RE: optional rules (Full Version)

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



Message


composer99 -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2006 9:46:04 AM)

By the way, Steve, is there any chance a change in terminology could be managed for active/passive standing in for face-up/face-down?

I kind of think active/passive as a combination doesn't work very well when describing units' status in WiF. I wholeheartedly agree that face-up/face-down is anachronistic and has to go, but if I might point out that (1) WiF also uses the term "active" to describe a major power who is at war with another major power (with all the in-game effects that go with it) and (2) active/passive strikes me as rather fuzzy. For example, if I have a unit garrisoning Gibraltar for pretty much the whole game, it strikes me that that's been a pretty "passive" unit, even if in tabletop terms it was face-up ("active" in current terminology) the whole time. Whereas a unit that's been to the front, the force pool and back a few times (the Moscow militia comes to mind) or at least is seeing lots of use (HQs) would be a pretty "active" unit, even if often as not it spends most of its time bieng "passive" (face-down).

I'm really not certain right now what would be a better choice of words for active, but either disorganized or disrupted seem to me to be better than passive, since they also describe what has happened to the corps after being shuffled in toto across Siberia on the railway (a rail move) or being subjected to two weeks' worth of tactical air strikes (a ground strike mission). Maybe for active we could use "ready for action" (or even just "ready") or maybe "in good order"?

Of course, when it comes down to implementation, if making such a change would by this point in time involve too much work (or time, or both), you won't hear any bellyaching from me about it when my MWiF game comes out from under the tree. [:D]




Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2006 10:04:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

By the way, Steve, is there any chance a change in terminology could be managed for active/passive standing in for face-up/face-down?

(...)

I'm really not certain right now what would be a better choice of words for active, but either disorganized or disrupted seem to me to be better than passive, since they also describe what has happened to the corps after being shuffled in toto across Siberia on the railway (a rail move) or being subjected to two weeks' worth of tactical air strikes (a ground strike mission). Maybe for active we could use "ready for action" (or even just "ready") or maybe "in good order"?

I like Ready / Disorganized, and I prefer it to Active / Passive too.
Can also be Ready / Not Ready or Ready / Used-up.
Used-Up would fit better to face-down naval & aircraft units, while Disorganized would fit better to face-down land units.




Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2006 10:16:12 AM)

quote:

2 possibilities.

- Select the 'perfect' maximum # for each country that can possibily get partisans, or
- Devise some way to adjust the maximum if the occupying forces do nothing about existing partisans (if they are ignored too long).

The simplest solution is the best. I am open to ideas here.

The best would be to have an unfixed maximum number of Partisans. The maximum number of partisans in a country can't be limited to a fixed number, this would lead to gamey tactics.
Maybe it can be that the maximum number is 1/3 the Partisan number rounded up, but also that the already present PART in the country modify the partisan number (for maximum number of PART purposes only). That way, the Partisan number of Poland would become 8 if there are already 2 PART in the country, and being 8 it would allow for a third PART. But, with a 3rd PART, the Partisan number would go to 9, and the limit would stay 3 PART in the country, and it becomes kind of a fixed limit.
The bottom line, is that there should always be the threat of a new PART appearing.

quote:

I do not like involving units from America in Flames or Patton in Flames. Thiose addons are not part of MWIF product 1.

I was sure you would say that.
But I would answer that adding the AiF & PatiF Partisans counter is not like adding the PatiF & AiF other units. It is kind of using the AiF & PatiF maps, and it is already what we are doing in MWiF, we are already using the PatiF map.
Frankly, it is the simplest solution, and the most WiF FE like solution. Having a maximum number pf PART in a country is not WiF FE like.




wfzimmerman -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2006 6:06:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

By the way, Steve, is there any chance a change in terminology could be managed for active/passive standing in for face-up/face-down?

(...)

I'm really not certain right now what would be a better choice of words for active, but either disorganized or disrupted seem to me to be better than passive, since they also describe what has happened to the corps after being shuffled in toto across Siberia on the railway (a rail move) or being subjected to two weeks' worth of tactical air strikes (a ground strike mission). Maybe for active we could use "ready for action" (or even just "ready") or maybe "in good order"?

I like Ready / Disorganized, and I prefer it to Active / Passive too.
Can also be Ready / Not Ready or Ready / Used-up.
Used-Up would fit better to face-down naval & aircraft units, while Disorganized would fit better to face-down land units.


I like Ready/Disorganized. This seems to convey the spirit of "flipping" better than "passive." Passive conveys that something (activeness) has ebbed away, as it were, while "disorganized" is closer to the Cardboardistan action of taking the beautiful counter and flipping it over.




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2006 9:02:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99
By the way, Steve, is there any chance a change in terminology could be managed for active/passive standing in for face-up/face-down?

(...)

I'm really not certain right now what would be a better choice of words for active, but either disorganized or disrupted seem to me to be better than passive, since they also describe what has happened to the corps after being shuffled in toto across Siberia on the railway (a rail move) or being subjected to two weeks' worth of tactical air strikes (a ground strike mission). Maybe for active we could use "ready for action" (or even just "ready") or maybe "in good order"?

I like Ready / Disorganized, and I prefer it to Active / Passive too.
Can also be Ready / Not Ready or Ready / Used-up.
Used-Up would fit better to face-down naval & aircraft units, while Disorganized would fit better to face-down land units.


I like Ready/Disorganized. This seems to convey the spirit of "flipping" better than "passive." Passive conveys that something (activeness) has ebbed away, as it were, while "disorganized" is closer to the Cardboardistan action of taking the beautiful counter and flipping it over.


I have no emotional attachment to active/passive. Their primary attraction is that they are short (2 syllables) and complement each other nicely.

I do not like Ready, mainly because there isn't an easy reverse - Unready seems weird.

We could go with Prepared/Unprepared but that introduces a whole new phrase set - though maybe that's a benefit.

Right now I am leaning towards Organized/Disorganized because they fit in so nicely with Reorganized. A little long to say (4 & 5 syllables) but quite clear.




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2006 9:05:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

2 possibilities.

- Select the 'perfect' maximum # for each country that can possibily get partisans, or
- Devise some way to adjust the maximum if the occupying forces do nothing about existing partisans (if they are ignored too long).

The simplest solution is the best. I am open to ideas here.

The best would be to have an unfixed maximum number of Partisans. The maximum number of partisans in a country can't be limited to a fixed number, this would lead to gamey tactics.
Maybe it can be that the maximum number is 1/3 the Partisan number rounded up, but also that the already present PART in the country modify the partisan number (for maximum number of PART purposes only). That way, the Partisan number of Poland would become 8 if there are already 2 PART in the country, and being 8 it would allow for a third PART. But, with a 3rd PART, the Partisan number would go to 9, and the limit would stay 3 PART in the country, and it becomes kind of a fixed limit.
The bottom line, is that there should always be the threat of a new PART appearing.

quote:

I do not like involving units from America in Flames or Patton in Flames. Thiose addons are not part of MWIF product 1.

I was sure you would say that.
But I would answer that adding the AiF & PatiF Partisans counter is not like adding the PatiF & AiF other units. It is kind of using the AiF & PatiF maps, and it is already what we are doing in MWiF, we are already using the PatiF map.
Frankly, it is the simplest solution, and the most WiF FE like solution. Having a maximum number pf PART in a country is not WiF FE like.


I tried to post this response last night but the server was having troubles.
------------
Ah, but WIF FE does have a maximum # of partisans in a country - the maximum # in the game, less any I take away from you when I get partisans to place and there aren't any more in the counter mix.

I do not see a need for a limitless # of partisans. Say 200 in France should suffice. [:D] New partisans as an ever present threat doesn't convince me either. At some point adding more partisans unbalances the game. There were a fixed # of possible soldiers who could join partisan units. Given that they needed weapons, officers, and other logistic elements to be effective, an upper bound is logical.

Here is my key point: if after getting 10 partisan units in Russia, you haven't been able to get the attention of the forces that are occupying the country, then adding even more shouldn't make much of a difference. The partisans did not win the war for any country, they were merely annoying to the occupying forces.

Another possibility [which I do not like] is to permit the player to reposition existing partisans once he has reached the maximum. If you are suppose to get 2 partisans and you already have your maximum 5 on the map, then you can pick up any two of the 5 and place them somewhere else (within the same country). This is more in keeping with how WIF FE handles partisans with them maybe popping up and maybe disappearing.




lomyrin -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2006 9:10:44 PM)

Of course the partisan HQ option would remove 2 Russian partisans when it was formed since it takes 2 partisans to call it out.

Lars  




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/24/2006 9:56:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

Of course the partisan HQ option would remove 2 Russian partisans when it was formed since it takes 2 partisans to call it out.

Lars  

I guess I didn't say what I intended to do with the partisan HQs. When a partisan HQ is formed, 2 partisans are removed from the map. However, the HQ would not count against the maximum # of partisans, so Russia could have 10 regular partisan units plus the HQ (given the current discussion about a maximum of 10 for Russia).




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 2:03:00 AM)

Continuing my progress through writing up all the optional rules, ...
=============================================================
[45][Oil Rules][RAW 48 s. 13.5.1]
This optional rule simulates the important role that oil played during WW II. Be warned that adding this optional rule increases the complexity of the game quite a bit. The mechanics are much easier with the program doing the record keeping (than doing them by hand playing over the board) but the more dramatic increase in complexity is created by the impact the oil rules have on tactical, operational, and even strategic planning, and execution of those plans. In practical terms, the oil rules change how units are reorganized, from passive to active, with some unit types requiring oil resources.

Passive units that are not oil dependent are reorganized to active as normal during the final reorganization step. Those that are oil dependent have additional restrictions placed upon whether they can be reorganized at that time. Specifically, during the final reorganization step oil resources must be spent to reorganize oil dependent units.

All naval and air units are oil dependent and it costs 0.2 or 0.1 oil points to reorganize each unit, depending on unit type and which optional rules are in effect. Land based units are only oil dependent if they are motorized, mechanized, or armor. In general, corps/army sized units cost 0.2 oil points to reorganize and divisions cost 0.1. Notable exceptions are HQ units with HQ-I costing 0.4 and HQ-A costing 0.6 oil points. If you have a question about any specific unit, the oil point cost to reorganize it is part of the general information about the unit, along with the build points needed for building it and the time it takes for the unit to be built.

For a unit to use oil for reorganizing, the oil must belong to the unit’s controlling major power. Even oil controlled by co-operating major powers can't help. However, Communist and Nationalist Chinese can use each other's oil. Chinese controlled oil resources may reorganize passive US units in China if they can trace a supply path (of unlimited length) back to Stilwell. You do not have to transport the oil anywhere. But you must be able to trace a path from the unit to the oil resource. This path is exactly like a basic supply path (including via overseas) except that it can be of any length.

The total oil needed for all the units you choose to reorganize, rounded to the nearest whole number, is the minimum amount of oil resources (whether from the current turn or saved) that you must spend. This means that you can reorganize 2 units that cost 0.2 oil points each for free (because 0.4 rounds to zero). However, if units costing a total of 0.5 or more oil points to reorganize 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 amount.

For example, assume you have only 2 oil resources and 6 oil dependent unit to reorganize (at 0.2 oil points per unit). You will have to spend at least a minimum of 1 oil resource because 6 * 0.2 = 1.2, which rounds to 1. And you will only have to spend that minimum if 4 or 5 of the units can trace a path to the same resource. But suppose that 3 units can only trace to 1 of the resources and the other 3 can only trace to the second resource. In that case, you would have to spend both resources to reorganize all 6 units.

If a supply unit was expended to make an HQ a primary supply source during the turn, then during final reorganization, that HQ may reorganize oil dependent units (even itself) as if it were 1 oil resource.

When sending resources to another player, you must also commit how many of the resources are oil.
=============================================================
[46][Hitler’s War][RAW 49 s. 13.3.2]
This optional rule enhances the effect of lend lease to the USSR and changes how the USSR production multiple is calculated. It increases the benefit the USSR gets from lend lease while removing any special benefit for holding onto certain major cities in the USSR.

Once the USA chooses US Entry Option #30, Lend Lease to the USSR, and until Germany and the Soviet Union are at war, the Soviets pick an extra marker during the entry marker step of each turn. After looking at the marker, they can treat it as a normal marker (offensively or defensively) or stack it face down on any of their useable factory stacks. Once placed the marker may never be moved even if the hex becomes controlled by another major power.

During their first production step the USSR is at war with Germany, all entry markers so placed are converted into saved build points, immediately available for production or to be saved for future turns. If not playing with the optional rule for Saving Build Points, then these extra build points must be spent immediately and any excess after production are lost.

Instead of gaining an increase in their production multiple for holding Kiev, Minsk, Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad, the USSR gains +0.25 while Germany and the USSR are at war with each other. The production multiple increase for other major powers when an enemy units is in their home country also disappears completely, except for China, which receives a permanent +0.25 increase.

To be very clear on this, when using this option, major powers no longer receive a bonus for an in supply enemy unit in their home country, and the USSR no longer receives any bonuses based on the cities they control.
=============================================================
[47][USSR Japan Compulsory Peace][RAW 50 s. 13.7.3]
This optional rule reflects the willingness both the USSR and Japan had for remaining at peace with each other during WW II. Though they had been fighting a mostly unreported little war along the Manchurian border for some time prior to Germany’s invasion of Poland, they both felt a lot of pressure on other fronts: Germany for the USSR and the USA for Japan. Agreeing to peace with each other was in both of their self-interests.

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 the war, 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 at the time of the compulsory peace. 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.




Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 2:31:19 AM)

quote:

47][USSR Japan Compulsory Peace][RAW 50 s. 13.7.3]
(...)

You may also add that agreeing to a peace between them and thus signing a peace treaty, has a slight US Entry Effect (US Entry Action #2).




composer99 -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 8:15:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I have no emotional attachment to active/passive. Their primary attraction is that they are short (2 syllables) and complement each other nicely.

I do not like Ready, mainly because there isn't an easy reverse - Unready seems weird.

We could go with Prepared/Unprepared but that introduces a whole new phrase set - though maybe that's a benefit.

Right now I am leaning towards Organized/Disorganized because they fit in so nicely with Reorganized. A little long to say (4 & 5 syllables) but quite clear.


I would agree that Organized/Disorganized does fit in nicely with the notion of re-organization, and they also describe the status of units in a manner that is also relevant to what they can do while organized or disorganized, and how they get from one to the other. Despite the syllable length, it's a pretty good combo. It gets my vote!




Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 10:40:49 AM)

Organized/Disorganized get my vote too !




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 1:58:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I have no emotional attachment to active/passive. Their primary attraction is that they are short (2 syllables) and complement each other nicely.

I do not like Ready, mainly because there isn't an easy reverse - Unready seems weird.

We could go with Prepared/Unprepared but that introduces a whole new phrase set - though maybe that's a benefit.

Right now I am leaning towards Organized/Disorganized because they fit in so nicely with Reorganized. A little long to say (4 & 5 syllables) but quite clear.


I would agree that Organized/Disorganized does fit in nicely with the notion of re-organization, and they also describe the status of units in a manner that is also relevant to what they can do while organized or disorganized, and how they get from one to the other. Despite the syllable length, it's a pretty good combo. It gets my vote!


How about orchestrated/discordant?




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 1:59:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Organized/Disorganized get my vote too !

Currently in 1st place then.




Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 4:37:05 PM)

quote:

How about orchestrated/discordant?

Keep that for Violins in Flames !!




wfzimmerman -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 5:09:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Organized/Disorganized get my vote too !

Currently in 1st place then.

Bandwagon!




lomyrin -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 6:08:33 PM)

Organized/Disorganized suits me fine too.

Lars




Zorachus99 -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 9:57:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Organized/Disorganized get my vote too !

Currently in 1st place then.

Bandwagon!

Ditto [8D]




composer99 -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 9:58:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

How about orchestrated/discordant?


Keep that for Violins in Flames !!


Or Conductors in Flames. Quite a few of them are renowned for being ill-tempered (or downright explosive) when they're on stage holding a baton. [:D]

Edit: Oh, and pardon my off-the-cuff off-topic remark. I promise to do better next time. [:'(]




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/25/2006 10:25:00 PM)

Here's your daily dose of optional rules.
==============
=============================================================
[45][Oil Rules][RAW 48 s. 13.5.1]
This optional rule simulates the important role that oil played during WW II. Be warned that adding this optional rule increases the complexity of the game quite a bit. The mechanics are much easier with the program doing the record keeping (than doing them by hand playing over the board) but the more dramatic increase in complexity is created by the impact the oil rules have on tactical, operational, and even strategic planning, and execution of those plans. In practical terms, the oil rules change how units are reorganized, from passive to active, with some unit types requiring oil resources.

Passive units that are not oil dependent are reorganized to active as normal during the final reorganization step. Those that are oil dependent have additional restrictions placed upon whether they can be reorganized at that time. Specifically, during the final reorganization step oil resources must be spent to reorganize oil dependent units.

All naval and air units are oil dependent and it costs 0.2 or 0.1 oil points to reorganize each unit, depending on unit type and which optional rules are in effect. Land based units are only oil dependent if they are motorized, mechanized, or armor. In general, corps/army sized units cost 0.2 oil points to reorganize and divisions cost 0.1. Notable exceptions are HQ units with HQ-I costing 0.4 and HQ-A costing 0.6 oil points. If you have a question about any specific unit, the oil point cost to reorganize it is part of the general information about the unit, along with the build points needed for building it and the time it takes for the unit to be built.

For a unit to use oil for reorganizing, the oil must belong to the unit’s controlling major power. Even oil controlled by co-operating major powers can't help. However, Communist and Nationalist Chinese can use each other's oil. Chinese controlled oil resources may reorganize passive US units in China if they can trace a supply path (of unlimited length) back to Stilwell. You do not have to transport the oil anywhere. But you must be able to trace a path from the unit to the oil resource. This path is exactly like a basic supply path (including via overseas) except that it can be of any length.

The total oil needed for all the units you choose to reorganize, rounded to the nearest whole number, is the minimum amount of oil resources (whether from the current turn or saved) that you must spend. This means that you can reorganize 2 units that cost 0.2 oil points each for free (because 0.4 rounds to zero). However, if units costing a total of 0.5 or more oil points to reorganize 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 amount.

For example, assume you have only 2 oil resources and 6 oil dependent unit to reorganize (at 0.2 oil points per unit). You will have to spend at least a minimum of 1 oil resource because 6 * 0.2 = 1.2, which rounds to 1. And you will only have to spend that minimum if 4 or 5 of the units can trace a path to the same resource. But suppose that 3 units can only trace to 1 of the resources and the other 3 can only trace to the second resource. In that case, you would have to spend both resources to reorganize all 6 units.

If a supply unit was expended to make an HQ a primary supply source during the turn, then during final reorganization, that HQ may reorganize oil dependent units (even itself) as if it were 1 oil resource.

When sending resources to another player, you must also commit how many of the resources are oil.
=============================================================
[46][Hitler’s War][RAW 49 s. 13.3.2]
This optional rule enhances the effect of lend lease to the USSR and changes how the USSR production multiple is calculated. It increases the benefit the USSR gets from lend lease while removing any special benefit for holding onto certain major cities in the USSR.

Once the USA chooses US Entry Option #30, Lend Lease to the USSR, and until Germany and the Soviet Union are at war, the Soviets pick an extra marker during the entry marker step of each turn. After looking at the marker, they can treat it as a normal marker (offensively or defensively) or stack it face down on any of their useable factory stacks. Once placed the marker may never be moved even if the hex becomes controlled by another major power.

During their first production step the USSR is at war with Germany, all entry markers so placed are converted into saved build points, immediately available for production or to be saved for future turns. If not playing with the optional rule for Saving Build Points, then these extra build points must be spent immediately and any excess after production are lost.

Instead of gaining an increase in their production multiple for holding Kiev, Minsk, Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad, the USSR gains +0.25 while Germany and the USSR are at war with each other. The production multiple increase for other major powers when an enemy units is in their home country also disappears completely, except for China, which receives a permanent +0.25 increase.

To be very clear on this, when using this option, major powers no longer receive a bonus for an in supply enemy unit in their home country, and the USSR no longer receives any bonuses based on the cities they control.
=============================================================
[47][USSR Japan Compulsory Peace][RAW 50 s. 13.7.3]
This optional rule reflects the willingness both the USSR and Japan had for remaining at peace with each other during WW II. Though they had been fighting a mostly unreported little war along the Manchurian border for some time prior to Germany’s invasion of Poland, they both felt a lot of pressure on other fronts: Germany for the USSR and the USA for Japan. Agreeing to peace with each other was in both of their self-interests.

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 the war, 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 at the time of the compulsory peace. 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.
=============================================================
[48][Enroute Interception][RAW 51 s. 14.2.1]
This optional rule enable fighters to intercept bombers along the path from the bomber’s starting hex/base to its target hex/destination. In this section to word bombers is being used to encompass air transport units as well. Like many of the optional rules it adds some realism at the expense of additional complexity. The program simplifies the mechanics of implementing this rule.

Instead of only being able to intercept a bomber at its target hex, this option lets you intercept it along the way. The player flying the bombers first announces the target hex for the air mission. If the opponent wants to intercept the bombers en-route, the first player moves the bomber up to 4 movement points (i.e. 1, 2, 3 or 4) - to a “way station”. He then move it up to another 4 points to a second way station, and keeps repeating this until the bomber reaches the target hex. The bombers can only be intercepted at the way stations or the target destination.

The player moving the bombers can fly escorting fighters to each way station. His opponent can then fly interceptors to the way station. And, as usual, the player moving the bombers can flying additional fighters ( i.e., his interceptors) to the way station. Then a normal air-to-air combat is fought at the way station.

After the air-to-air combat, surviving bombers can continue on to the next way station. Surviving escorting fighters can continue on with them but only if their range is sufficient to reach that station. Escorting fighters that don't continue, and all intercepting fighters (for both sides), must return to base. Bombers don't need to continue - they can choose to return to base after each combat.

After the mission is over all air units return to base normally; there are no way stations on the way back.
=============================================================
[49][Night Missions][RAW 52 s. 22.4.2]
This optional rule enables players to designate air missions as night air missions, which was a frequent occurrence during WW II. A few air units are especially capable of performing night missions while most suffer a handicap when flying night missions.

When an aircraft or carrier plane flies a mission, the player can designate that it is flying a night mission. The default is a day mission. Some aircraft can fly a day mission while others fly a night mission into the same hex in the same step. Note that naval air combats and port attacks are always day missions.

Air-to-air combat can only occur between opposing aircraft if they are both flying at night or both flying during the day. So, there can be two separate air-to-air combats in the same hex - one for the day mission and one for the night.

The tactical and strategic factors of aircraft flying night missions is cut in half. Fighters other than the front fighter contribute nothing to their side's air-to-air strength during night missions unless they are night fighters. During air-to-air combat at night, all aircraft except night fighters (those aircraft with a black circle around its air-to-air rating) achieve one result less than normal. Thus 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 missions are resolved after both day and night air-to-air combats are concluded. When both day and night ground support or strategic bombardment missions are flown against the same hex, their values are totaled. Any land unit air transported, or paradropped, at night becomes disorganized after landing, though paradropping units must still fight any required combat normally.

If enemy aircraft fly both day and night missions to the same hex in the same step, you choose which of your aircraft flying CAP there will fight which mission. This decision is not made until after all aircraft have flown to the hex.




Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/26/2006 3:10:47 AM)

quote:

[48][Enroute Interception][RAW 51 s. 14.2.1]
(...)
After the mission is over all air units return to base normally; there are no way stations on the way back.

You could also say that there are never interceptions on the way back of any mission anyway.
As in reality there were interceptions on the way back, sometimes players think there are too in the game.




Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/26/2006 3:20:00 AM)

quote:


[49][Night Missions][RAW 52 s. 22.4.2]
(...)
The tactical and strategic factors of aircraft flying night missions is cut in half. Fighters other than the front fighter contribute nothing to their side's air-to-air strength during night missions unless they are night fighters. During air-to-air combat at night, all aircraft except night fighters (those aircraft with a black circle around its air-to-air rating) achieve one result less than normal. Thus an AX result becomes a DX, a DX becomes an AA, an AA becomes a DA and so on. A DC result is unaffected.

Great, you know what ? [:D]
I learned something here !!!! [&o]
I always fought that only day fighters suffered from decreased results, and not bombers for example. And from what I read here, and in the rulebook too (I checked), all aircraft except night fighters inflict decreased results at night !!! Fighting at night is darn dangerous for bombers when you read the rule correctly [:D] Decreased results mean more bounces combats, remember this !!!!
I must have read this rule wrongly a long time ago, and I never came back to it until reading your writeups !!!




Mziln -> RE: optional rules (8/26/2006 5:44:17 AM)


=============================================================
[46][Hitler’s War][RAW 49 s. 13.3.2]
This optional rule enhances the effect of lend lease to the USSR and changes how the USSR production multiple is calculated. It increases the benefit the USSR gets from lend lease while removing any special benefit for holding onto certain major cities in the USSR.

Once the USA chooses US Entry Option #30, Lend Lease to the USSR, and until Germany and the Soviet Union are at war, the Soviets pick an extra marker during the entry marker step of each turn. After looking at the marker, they can treat it as a normal marker (offensively or defensively) or stack it face down on any of their useable factory stacks. Once placed the marker may never be moved even if the hex becomes controlled by another major power.

During their first production step the USSR is at war with Germany, all entry markers so placed are converted into saved build points, immediately available for production or to be saved for future turns. If not playing with the optional rule for Saving Build Points, then these extra build points must be spent immediately and any excess after production are lost.

Instead of gaining an increase in their production multiple (as per rule 13.6.3 Production multiples: +0.25 for holding Kiev and Minsk from 1942 onwards and/or +0.25 for holding Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad from 1943 onwards). The USSR gains +0.25 while Germany and the USSR are at war with each other. The production multiple increase for other major powers when an enemy units is in their home country also disappears completely, except for China, which receives a permanent +0.25 increase.

To be very clear on this, when using this option, major powers no longer receive a bonus for an in supply enemy unit in their home country, and the USSR no longer receives any bonuses based on the cities they control.
=============================================================


IMO the effects needs to be empasized.




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/26/2006 6:12:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

=============================================================
[46][Hitler’s War][RAW 49 s. 13.3.2]
This optional rule enhances the effect of lend lease to the USSR and changes how the USSR production multiple is calculated. It increases the benefit the USSR gets from lend lease while removing any special benefit for holding onto certain major cities in the USSR.

Once the USA chooses US Entry Option #30, Lend Lease to the USSR, and until Germany and the Soviet Union are at war, the Soviets pick an extra marker during the entry marker step of each turn. After looking at the marker, they can treat it as a normal marker (offensively or defensively) or stack it face down on any of their useable factory stacks. Once placed the marker may never be moved even if the hex becomes controlled by another major power.

During their first production step the USSR is at war with Germany, all entry markers so placed are converted into saved build points, immediately available for production or to be saved for future turns. If not playing with the optional rule for Saving Build Points, then these extra build points must be spent immediately and any excess after production are lost.

Instead of gaining an increase in their production multiple (as per rule 13.6.3 Production multiples) for holding Kiev, Minsk from 1942 onwards. Or for holding Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad from 1943 onwards, the USSR gains +0.25 while Germany and the USSR are at war with each other. The production multiple increase for other major powers when an enemy units is in their home country also disappears completely, except for China, which receives a permanent +0.25 increase.

To be very clear on this, when using this option, major powers no longer receive a bonus for an in supply enemy unit in their home country, and the USSR no longer receives any bonuses based on the cities they control.
=============================================================

 
 

Yes.

Since the part you highlighted is the rule that is being overridden by this optional rule, adding the extra details is likely to be more confusing than helpful. I prefer brevity in these writeups, sweeping details under the rug on some occasions. Though I do use repetition to reinforce important points.




Mziln -> RE: optional rules (8/26/2006 10:10:26 PM)

"for holding Kiev, Minsk, Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad" is misleading. If you don't read 13.6.3 it sounds like you must hold all 5.
 
If you want to be brief:
 
Instead of gaining an increase in their production multiple by holding USSR cities (see rule: 13.6.3 Production multiples) the USSR gains +0.25 while Germany and the USSR are at war with each other. The production multiple increase for other major powers when an enemy units is in their home country also disappears completely, except for China, which receives a permanent +0.25 increase.
 
 





wfzimmerman -> RE: optional rules (8/26/2006 11:53:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

=============================================================
[46][Hitler’s War][RAW 49 s. 13.3.2]
This optional rule enhances the effect of lend lease to the USSR and changes how the USSR production multiple is calculated. It increases the benefit the USSR gets from lend lease while removing any special benefit for holding onto certain major cities in the USSR.

Once the USA chooses US Entry Option #30, Lend Lease to the USSR, and until Germany and the Soviet Union are at war, the Soviets pick an extra marker during the entry marker step of each turn. After looking at the marker, they can treat it as a normal marker (offensively or defensively) or stack it face down on any of their useable factory stacks. Once placed the marker may never be moved even if the hex becomes controlled by another major power.



During their first production step the USSR is at war with Germany, all entry markers so placed are converted into saved build points, immediately available for production or to be saved for future turns. If not playing with the optional rule for Saving Build Points, then these extra build points must be spent immediately and any excess after production are lost.

Instead of gaining an increase in their production multiple (as per rule 13.6.3 Production multiples) for holding Kiev, Minsk from 1942 onwards. Or for holding Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad from 1943 onwards, the USSR gains +0.25 while Germany and the USSR are at war with each other. The production multiple increase for other major powers when an enemy units is in their home country also disappears completely, except for China, which receives a permanent +0.25 increase.

To be very clear on this, when using this option, major powers no longer receive a bonus for an in supply enemy unit in their home country, and the USSR no longer receives any bonuses based on the cities they control.
=============================================================



Yes.

Since the part you highlighted is the rule that is being overridden by this optional rule, adding the extra details is likely to be more confusing than helpful. I prefer brevity in these writeups, sweeping details under the rug on some occasions. Though I do use repetition to reinforce important points.


As a newbie, I needed the "to be very clear on this" clarification. I think it is worth keeping the highlighted empahsis.




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/27/2006 12:26:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

"for holding Kiev, Minsk, Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad" is misleading. If you don't read 13.6.3 it sounds like you must hold all 5.
 
If you want to be brief:
 
Instead of gaining an increase in their production multiple by holding USSR cities (see rule: 13.6.3 Production multiples) the USSR gains +0.25 while Germany and the USSR are at war with each other. The production multiple increase for other major powers when an enemy units is in their home country also disappears completely, except for China, which receives a permanent +0.25 increase.
 
 



Ok, I'll add the cross reference.




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: optional rules (8/27/2006 1:14:25 AM)

The never ending quest to do writeups for all the optional rules continues ...
=============================================================
[55][Limited Aircraft Interception][RAW 57 s. 14.2.1]
This optional rule modifies the ability of fighters to intercept bombers that are only flying a short distance.

In addition to the normal restrictions on interception, a fighter cannot intercept if it is flying further than the longest distance flown to the hex/hex dot by any enemy aircraft. For example, if a bomber is based adjacent to a target hex it is attacking, then in order for the fighter to intercept, it has to be based either in or adjacent to the target hex. Otherwise the fighter would be flying 2 hexes and the bomber only 1.
=============================================================
[56][Internment][RAW 58 s. 19.1]
This optional rule is extremely minor, and occurs rarely. It addresses the fact that sometimes minor country aircraft fled to neutral countries to avoid destruction. The planes were impounded by the neutral power but the pilots were able to return home unharmed.

A minor country aircraft unit can rebase into a neutral minor country. An aircraft unit that does so is destroyed but the pilot survives. Increase the number of available pilots for the major power that controlled the air unit.
=============================================================
[57][Flying Bombs][RAW 59 s. 14.7]
This optional rule simulates the aircraft that were designed to be flown only once - all pilots who want to volunteer please raise their hand. The Ohka is also included under this rule.

Some aircraft were specifically designed to be flown once only. In effect, they were flying bombs. These units are marked with a death's head symbol and when this optional rule is selected, those units are added to the game.

Flying bombs can move by rail and can be rebased into a coastal hex from a naval transport. However, they never return to base from any mission except a rebase. They are always destroyed instead.

If the death's head symbol is printed in black, the pilot automatically dies with the aircraft. If the symbol is white, the pilot survives if and only if a pilot would normally have survived.

The MXY-7 Ohka can't fly any missions by itself. Instead, it can only fly a mission if it is stacked with a G4M Betty. Both of them fly the mission, using the Betty's range. Once you reach the target hex (or sea-box section), immediately, before resolving any air-to-air combat, you must return the Betty to base (and it becomes disorganized upon landing).
=============================================================
[58][Kamikazes][RAW 60 s. 14.8]
This optional rule adds the famous/infamous kamikaze air units the Japanese employed towards the end of the war. It increases the effectiveness of the air unit’s bombing but is certain to destroy both the air unit and its pilot.

The Japanese player can declare a kamikaze attack in any naval air combat after air-to-air combat but before anti-aircraft fire. He can nominate any or all of his bombers as kamikazes (even those with a death's head as described in the optional rule Flying bombs).

The air-to-sea factors of kamikaze bombers that survive anti-aircraft fire is doubled. After the air-to-sea attack is resolved, all kamikazes and their pilots are destroyed. If the optional rule for carrier planes is not being used, then any carrier that flies its planes as kamikazes results in the carrier being damaged.
=============================================================
[62][Japanese Command Conflict][RAW 64 s. 22.3]
This optional rule simulates the violent arguments between the Japanese army and navy. Prior to and throughout the war, the Imperial Japanese navy fought a series of bloody disputes with the Imperial Japanese army. They fought over everything from resource allocation to the strategic direction of the war. This rule attempts to simulate that historical reality by complicating the Japanese player's life a little.

The Japanese land and naval bombers are combined into one force pool. They are still separated by cost but not by type. When you build an aircraft, what you get is, consequently, a bit of a lottery.

Similarly, marines go into the same pool as infantry units. Whenever there is a marine in the infantry force pool, it is assumed that every infantry unit costs 5 build points. If you do not draw a marine as part of the random selection then you have 2 more build points to spend. Note, if you don't have 5 build points available (and there is a marine unit in the force pool), you can't build an infantry unit.
=============================================================
[63][Ski Troops][RAW 65 s. 22.4.1]
This optional rule simulates the advantages ski troops had when fighting in rugged terrain during winter.

Ski troops treat swamp and forest hexes as clear for movement purposes during snow and blizzard. Ski troops do not have to stop moving if they enter an enemy zone of control in snow or blizzard. Ski troops can trace supply through enemy ZOCs in snow or blizzard (but not through hexes occupied by enemy land units). Note this well! Essentially, enemy ZOC do not exist for ski troops when there is snow on the ground. Ski troops provide the winter combat bonus.
=============================================================
[64][Queens][RAW 66 s. 22.4.4]
This optional rule simulates the fact that the British used their famous passenger liners as naval transports.

This unit represents two converted passenger liners (Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth) that were justly famous for their speed. They are faster than usual naval transports except they cannot transport HQ-A, armor, mechanized, artillery, or aircraft units. The Queens can replace a regular naval transport unit from the start of a scenario.




Froonp -> RE: optional rules (8/27/2006 1:36:18 AM)

Good, I see nothing wrong here.




Neilster -> RE: optional rules (8/27/2006 12:01:44 PM)

Re partisans only being a nuisance...they basically liberated Yugoslavia and huge areas of Belorussia and the Ukraine were partisan controlled at various times after 1942. The Germans protected their rail lines, garrisoned cities and major towns and basically ceded the countryside. Every now and again they conducted major sweeps which involved surrounding a large area and tightening the ring to force the partisans to battle. It would have been worse for them but the partisans fought among themselves for much of the time. Ditto for Yugoslavia.

I was never too keen on "passive" for flipped units. Just to throw something out there, how about "ready/spent"? It's brief.

Cheers, Neilster




Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.703125