.

< Message edited by Centuur -- 8/18/2021 7:02:53 PM >

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1115

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/18/2021 7:27:17 PM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

NE becomes AC. Attacker clears is one result less than no effect.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 1116

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/18/2021 8:28:44 PM

Joseignacio

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

Yes, like Orm says:

(1) AX becomes DX
(2) DX becomes AA
(3) AA becomes DA
DA becomes NE
NE becomes AC
AC becomes DC

And remember this does not affect CVPs (or at least most so believe) because they are not FTRs but CVPs and that malus is only against FTRs. This is subject to some debate but is mostly understood this way because of the letter of the rule (even though I bleieve, like many others it's just poorly phrased and should refer to any plane in a FTR role).

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 8/18/2021 8:31:28 PM >

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 1117

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/18/2021 11:19:11 PM

Courtenay

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

I think that the twin engine penalty applies whether you are fighting a FTR or a CVP. Look at the rule: It does not say that rule applies when fighting a FTR, but a fighter. When one assigns CVPs to combat, one must choose whether it is a fighter or a bomber, just as one must choose whether a FTR is flying as a fighter or a bomber. A fighter is any plane in the fighter line up of an air-to-air combat, just as a bomber is any plane in the bomber line up.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Joseignacio)

Post #: 1118

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/18/2021 11:46:06 PM

Joseignacio

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

FTR stands for Fighter, it's its abbreviation.

What you say is my initial view, however I have found that in my circles the pure letter of the rule is most commonly accepted. As it happens with so many other WIF rules.

(in reply to Courtenay)

Post #: 1119

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/19/2021 3:08:18 AM

paulderynck

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

I think that the twin engine penalty applies whether you are fighting a FTR or a CVP. Look at the rule: It does not say that rule applies when fighting a FTR, but a fighter. When one assigns CVPs to combat, one must choose whether it is a fighter or a bomber, just as one must choose whether a FTR is flying as a fighter or a bomber. A fighter is any plane in the fighter line up of an air-to-air combat, just as a bomber is any plane in the bomber line up.

Correct.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Courtenay)

Post #: 1120

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/19/2021 4:12:31 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Hey guys, thanks! To sum up everything as I understand it,

(1) AX -> DX
(2) DX -> AA
(3) AA -> DA
(4) DA -> NE
(5) NE -> AC
(6) AC -> DC
(7) DC -> DC

And the PIL dies, or potentially dies, on any AX/PX result.

I guess the only confusion left for me is the NE result?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur
DC doesn't change (the result is unaffected) and NE of course stays to be a NE result.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio
NE becomes AC

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 1121

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 8/19/2021 6:32:34 PM

Courtenay

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Hey guys, thanks! To sum up everything as I understand it,

(1) AX -> DX
(2) DX -> AA
(3) AA -> DA
(4) DA -> NE
(5) NE -> AC
(6) AC -> DC
(7) DC -> DC

And the PIL dies, or potentially dies, on any AX/PX result.

I guess the only confusion left for me is the NE result?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur
DC doesn't change (the result is unaffected) and NE of course stays to be a NE result.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio
NE becomes AC

I would go with Joseignaio here.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1122

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 9/1/2021 6:28:55 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

I'll concede at this point that I'm just not finding it in the rules, but where in the rules am I prohibited from switching between major powers during the final reorganization step; specifically, use oil?

Let's say that Germany has 0.5 units that need oil to reorg and Italy has 0.45 units. MWiF forces me to reorg the German units first. Is this correct? If not, I'd like to switch to Italy, use a German saved oil to reorg the Italian units, meaning I still have 0.55 left of that oil point when I switch back to Germany. Then use 0.5 to reorg the German units effectively consuming that 1 German oil.

As it is now, since I can't switch between Germany and Italy, I have to either not reorg all the German units in order to only use 1 oil point or use 2 oil points to reorg everybody.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 9/1/2021 6:41:36 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to Courtenay)

Post #: 1123

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 9/2/2021 7:05:28 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

It should cost one oil either way. So it shouldn't matter who goes first.

The rules doesn't state which MP that reorganizes their units first. I suppose that MWIF doesn't allow it because there have not been perceived for the need to change it.

Germany reorg for 0.5 and use up an oil. If Italy then reorganizes for 0.45 and use German oil then that should not use up any oil in my humble opinion. If it does, then that sounds like a bug to me. In my humble opinion, of course.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1124

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 9/2/2021 7:46:04 PM

Centuur

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

It should cost one oil either way. So it shouldn't matter who goes first.

The rules doesn't state which MP that reorganizes their units first. I suppose that MWIF doesn't allow it because there have not been perceived for the need to change it.

Germany reorg for 0.5 and use up an oil. If Italy then reorganizes for 0.45 and use German oil then that should not use up any oil in my humble opinion. If it does, then that sounds like a bug to me. In my humble opinion, of course.

Don't be humble. It's a bug. But there's another rule regarding the use of oil which hasn't been coded.

RAW:
If 3 or more units trace a path to the same oil resource, you must
spend that resource. This may mean that you will have to spend
more oil resources than the minimum number.

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 1125

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 9/4/2021 9:42:03 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

It should cost one oil either way. So it shouldn't matter who goes first.

The rules doesn't state which MP that reorganizes their units first. I suppose that MWIF doesn't allow it because there have not been perceived for the need to change it.

Germany reorg for 0.5 and use up an oil. If Italy then reorganizes for 0.45 and use German oil then that should not use up any oil in my humble opinion. If it does, then that sounds like a bug to me. In my humble opinion, of course.

Germany uses 1 oil, regardless of which major power reorganizes units first.
Italy doesn't use any oil - provided there is an available oil point for Italy or a cooperating major power.

If both countries only have 1 oil point, then yes, the Italian units would not get reorganized. Of course, you could choose to only reorganize German units that require a total of .4 oil. Then the Italians could reorganize all .45 of theirs.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 1126

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 9/4/2021 9:50:13 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

It should cost one oil either way. So it shouldn't matter who goes first.

The rules doesn't state which MP that reorganizes their units first. I suppose that MWIF doesn't allow it because there have not been perceived for the need to change it.

Germany reorg for 0.5 and use up an oil. If Italy then reorganizes for 0.45 and use German oil then that should not use up any oil in my humble opinion. If it does, then that sounds like a bug to me. In my humble opinion, of course.

Don't be humble. It's a bug. But there's another rule regarding the use of oil which hasn't been coded.

RAW:
If 3 or more units trace a path to the same oil resource, you must
spend that resource. This may mean that you will have to spend
more oil resources than the minimum number.

I don't consider the original post to be a bug - see my immediately previous post.

---

As for the RAW rule about 3 or more units, ...

MWIF applies it if there are separate groups of units tracing to different groups of oil points.

A common case is when the NEI oil resources are cut off from convoys, but still usable for reorganizing units that are remaining at sea. The best way to process this situation is to identify all the units remaining at sea that require oil and reorganize them first - using the NEI oil resources. Then you can process the units on land that require oil for reorganization. Note that the program keeps track of the total oil used to reorganize units and forces the expenditure of an oil point if required. The instance I am thinking of here, is that you use .4 NEI oil to reorganize units and then use .4 oil from other sources to reorganize units on land. Although you will have .6 NEI oil 'remaining' and .6 other oil remaining, the program will require that one of those oil point be expended.

< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 9/4/2021 9:51:12 PM >

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 1127

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 9/5/2021 7:50:59 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur
But there's another rule regarding the use of oil which hasn't been coded.

RAW:
If 3 or more units trace a path to the same oil resource, you must
spend that resource. This may mean that you will have to spend
more oil resources than the minimum number.

It is coded. That is why you need to spend one oil when you reach 0.5 oil. 0.6 oil usage equals 3 units if you count in units. Three SCS ships, for example, does not count as three units in regards to that oil rule. The three ships only counts as 1.5 units.

1 ARM -> 1 unit -> 0.2 oil
1 HQI -> 2 units -> 0.4 oil
1 HQA -> 3 units -> 0.6
1 NAV3 -> 1 unit -> 0.2 oil
1 FTR2 -> 0.5 unit -> 0.1
1 SCS -> 0.5 unit -> 0.1 oil
And so on...
Note that playing with light cruisers modify the oil cost for both CA, and CL, but not for BB.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 1128

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/17/2021 5:45:56 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Hey guys, thanks! To sum up everything as I understand it,

(1) AX -> DX
(2) DX -> AA
(3) AA -> DA
(4) DA -> NE
(5) NE -> AC
(6) AC -> DC
(7) DC -> DC

And the PIL dies, or potentially dies, on any AX/PX result.

A subtly that I learned from MWiF. When flying as a bomber even in day against a "normal" fighter the twin engine air-to-air result is NOT reduced by 1. That is, no penalty applied to twin engine fighters flying as bombers in air-to-air.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1129

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/17/2021 10:16:24 PM

paulderynck

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

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

< Message edited by paulderynck -- 11/17/2021 10:18:39 PM >

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1130

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 1:25:56 AM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

Could be wrong but don't believe so ... well at least accroding to how MWiF is programmed.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 1131

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 1:34:20 AM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

Could be wrong but don't believe so ... well at least accroding to how MWiF is programmed.

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see 1 result lower here?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1132

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 1:35:43 AM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Here's the game file for those who wish to check it out for themselves.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1133

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 2:26:33 AM

paulderynck

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

It's a bug then. Should be in tech support.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1134

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 6:24:08 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

It's a bug then. Should be in tech support.

No. It is not a bug. MWIF does it correctly. It is just a misunderstanding.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 1135

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 6:24:44 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

Paul said it right.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 1136

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 6:26:13 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Hey guys, thanks! To sum up everything as I understand it,

(1) AX -> DX
(2) DX -> AA
(3) AA -> DA
(4) DA -> NE
(5) NE -> AC
(6) AC -> DC
(7) DC -> DC

And the PIL dies, or potentially dies, on any AX/PX result.

A subtly that I learned from MWiF. When flying as a bomber even in day against a "normal" fighter the twin engine air-to-air result is NOT reduced by 1. That is, no penalty applied to twin engine fighters flying as bombers in air-to-air.

There is no specific penalty for twin engine fighters flying as bombers. Edit: That penalty is only applied when the FTR3 flies as a front fighter.

However, there is a penalty to all fighters flying as bombers. Their fighter value is reduced by one.

< Message edited by Orm -- 11/18/2021 6:34:52 AM >

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1137

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 6:33:44 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I believe that statement is incorrect. If it is a FTR with a bomb rating and flies as a bomber then its A2A is reduced by one. If it also has an orange circle, that doesn't matter - it does not get the next worse result when flying as a bomber.

Could be wrong but don't believe so ... well at least accroding to how MWiF is programmed.

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see 1 result lower here?

You should not see the result lowered. What you see is your fighter has one reduced in fighter value. The 5 strength German FTR3 had its value reduced to 4 (as shown by the counter).

Compare how it looks in my picture where it is in its fighter configuration.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 1138

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 6:36:47 AM

Orm

Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

And here are the two optional rules for reference.

Cut from RAC: 14.3.2 Combat
....
Option 53: (Twin-engined fighters) In air-to-air combat during the day, all front fighters with an orange air-to-
air rating achieve one result less than normal when the front enemy fighter in the combat does not have an orange
air-to-air rating. In these cases an AX result becomes a DX, a DX becomes an AA, an AA becomes a DA and so on.
A DC result is unaffected. [Clarification. The pilot death result is unchanged - Jan. 18, 2008.]

Option 54: (Fighter bombers) Reduce the air-to-air rating of the front bomber by 1 if it is a FTR.

Edit: Note that option 54 only affects FTR flying as a bomber. CVP is unaffected.

< Message edited by Orm -- 11/18/2021 6:37:45 AM >

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 1139

RE: New to the game - Basic Questions - 11/18/2021 9:12:48 AM

Joseignacio

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

Agree with Orm.

The Twin Fighters have a penalty that doesn't apply here because they are not Front Fighters in this case, but bombers. That one is the table penalty (one result less). So this is correct, we don't apply that result lowering.

However, as Any Fighter flying as a Bomber, it loses one A2A factor.

I see it correct.

(in reply to Orm)

Post #: 1140