RE: optional rules (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/23/2007 5:38:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dale1066
version 0.7.71 if thats any help offhand cant think of any where else the max might be except in the oil usage window see attached

That might be that.



dale1066 -> RE: optional rules (8/23/2007 11:19:45 PM)

Speaking of Optional rules this is the thread I hope :)

I've been playing around with CWif looking at posibilities for the japanese player in '39

Massive move against USSR in S/O seems viable if he's not expecting it, (confirm Japan still sets up after ussr?) and probably so even if he is IMHO Wx can be difficult maybe

What is a usual Wif soviet setup in the far east ? seems to me you either set up the good units around Chita for railing west as required but that practically gives japan four resources for practically nothing. Alternativly be prepared to see them and the eastern reserves destroyed by japanese land/naval power.

China gets let of, but if it goes well not for long, after all China is not renowned for its offensive capability still i would not leave any fleet in canton that would be embarrasing if they got lucky.

Any way to the point I've been trying to find the rule for the enforcing of peace between USSR and Japan, I thought it was an optional rule dependant on capturing V'v'k and/or surrounding hexes and indeed its marked as such in CWif tho' Not Yet Implemented (NYI) I've been through the PDF of the rules for CWif and can't find it Is it still a valid option or has it been superseded. If not will it be included in MWif?

I suppose this could be on the Soviet/Japanese startegy threads? or is it already I've looked but couldn't find much



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/23/2007 11:38:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dale1066

Speaking of Optional rules this is the thread I hope :)

I've been playing around with CWif looking at posibilities for the japanese player in '39

Massive move against USSR in S/O seems viable if he's not expecting it, (confirm Japan still sets up after ussr?) and probably so even if he is IMHO Wx can be difficult maybe

What is a usual Wif soviet setup in the far east ? seems to me you either set up the good units around Chita for railing west as required but that practically gives japan four resources for practically nothing. Alternativly be prepared to see them and the eastern reserves destroyed by japanese land/naval power.

China gets let of, but if it goes well not for long, after all China is not renowned for its offensive capability still i would not leave any fleet in canton that would be embarrasing if they got lucky.

Any way to the point I've been trying to find the rule for the enforcing of peace between USSR and Japan, I thought it was an optional rule dependant on capturing V'v'k and/or surrounding hexes and indeed its marked as such in CWif tho' Not Yet Implemented (NYI) I've been through the PDF of the rules for CWif and can't find it Is it still a valid option or has it been superseded. If not will it be included in MWif?

I suppose this could be on the Soviet/Japanese startegy threads? or is it already I've looked but couldn't find much

Mandatory Peace between USSR and Japan is an optional rule in WIF FE (in MWIF too). It is in the Mutual Peace section of the rules as I recall.



dale1066 -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2007 12:06:27 AM)

Cheers

Found that hmmm interesting Peace is dependant on the soviets even tho they might be losing wanting peace thought it was the otherway around I guess the ability to do land moves is good but is it worth those resources to Japan?



Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2007 12:09:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dale1066

Cheers

Found that hmmm interesting Peace is dependant on the soviets even tho they might be losing wanting peace thought it was the otherway around I guess the ability to do land moves is good but is it worth those resources to Japan?


From RAW7 august 04 :
***********************************
13.7.3 Mutual peace
(...)
Option 50: (USSR-Japan compulsory peace) If Japan controls Vladivostok during the first war between Japan and the USSR, the Japanese player must agree to a peace if the Soviet player wants one. Similarly, if the USSR controls 3 or more resources that were Japanese controlled at the start of Sep/Oct 1939, the Soviet player must agree to a peace if the Japanese player wants one.
In either case, the new Russo-Japanese border is established by the hexes each controls. Any pocket of non-coastal hexes wholly surrounded by hexes controlled by the other major power becomes controlled by the major power whose hexes surround them.
***********************************



dale1066 -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2007 12:29:54 AM)

Thanks

I read that, isn't that what I typed (well assuming the japanese are winning) the soviets assuming they have lost everything that japanese player wants (4 resources and VVK) will just retreat into the mountains keeping the war going to keep the possibility of doing a land action. which is useful. Any reason why they might want to make peace surely in '39/40 japan can't be thinking of advancing past Chita, its a long way to any other objectives?



composer99 -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2007 5:29:11 PM)

One of the biggest benefits to Japan attacking the USSR, from the USSR's point of view, is that it gets to build MIL from then on, in addition to getting to call land actions. Those Militias can be used to stop the Japanese at Chita, or seep around them and cause supply/flanking problems, or go do garrison duty in the European USSR.

While they are still operating within range of Japan's CVPs, the Japanese can expect to dominate. But once they press inland it can be tough going.

If I were the USSR, I would only consider forcing a peace once war with Germany has started and I don't want to fight on two fronts.



dale1066 -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2007 7:20:32 AM)

Re Chita Gotcha. but to cause serious probs to japan would mean committing a hq which would be ok in 40 but by 41 would be needed back in europe either to stuff or to fight. even then surely if all of the siberian cities were in japanese hands the russian advance would be limited to the chita to harbin railline which could be defended reasonably easily/cheaply?

Forgot about the mil issue but from a japanese point of view the russians will dow on you(or Italy?) at some point so will get them anyway

I could see the russian player declaring peace under other circumstances (after all he may DOW again at some point ? ) mind you then is'nt a Nag pact in effect and chits need to be assigned / garrisons maintained or is that an older rule? Circumstances of a peace being Japan has VV and maybe the other resources but if the means(raillines) to transport them back to japan isn't under japanese control in the ensuing peace(with its controlled hex transfer ownership) neither player would gets the resources.

Just thinking out loud really and interested in others opinions. Still interested in what a usual russian set up in siberia is ?




composer99 -> RE: optional rules (8/27/2007 7:14:18 PM)

I may have some thoughts on that, but I would suggest in the meantime that this discussion be moved to the USSR AIO thread.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (9/4/2007 4:43:30 AM)

The beta testers have noted that there should be 3 sets of optional rules predefined.

One would be for novices.

One would be a 'standard' set.

And the third would an 'advanced' set.

We had previously defined 2 of these with the first two given above kind of mixed together.

I would like to establish 3 rather distinct sets. Below are what I have from earlier input from forum members. Note that the first two are identical, so some changes have to be made to justify the creation of the 3rd set.

It will probaly be easiest if you simply list which settings you recommend changing, rather than listing them all again with new values - which would make it difficult for me (and others) to figure out what you think should be changed.
==============
NoviceDefaultOptions: TOptions = (
Divisions: False;
Artillery: False;
Fortifications: False;
SupplyUnits: False;
CombatEngineers: False;
FlyingBoats: False;
Territorials: False;
LimitedOverseasSupply: False;
LimitedSupplyAcrossStraits: False;
HQSupport: False;
EmergencyHQSupply: False;
SyntheticOilPlants: False;
OffCityReinforcement: True;
RecruitmentLimits: False;
HQMovement: False;
BottomedShips: False;
InThePresenceOfTheEnemy: False;
SurprisedZOCs: False;
BounceCombat: False;
VWeapons: False;
AtomicBombs: False;
Frogmen: False;
SCSTransport: False;
AmphibiousRules: False;
OptionalCVSearching: False;
Pilots: False;
FoodInFlames: False;
FactoryConstruction: False;
SavingResources: False;
CarpetBombing: False;
TankBusters: False;
MotorizedMovementRates: True;
BomberATR: False;
LargeATR: False;
RailwayMovement: False;
DefensiveShoreBombardment: False;
BlitzBonus: False;
ChineseAttackWeakness: False;
FractionalOdds: True;
AlliedCombatFriction: True;
TwoD10LandCRT: False;
ExtendedAircraftRebasing: True;
VariableReorganizationCosts: False;
Partisans: True;
IsolatedReorganizationLimits: False;
OilRules: False;
HitlersWar: False;
USSRJapanCompulsoryPeace: False;
EnrouteInterception: False;
NightMissions: False;
TwinEnginedFighters: False;
FighterBombers: False;
OutclassedFighters: False;
CarrierPlanes: False;
RoughSeas: False;
LimitedAircraftInterception: False;
Internment: False;
FlyingBombs: False;
Kamikazes: False;
Offensive: True;
Ukraine: False;
Intelligence: False;
JapaneseCommandConflict: False;
SkiTroops: False;
Queens: False;
CityBasedVolunteers: False;
Siberians: True;
NavalSupplyUnits: False;
GuardsBannerArmies: False;
ChineseWarlords: False;
PartisanHQs: False;
CruisersInFlames: False;
ConvoysInFlames: False;
OilTankers: False;
ConstructionEngineers: False;
ScrapUnits: False;
AddChineseCities: False;
UnlimitedBreakdown: False;
ExtendedGame: False;
UnrestrictedSetup: False;
NavalOffensiveChit: False;
);

StandardDefaultOptions: TOptions = (
Divisions: False;
Artillery: False;
Fortifications: False;
SupplyUnits: False;
CombatEngineers: False;
FlyingBoats: False;
Territorials: False;
LimitedOverseasSupply: False;
LimitedSupplyAcrossStraits: False;
HQSupport: False;
EmergencyHQSupply: False;
SyntheticOilPlants: False;
OffCityReinforcement: True;
RecruitmentLimits: False;
HQMovement: False;
BottomedShips: False;
InThePresenceOfTheEnemy: False;
SurprisedZOCs: False;
BounceCombat: False;
VWeapons: False;
AtomicBombs: False;
Frogmen: False;
SCSTransport: False;
AmphibiousRules: False;
OptionalCVSearching: False;
Pilots: False;
FoodInFlames: False;
FactoryConstruction: False;
SavingResources: False;
CarpetBombing: False;
TankBusters: False;
MotorizedMovementRates: True;
BomberATR: False;
LargeATR: False;
RailwayMovement: False;
DefensiveShoreBombardment: False;
BlitzBonus: False;
ChineseAttackWeakness: False;
FractionalOdds: True;
AlliedCombatFriction: True;
TwoD10LandCRT: False;
ExtendedAircraftRebasing: True;
VariableReorganizationCosts: False;
Partisans: True;
IsolatedReorganizationLimits: False;
OilRules: False;
HitlersWar: False;
USSRJapanCompulsoryPeace: False;
EnrouteInterception: False;
NightMissions: False;
TwinEnginedFighters: False;
FighterBombers: False;
OutclassedFighters: False;
CarrierPlanes: False;
RoughSeas: False;
LimitedAircraftInterception: False;
Internment: False;
FlyingBombs: False;
Kamikazes: False;
Offensive: True;
Ukraine: False;
Intelligence: False;
JapaneseCommandConflict: False;
SkiTroops: False;
Queens: False;
CityBasedVolunteers: False;
Siberians: True;
NavalSupplyUnits: False;
GuardsBannerArmies: False;
ChineseWarlords: False;
PartisanHQs: False;
CruisersInFlames: False;
ConvoysInFlames: False;
OilTankers: False;
ConstructionEngineers: False;
ScrapUnits: False;
AddChineseCities: False;
UnlimitedBreakdown: False;
ExtendedGame: False;
UnrestrictedSetup: False;
NavalOffensiveChit: False;
);

EnhancedDefaultOptions: TOptions = (
Divisions: True;
Artillery: True;
Fortifications: True;
SupplyUnits: False;
CombatEngineers: True;
FlyingBoats: True;
Territorials: True;
LimitedOverseasSupply: True;
LimitedSupplyAcrossStraits: True;
HQSupport: True;
EmergencyHQSupply: True;
SyntheticOilPlants: True;
OffCityReinforcement: True;
RecruitmentLimits: False;
HQMovement: False;
BottomedShips: False;
InThePresenceOfTheEnemy: False;
SurprisedZOCs: False;
BounceCombat: False;
VWeapons: True;
AtomicBombs: True;
Frogmen: True;
SCSTransport: True;
AmphibiousRules: True;
OptionalCVSearching: True;
Pilots: True;
FoodInFlames: False;
FactoryConstruction: True;
SavingResources: True;
CarpetBombing: True;
TankBusters: True;
MotorizedMovementRates: True;
BomberATR: True;
LargeATR: True;
RailwayMovement: False;
DefensiveShoreBombardment: False;
BlitzBonus: True;
ChineseAttackWeakness: True;
FractionalOdds: True;
AlliedCombatFriction: True;
TwoD10LandCRT: True;
ExtendedAircraftRebasing: True;
VariableReorganizationCosts: False;
Partisans: True;
IsolatedReorganizationLimits: True;
OilRules: True;
HitlersWar: False;
USSRJapanCompulsoryPeace: True;
EnrouteInterception: True;
NightMissions: True;
TwinEnginedFighters: True;
FighterBombers: True;
OutclassedFighters: True;
CarrierPlanes: True;
RoughSeas: False;
LimitedAircraftInterception: False;
Internment: True;
FlyingBombs: True;
Kamikazes: True;
Offensive: True;
Ukraine: False;
Intelligence: False;
JapaneseCommandConflict: False;
SkiTroops: True;
Queens: True;
CityBasedVolunteers: True;
Siberians: True;
NavalSupplyUnits: True;
GuardsBannerArmies: True;
ChineseWarlords: True;
PartisanHQs: True;
CruisersInFlames: False;
ConvoysInFlames: False;
OilTankers: False;
ConstructionEngineers: True;
ScrapUnits: True;
AddChineseCities: False;
UnlimitedBreakdown: False;
ExtendedGame: False;
UnrestrictedSetup: False;
NavalOffensiveChit: False;
);



Froonp -> RE: optional rules (9/4/2007 1:08:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
It will probaly be easiest if you simply list which settings you recommend changing, rather than listing them all again with new values - which would make it difficult for me (and others) to figure out what you think should be changed.

Here's my take :

The philosophy of the choices I present here are :
Novice = A WiF FE Classic game (less rules & less units)
Standard = A WiF FE Classic game with more rules especially supply & Oil
Advanced = Full chrome WiF FE Deluxe (more rules & more units)

Novice :
HQSupport: True;
OptionalCVSearching: True;
Pilots: True; [As a note, MWiF has PiF mandatory, and PiF is designed to work with Pilots]
TankBusters: True; [What game about WWII could not include tank busters]
DefensiveShoreBombardment: True;
IsolatedReorganizationLimits: True;
USSRJapanCompulsoryPeace: True;
FighterBombers: True;
CarrierPlanes: True; [As a note, MWiF has SiF mandatory, and SiF is designed to work with Carrier Planes]
Kamikazes: True; [What game about WWII could not include Kamikazes]
JapaneseCommandConflict: True;
GuardsBannerArmies: True;
ChineseWarlords: True;
AddChineseCities: True;

Normal :
FlyingBoats: True;
LimitedOverseasSupply: True;
LimitedSupplyAcrossStraits: True;
HQSupport: True;
EmergencyHQSupply: True;
OptionalCVSearching: True;
Pilots: True;
SavingResources: True;
CarpetBombing: True;
TankBusters: True;
BomberATR: True;
LargeATR: True;
DefensiveShoreBombardment: True;
BlitzBonus: True;
ChineseAttackWeakness: True;
VariableReorganizationCosts: True;
IsolatedReorganizationLimits: True;
OilRules: True;
USSRJapanCompulsoryPeace: True;
TwinEnginedFighters: True;
FighterBombers: True;
OutclassedFighters: True;
CarrierPlanes: True;
Internment: True;
FlyingBombs: True;
Kamikazes: True;
JapaneseCommandConflict: True;
Queens: True;
NavalSupplyUnits: True;
GuardsBannerArmies: True;
ChineseWarlords: True;
ScrapUnits: True;
AddChineseCities: True;

Advanced :
SupplyUnits: True;
BottomedShips: True;
BounceCombat: True;
FoodInFlames: True;
DefensiveShoreBombardment: True;
VariableReorganizationCosts: True;
Intelligence: True;
JapaneseCommandConflict: True;
CruisersInFlames: True;
ConvoysInFlames: True;
OilTankers: True;
AddChineseCities: True;
UnlimitedBreakdown: True;

To be clear, there are no options that I did put to False in your list.

I can send you a spreadsheet that I made that show those 3 sets side by side, and that shows which are at True at start, and which I made additiionnaly True.



brian brian -> RE: optional rules (9/4/2007 7:29:36 PM)

While an option to just click 'Yes" to all optionals would be a nice time-saver to try that, I would be careful with the final list for an "Advanced" game.

There are only a few optionals I would click "No" on for such a game. Food in Flames is a huge giveaway to the Allies - an extra 75 to 100 BPs through an entire game. The Axis can't often break those connections; the resources used to protect the connections in the Indian Ocean are soon turned on Japan's convoys and the CW has more resources in general to commit to the Pacific. Intelligence is considered a broken rule; by mid-43 if desired the USA simply buys the initiative, permanently just about, and all the other goodies from Intell points. I also personally won't ever play with "Limited Aircraft Interception", where a FTR can't intercept a bomber if the bomber flew less hexes to the target than the FTR, as if WiF was some sort of hour-by-hour or minute-by-minute tactical air combat game.

Defensive Shore Bombardment is also a widely debated optional, frequently modified by the consensus of the "House", I would consider carefully whether this should be part of any 'set' of optionals.

Variable Re-Org costs and limiting reinforcements to one counter per city would probably also lose any majority vote amongst WiF players.



I do look forward to the computer helping me with Limited HQ Movement via it enforcing the increased cost for me. We want to try this optional but usually throw it out by 1941 because we have forgotten it so many times. The same is true for "Bottomed Ships" - a good rule, just annoying to remember correctly at times.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (9/4/2007 8:07:04 PM)

Brian,

There already are buttons for selecting All or None of the optional rules. So these 3 Sets should be neither of those.

I agree with Brian about disabling "broken optional rules" even in the Advanced set.

----

Patrice,

I would prefer the Novice set to minimize the use of optional rules in order to minimize what the novice needs to learn. There is an enormous learning curve when you first start playing WIF, and even a half dozen of "nice little optional rules" adds to that burden.



Jimm -> RE: optional rules (9/4/2007 9:27:49 PM)


IN principle I agree with Froonp although I think he has it in for the novice Japs out there (Warlords!!!)
Steve, from your list these are what I would alter:-
NOVICE:-

VWeapons: True;
AtomicBombs: True;
ChineseAttackWeakness: True; [makes things simpler for the Japanese novice]
FractionalOdds: False; [Is this relevant in MWIF? and if so it is surely an added complication]
TwoD10LandCRT: True; [again is this relevant in a computer moderated game? ]
ExtendedAircraftRebasing: False;
CityBasedVolunteers: True; [Its just bonus units- whats hard in that?]
AlliedCombatFriction: False;

STANDARD

Divisions: True; [its just extra units, no added complexity]
Artillery: True; [similarly to the above but seems to me to be "standard" (although I personally have difficulty rationalizing artillery within the game!)]
CombatEngineers: True;
FlyingBoats: True;
SyntheticOilPlants: True;I just think oil is such a major part of the game, I would tend to include as standard but it might be argued it should be advanced
VWeapons: True; [C'mon, you've got to have the useless V1s]
AtomicBombs: True;
SavingResources: True;
FractionalOdds: False;see above
AlliedCombatFriction: True;
TwoD10LandCRT: True;see above
ExtendedAircraftRebasing: False;
VariableReorganizationCosts: True;
OilRules: True;
Kamikazes: True;
CityBasedVolunteers: True;
GuardsBannerArmies: True;

ADVANCED

SupplyUnits: True;
BottomedShips: True;
InThePresenceOfTheEnemy: True;
BounceCombat: True;
ExtendedAircraftRebasing: False;
GuardsBannerArmies: True;
ChineseWarlords: False;
PartisanHQs: True;
ChineseAttackWeakness: False;

For advanced you pretty much pays your money and takes your choice- if its not all options then a lot of them are down to taste and flavour/balance of the game. Thats why I would knock off Chinese warlords off the advanced list- it is to me an added flavour rather than an added level of realism. Chinese Attack weakness also although I would have this in the Novice game simply to make life easier all round.



lomyrin -> RE: optional rules (9/4/2007 9:53:39 PM)

Looking at the default options in the present version 04.05 of the game I would use that standard option set for the Novice.  The advanced option set with Supply Units, Unlimited Breakdowns, Bounce Combat, added Chinese Cities and Defensive Shore Bombardment added to the present options included there.

Lars




brian brian -> RE: optional rules (9/4/2007 10:49:18 PM)

[ARTillery - these too seemed odd to me when they first came out. But they represent Army and Army Group level assets that would be assigned to key sectors when the key time came. I now think they work great.]

[China options - Chinese Attack Weakness is considered necessary (well by me and a lot of others) for some semblance of reality in China. Even with it China is a tougher dragon than it perhaps should be. The WarLords are considered standard equipment by many players as without them China can be smooshed a bit too easily even with good play. Japanese Command Conflict is held in low regard as good Japanese play is too pretty much keep all off the MAR corps on the map at all times and it just makes the LND bombing program so silly that none are ever built, which isn't completely uncommon on the Japanese part anyhow. Someday a computer version that allows separate players for the IJN and the Army would truly be excellent (as it would for some of the other powers in the game). I am very happy that "Additional Chinese Cities" seems to be a selectable option and I would like to say: Thank You Very Much! I wouldn't mind seeing that to include additional Soviet Asian cities. That entire theater would depend on an intact Trans-Siberian railway, break it one place and combat would end beyond that point within a week or two. Anyway, I think China could be properly defended with smart play on the bigger map even without making their entire Home Country a logistic/reinforcement network.]

I do think Steve is on a good track in generating a few sets of optionals to use and should help him generate good AI play in a lot of ways. You could make a good case for a "Novice" set being ZERO options. Or could you?

Anyway the options that add units really do add complexity in that they add counter density and increase game playing time.



Zorachus99 -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 4:04:35 AM)

NOVICE

MotorizedMovementRates: True; (what does this do?  It's not clearly apparant.  Is motorized movement rate an optional rule?)

I need more information on exactly what add chinese cities does.

STANDARD
FlyingBoats: True; (flying boats is a cool concept & historical)
VWeapons: True; (if the standard made it to '45 then let him use them)
AtomicBombs: True; (if the standard player makes it they will likely want to drop nukes)
TankBusters: True; (too cool)
BomberATR: True; (Not confusing it's got the white circle)
BlitzBonus: True; (best to introduce the system at standard difficulty, 1d10 is primitive these days)
TwoD10LandCRT: True;
TwinEnginedFighters: True; (best time to learn this rule)
FighterBombers: True; (the value is apparant on the counter)
Kamikazes: True; (you want to see this at standard)

EnhancedDefaultOptions:
SupplyUnits: True; (playing with the supply rules now)
BottomedShips: True; (cool result, usually seen at Pearl Harbor)
BounceCombat: True; (air combat is more random than just 2d10 combat chart)
FactoryConstruction: False; (extremely rare option, often backfires)
DefensiveShoreBombardment: True; (the game mechanics justifications don't argue as strongly as military perspective IMO)



composer99 -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 6:26:47 AM)

Here's my take on it.

Novice
I view novice as WiF Classic, plus or minus a few options.

FlyingBoats: True;
(Italy & USA have little early war naval air w/out these.)

HQSupport: True;
(I view this as a fairly essential element of having to make decisions about using HQs.)

SavingResources: True;
(I assume this also means for saving build points, which would still be very useful even in Classic.)

BlitzBonus: True;
(Blitz Bonus is practically the reason to build ARM & MECH in the first place - and as all the other predefined optional rulesets will, in my view, have 2d10, this is the only place for this option.)

ChineseAttackWeakness: True;
(Keeping the Chinese strong enough to survive against all but the most skilled and lucky Japanese is important, but it's also important to keep them weak enough so they don't go crippling the Japanese as soon as the strategic situation shifts.)

FractionalOdds: False;
(This seems like too much chrome for a "novice" game.)

GuardsBannerArmies: True;
(I view this as key to getting the USSR the oomph it needs to beat Germany.)

ChineseWarlords: True;
(This helps the Chinese stay afloat longer.)

ScrapUnits: True;
(There is some awful crap in the early war units; I can't see why players would need to be stuck with them.)

Kamikazes
(Japan without Kamikazes? A jest, surely.)

Standard

I view this as a sort of "Typical Deluxe", the kind you might see at WiFCon, where players don't want too much chrome, but want more than just what Classic offers.

As such I will not offer any commentary except for what might be considered an unusual choice.

Divisions: True;
Artillery: True;
SupplyUnits: True;
CombatEngineers: True;
FlyingBoats: True;
HQSupport: True;
EmergencyHQSupply: True;
SyntheticOilPlants: True;
BounceCombat: True;
Frogmen: True;
SCSTransport: True;
AmphibiousRules: True;
OptionalCVSearching: True;
Pilots: True;
SavingResources: True;
TankBusters: True;
BomberATR: True;
LargeATR: True;
ChineseAttackWeakness: True;
FractionalOdds: False;
TwoD10LandCRT: True;
IsolatedReorganizationLimits: True;
OilRules: True;
TwinEnginedFighters: True;
FighterBombers: True;
CarrierPlanes: True;
Internment: True;
FlyingBombs: True;
Kamikazes: True;
SkiTroops: True;
Queens: True;
CityBasedVolunteers: True;
Siberians: True;
NavalSupplyUnits: True;
GuardsBannerArmies: True;
ChineseWarlords: True;
ScrapUnits: True;

Advanced
The Super Deluxe game. This includes almost all the chrome except the stuff that isn't RAW or that I do not think merits inclusion in a standardized package.

SupplyUnits: True;
BottomedShips: True;
InThePresenceOfTheEnemy: True;
BounceCombat: True;
FoodInFlames: True;
BlitzBonus: False; - Blitz bonuses are subsumed in the 2d10 chart.
EnrouteInterception: False;
CruisersInFlames: True;
ConvoysInFlames: True;
OilTankers: True;
AddChineseCities: True; - The only non-RAW option to be included, I think.
NavalOffensiveChit: True;

I think with these changes, the predefined optionals sets are quite distinct.

Edit: If they were part of MWiF, the Advanced ruleset would include Heavy Units and Air Cavalry as well.



Neilster -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 7:42:15 AM)

So Christopher, did you include fractional odds at all? I thought they helped prevent gameyness and if the computer is doing all the work...

Did we finally thrash out the groupings of options that were pro-Axis, pro-Allied and neutral? Players could further refine their optional rules in light of these.

Cheers, Neilster







dale1066 -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 9:19:23 AM)

With regard to the optional rules is it worth (has it been done in CWif already ? if so apols) indicationg if the rule tends to favour the axis, allied or neither side ? IIRC in the rules/ Game Design notes originally there was this information and it helps make a more balenced game when the experience/skills of the players are taken into account.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 11:05:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dale1066

With regard to the optional rules is it worth (has it been done in CWif already ? if so apols) indicationg if the rule tends to favour the axis, allied or neither side ? IIRC in the rules/ Game Design notes originally there was this information and it helps make a more balenced game when the experience/skills of the players are taken into account.

Some of those evaluations are controversial. And even those that clearly favor one side, by how much is not clear. Since it is not really part of my task list, I haven't included it.



Jimm -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 11:32:43 AM)

There is a weighting of options, by relative benefit to each power, in one of the old annuals/ LOC. Not sure how accurate it is (taken from a relatively small sample I think) but they generally bear out common sense- however most are not comprehensively pro-axis or pro-allied - they help or hinder individual powers. So to my mind its not that clear cut. When an option definitely helps one or other side it is generally obvious anyway!




dale1066 -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 12:45:07 PM)

Fair enough in order to help novices to the game will there be anywhere in Cwif, inside the Help/tutorials for instance,
which will point to Wif Resources on the net?



brian brian -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 6:16:24 PM)

I find most optionals to be pro-attacker or pro-defender; since each side roughly spends half the game attacking or defending a lot of them balance out across the whole game, but that's just my opinion; many folks have definite ideas on which are pro-Axis or Allied.


One of my favorite innovations in WiF has been fractional odds, so I'll repeat myself here: I'm not sure if it was invented in the WiF community but it is a great way to play wargames. I'll probably never go back to playing without it. You are rewarded for throwing in whatever you can into an important attack; the days of time-consumingly and quite unrealistically re-arranging your entire army to get just enough factors to make the next odds level are over. In WiF it wipes out a lot of extraneous fighter-bomber missions for that one or two extra points. It also improves most anyone's play as they realize the implications, resulting in faster play and more focus on the big picture that the designer is trying to paint for you. There is some resistance to the idea; some people only want to use it to go to half-odds levels like 3.5:1 in conjunction with the 2d10 and you are back to factor counting; others want to throw out all rounding of anything and just keep adding up factors and die roll modifiers with no rounding at all and let the calculator generate the final plus on the 3d10, which I kind of like to eliminate a bit of cheese, slow down the attacker a little bit and try and lower the land unit density, which can get a bit ridiculously high late in a game of WiF, but not rounding things is hard to recall after playing WiF for a long time. The third die in a fractional odds + 2d10 also makes for great wargaming tragedy and comedy ... if it wasn't for that darn 1 on the fractional I would've stayed at a 13 - / - result, now I am at 'Magic' 14. ARRRRGHHHHH! The flip side comes when you take Gibraltar via the third die getting the result up to the coveted "S" result. Try it, you'll like it.



composer99 -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 7:22:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster

So Christopher, did you include fractional odds at all? I thought they helped prevent gameyness and if the computer is doing all the work...

Did we finally thrash out the groupings of options that were pro-Axis, pro-Allied and neutral? Players could further refine their optional rules in light of these.

Cheers, Neilster



I did in the "Advanced version" - it's already part of that package as proposed by Steve.

I personally use fractional odds and greatly prefer it to its absence, so now that I think about it I'm not sure why I suggested it not be included in the "standard" package. I've never played with the 1d10 table, so I have no strong feeling one way or another about it in the "novice" package, aside from it having the feeling of "chrome".



Jimm -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 9:37:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I find most optionals to be pro-attacker or pro-defender; since each side roughly spends half the game attacking or defending a lot of them balance out across the whole game, but that's just my opinion; many folks have definite ideas on which are pro-Axis or Allied.


One of my favorite innovations in WiF has been fractional odds, so I'll repeat myself here: I'm not sure if it was invented in the WiF community but it is a great way to play wargames. I'll probably never go back to playing without it. You are rewarded for throwing in whatever you can into an important attack; the days of time-consumingly and quite unrealistically re-arranging your entire army to get just enough factors to make the next odds level are over. In WiF it wipes out a lot of extraneous fighter-bomber missions for that one or two extra points. It also improves most anyone's play as they realize the implications, resulting in faster play and more focus on the big picture that the designer is trying to paint for you. There is some resistance to the idea; some people only want to use it to go to half-odds levels like 3.5:1 in conjunction with the 2d10 and you are back to factor counting; others want to throw out all rounding of anything and just keep adding up factors and die roll modifiers with no rounding at all and let the calculator generate the final plus on the 3d10, which I kind of like to eliminate a bit of cheese, slow down the attacker a little bit and try and lower the land unit density, which can get a bit ridiculously high late in a game of WiF, but not rounding things is hard to recall after playing WiF for a long time. The third die in a fractional odds + 2d10 also makes for great wargaming tragedy and comedy ... if it wasn't for that darn 1 on the fractional I would've stayed at a 13 - / - result, now I am at 'Magic' 14. ARRRRGHHHHH! The flip side comes when you take Gibraltar via the third die getting the result up to the coveted "S" result. Try it, you'll like it.


Fair comment, you are quite evangelical! I feel myself becoming converted.

I am still interested to see how this side the game is covered in Mwif- my expectation was that the dice rolling was pretty much "invisible" and the results just get churned out- the players wouldnt need to worry about combat tables etc. Or maybe not?




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (9/5/2007 10:15:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimm


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I find most optionals to be pro-attacker or pro-defender; since each side roughly spends half the game attacking or defending a lot of them balance out across the whole game, but that's just my opinion; many folks have definite ideas on which are pro-Axis or Allied.


One of my favorite innovations in WiF has been fractional odds, so I'll repeat myself here: I'm not sure if it was invented in the WiF community but it is a great way to play wargames. I'll probably never go back to playing without it. You are rewarded for throwing in whatever you can into an important attack; the days of time-consumingly and quite unrealistically re-arranging your entire army to get just enough factors to make the next odds level are over. In WiF it wipes out a lot of extraneous fighter-bomber missions for that one or two extra points. It also improves most anyone's play as they realize the implications, resulting in faster play and more focus on the big picture that the designer is trying to paint for you. There is some resistance to the idea; some people only want to use it to go to half-odds levels like 3.5:1 in conjunction with the 2d10 and you are back to factor counting; others want to throw out all rounding of anything and just keep adding up factors and die roll modifiers with no rounding at all and let the calculator generate the final plus on the 3d10, which I kind of like to eliminate a bit of cheese, slow down the attacker a little bit and try and lower the land unit density, which can get a bit ridiculously high late in a game of WiF, but not rounding things is hard to recall after playing WiF for a long time. The third die in a fractional odds + 2d10 also makes for great wargaming tragedy and comedy ... if it wasn't for that darn 1 on the fractional I would've stayed at a 13 - / - result, now I am at 'Magic' 14. ARRRRGHHHHH! The flip side comes when you take Gibraltar via the third die getting the result up to the coveted "S" result. Try it, you'll like it.


Fair comment, you are quite evangelical! I feel myself becoming converted.

I am still interested to see how this side the game is covered in Mwif- my expectation was that the dice rolling was pretty much "invisible" and the results just get churned out- the players wouldnt need to worry about combat tables etc. Or maybe not?



I do not want to create some elaborate system (e.g., calculating the probability of an attack being successful). But showing the current odds is reasonable. As for the dice, there is a player interface option to 'see' the dice rolls - or not.



brian brian -> RE: optional rules (9/6/2007 12:04:18 AM)

there is already plenty of statistical info on the outcomes of the 2d10 table available. I never read that stuff myself but I would like to know the final odds, or 'plus' on the 2d10 and the fractional before making the irrevocable attack decision and I always figured that would be visible to the player.



Zorachus99 -> RE: optional rules (9/6/2007 5:21:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

there is already plenty of statistical info on the outcomes of the 2d10 table available. I never read that stuff myself but I would like to know the final odds, or 'plus' on the 2d10 and the fractional before making the irrevocable attack decision and I always figured that would be visible to the player.


This is actually harder than it sounds. You don't always know before the attack if HQ Support, Bombardment, or Air Support will be used. The results of air combat are incredibly random, which make generalization difficult.



composer99 -> RE: optional rules (9/6/2007 3:02:24 PM)

Bombers flying ground support are the big X-factor in trying to calculate combat odds/2d10 modifiers.

I usually start by calculating the mods with no ground support (as I control shore bombardment and the outcomes of HQ support are predictable). Then I work up a worst-case scenario (I get no gs through, opponent gets all available support through), a best case scenario (opposite result), and what I think is a reasonable approximation of the actual ground support clearance.

Then I decide if an attack is worth proceeding with. But that might be too much to expect of MWiF to have it calculate all that for me. That's okay, though, I like the mental exercise.




Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.125