Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

quote:

An agressive Italian can only transport a couple of units in Africa in a turn. Compared to the CW sealift, Italy has virtually no way to take the CW backdoor. We tried last game, attacking from Egypt & Syria. We were puched back ad swept in less than 2 turns.

If you aim for a conquest of Suez as the axis you should try to do it from both east and west, which will make the defence much harder for the CW (till not very hard)
Personally I think an attack on Suez prior a conquest of Gibraltar is a waste of time and resources, unless CW has totally stripped it and you can pick it up using a minimum force (wavell in France '39 might be such a case).

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

quote:

I just want to say that, I prefer to try to threaten Italy and achieve a better offensive position in the Med, rather than do raid invasion in western Europe or Denmark or the Netherlands, because these places in 41-42 lead nowhere.

Totally agree here, a couple of CW units in Rotterdam/Amsterdam is very annoying though especially if the get in during the autumn they are likely to survive all winter keeping the annoyance level high. So as germany you should always keep garrision around the Benelux cities.

quote:

(2) Which major powers to declare war on, when, and any associated conditions concerning same.

quote:

Hey, why do you say "totaly agree" then immediately give an example that is the contrary to what you said you completely agreed

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

quote:

(2) Which major powers to declare war on, when, and any associated conditions concerning same.

For the CW, this is a set of decisions that (thankfully) does not often have to get made, since in most scenarios it's already at war with most or all of its opponents. To whit:

Germany: The CW begins every WiF scenario it appears in either declaring war upon or already at war with Germany from the get-go. Easy enough.

Italy: The CW has to make a decision about war with Italy in the following scenarios: Fascist Tide (1939 2-map) and Global War (1939). It is at war with Italy in all other scenarios.

Japan: The CW has to make a decision about war with Japan in the Global War, Missed the Bus, and Lebensraum campaigns. It may have to make a decision in the Waking Giant campaign and the Day of Infamy 2-map scenario if the Japanese player (mysteriously) doesn't declare war. It is at war with Japan in all other scenarios those two powers appear in.

There should be a reasonable way of formulating a general process by which CW, or any other power for that matter, chooses to declare war on another one.

Balance of Forces
What is CW's balance of forces vs. Italy or Japan? The overall picture would range along some kind of axis, from Extremely Unfavourable to Extremely Favourable to somewhere in between. The balance of forces would be defined by a number of sub-properties, some of which I will list here.

Absolute number of units: Quantity is its own quality. The more units of each type the CW has than Italy or Japan do in the potential theatre of conflict, the more favourable things are for the CW, and vice-versa.

Quality of units: Who has more white-print units? Who has more combat factors? Who has better air units? Who has better naval units?

Nature and positioning of units: Are the CW's units in theatre a bunch of ARM/MECH stuffed against the Libyan border or MAR/PARA sitting in Rabaul waiting to be deployed? Or are they GARR, MIL, positioned on key garrison cities.

Logistics: How easy is it for the CW to keep its forces in supply? How easy is it for Italy or Japan, in the event that the CW goes to war with them, to do the same?

Reinforcements: How much additional force can the CW bring in to the theatre once the war begins, & how much can Italy or Japan bring in?

Short-Term Consequences of CW DoW
What are the expected short-term military & political consequences of a CW DoW (that is, during the surprise impulse & the rest of the turn that the war begins in)? Once again, an axis along which Least Favourable to Most Favourable consequences appears, with discrete points in between at presumably regular intervals.

Destruction of Enemy Materiél: How much damage can the CW inflict during the surprise impulse, and what sort of units is it destroying anyway?

Territorial Gains: How much territory, especially resource & victory hexes, will the CW gain during the surprise impulse & the rest of the turn?

Expected Losses: What does the CW expect to lose in the surprise impulse & the rest of the turn?

US Entry: Can the US entry pool handle the worst-case chit loss?

Long-Term Consequences of CW DoW
What are the long-term military & political consequences of a CW declaration of war on Italy or Japan rather than vice-versa?

Commitment to Theatre: How much commitment will this theatre demand from the CW if it goes on the attack right away? Can it afford to meet that commitment over time?

Protracted Contests: Can the CW's forces in place handle fighting a long-fought contest over the sea areas & land regions in the theatre under consideration? If they can't, what additional forces are needed to allow them to do so?

Long-Term US Entry: By declaring war and taking away US entry chits, what delay will the CW inflict upon the selection of key US entry options, and more importantly how long will US entry into the war be delayed? For this section, the average values of chits in each year comes into play.

Consequences of Reverse Situation
While of course the CW may be declaring war upon Italy or Japan because it believes it has a better balance of forces, can inflict damage and take turf in the short run, and tough it out for the long run, sometimes the CW will consider declaring war on them just to keep them from getting a surprise impulse on it. So, the CW will want to analyse the situation as much as it can from the standpoint of Italy or Japan, using all the above considerations, and decide if it is in their favour to declare war soon on the CW.

The more critical the surprise impulse Japan or Italy will get if they declare war compared to the rest of the struggle, the more likely the CW will want to pre-empt them.

Likely Results
Taking all the latter into account, I think that the CW has a reasonable chance of declaring war on Italy anytime in 1939-1940, and it will depend on what can be made of the surprise impulse. By contrast, the CW will probably not be even close to declaring war on Japan until some time in 1942, by which point it is almost certainly moot since Japan will most likely have declared war on the CW.

quote:

(3) Which minor countries to declare war on, when, and any associated conditions concerning same.

quote:


I just want to say that, I prefer to try to threaten Italy and achieve a better offensive position in the Med, rather than do raid invasion in western Europe or Denmark or the Netherlands, because these places in 41-42 lead nowhere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

Personally, I would rather lose Malta than the Suez. Malta can be cut off from supply by the Italian fleet, while Egypt cannot.

Egypt can be put out of supply, it is just as easy as Malta.
Remember that CW units in Egypt use Le Caire as a Secondary supply source. Only the Egyptian units (i.e. the territorials) take supply from the Egyptian cities who are primarty supply sources for them.
The secondary supply sources need to trace back to a primary supply source.
So, to cut supply to Malta, you need to empty 2 Sea Areas of any Allied CP or TRS / AMPH.
To cut supply to Egypt you need to do the same. Empty 2 Sea Areas of any Allied CP or TRS / AMPH.
The only difference is that for Malta the Italian can do it by themselves, and for Egypt they need the help of Japan.
With the same player controlling both, I say it is not a problem.
I for one even already conquered Egypt with Japan, not only to help Italy, but for the objectives too. It was the bigger victory I ever achieved in WiF FE... ah.... memories of the good old days....

quote:

I suppose Japan, sailing from Singapore, could sail into the Red Sea to help out...

quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

quote:

I suppose Japan, sailing from Singapore, could sail into the Red Sea to help out...

Or Euroaxis longrange bombers with a Nav value.

quote:


A toggle option where there is a:
A) "Combined Commander-in-Chief" for a faction controlling all allied units and using the land/air/sea/combined move rules to the greatest impact, within the cooperation rules;

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

With Japan & Italy not cooperating, who did you garrison Singapore ? with Italian Units ???
Taking itno consideration the poor range of the Italian Navy, I think it is of little use out of the Med. Morover, the supply to Italy is too easily broken by the Allies to risk a fleet that far.
That said, if the allies were in the ropes, why not do this kind of wild things

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
These strategy debates bring up a question:

If there are several Major Powers on computer control (for example Italy and Japan), will they be operated by the "same" AI, in that, sharing the same goals?

Historically, there was little chance that the Japanese Imperial Staff was going to devote serious recources to something that would only benefit the Italians...

In a game where each Major Power is controlled by a seperate player (and they have individual victory condition levels), the Japanese player may tell his Italian "ally" to go jump in a lake when it comes to sending the Kuido Butai into the Indian Ocean.

I suggest, if possible, that there be a couple of layers of AI opponents. (I tend to play solo...)

A toggle option where there is a:
A) "Combined Commander-in-Chief" for a faction controlling all allied units and using the land/air/sea/combined move rules to the greatest impact, within the cooperation rules;

The best example is where the Americans and Commonwealth units in a theatre share sea lift capability, have common invasion strategies, and so on...

or

B) Where each discreet nation operates according to it's "own" goals, with less likely cooperation and synchronisation of operations.

Or am I making it too dissimilar with the face to face games?

quote:

(4) Which minor countries to align, when, and any associated conditions concerning same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

quote:

(4) Which minor countries to align, when, and any associated conditions concerning same.

This must assuredly be the easiest thing the CW AI would have to deal with: the only minor country it can align proactively is Yugoslavia, by having 4 corps in an adjacent country (Germany, Italy, Greece, Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungary).

Since the Axis usually resolves the Yugoslav situation either by conquest or alignment during the 1941-1942 period, there's not much the CW can do about aligning Yugoslavia itself. I would, however, say that the CW should consider mounting a campaign to align Yugoslavia anytime from 1941 on if the following conditions are met:

1. The Axis have not dealt with Yugoslavia by conquest or alignment and/or are not putting any effort into doing so (for example, there are no Axis forces set up in Albania, or along the Yugo border, or what have you).

2. The Axis is deeply committed to other theatres and could not spare troops of sufficient quality to simply conquer Yugoslavia during the turn the CW aligns it.

3. The CW has the ability to stuff at least 4 corps into one of the countries adjacent to Yugoslavia.

4. The CW has the ability to send reinforcements to Yugoslavia (air & land units) that will help preserve that country once it has joined the war on the Allied side.

The CW only picks up other minor powers reactively when Axis powers declare war on them, so it doesn't really need to think about how and when to align them.

quote:

(5) Expected areas of conflict: with whom, where, type of combat (land, naval, air, convoys).

quote:


I usually build a factory for the Commonwealth in India to reduce the need for convoys. Do you think that would change the convoy contests in the Indian ocean?

quote:

WIF RAW7-aug.4:
"22.2 Factory destruction & construction (option 30)
You can build a maximum of 1 new factory a turn for each major power. They cost 8 build points each and take 4 turns to arrive.
When a new factory arrives, you must put a marker onto a city hex in your home country to reflect its construction (only in Britain for the Commonwealth until conquered). You can never have more than 2 blue factories in a hex. New factories are always blue factories."

quote:

Do you see any convoys for the British coming around Cape Horn? I am thinking about the Food in Flames option.

quote:

I usually build a factory for the Commonwealth in India to reduce the need for convoys. Do you think that would change the convoy contests in the Indian ocean?

quote:

ORIGINAL: CBoehm

quote:


I usually build a factory for the Commonwealth in India to reduce the need for convoys. Do you think that would change the convoy contests in the Indian ocean?

perhaps Im wrong...but Im quite sure this is not allowed within the standard boardgame RAW7 rules? or are the rules different in CWIF or am I just mistaken.

edit just looked it up:

quote:

WIF RAW7-aug.4:
"22.2 Factory destruction & construction (option 30)
You can build a maximum of 1 new factory a turn for each major power. They cost 8 build points each and take 4 turns to arrive.
When a new factory arrives, you must put a marker onto a city hex in your home country to reflect its construction (only in Britain for the Commonwealth until conquered). You can never have more than 2 blue factories in a hex. New factories are always blue factories."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

Do you see any convoys for the British coming around Cape Horn? I am thinking about the Food in Flames option.

A convoy line going from Australia to England through the Cape Horn (south tip of South America) would use 13 Sea Area.
A convoy line going from Australia to England through the Panama Cana would use 10 Sea Area.
A convoy line going from Australia to England through the Cape of Good Hope (south tip of South Africa) would use 9 Sea Area.
A convoy line going from Australia to England through the Mediterranean & the Suez Canal would use 9 Sea Area.
I never had a convoy line runninr around the Cape Horn.
cf : CWiF world maps attached to this post.

quote:

I usually build a factory for the Commonwealth in India to reduce the need for convoys. Do you think that would change the convoy contests in the Indian ocean?

As CBoehm said, this is forbidden.

quote:

Wow. Everyone stood around and gaped in awe. I know this is what I asked for and it is desperately needed for the AIO, but I stopped believing in Santa Claus a few years back.

quote:

Just to prove that I read and understood all this, I assume you are throwing Norway in with Denmark and Germany.

quote:

Do you see any convoys for the British coming around Cape Horn? I am thinking about the Food in Flames option.

quote:

(6) A master production plan by unit type and/or gearing limits. This does not have to be detailed, just a broad outline.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

By the way, does WIF FE simply drop BP fractions? For example, do the Chinese, with 7 PP and a 0.25 multiple, only get 1 BP per turn? The rules are unclear to me on this point.