US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (Full Version)

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



Message

hakon -> US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/4/2006 3:20:08 PM)

The following topic has been discussed in both the playing groups I regularily play in:

When the US tries to declare war on Japan, they have to roll a die to see if the dow is successful.

The question is, Can the CW

i) wait with their DOW until after the US DOW has been confirmed,
ii) or must they declare war at the same time that the US declares that they will TRY to declare war.


------

The argument for position (ii) relies on a statement in the beginning of the RAW ruleset, stating that "the rules are laid out in order of play", interpreting that sentence as a universal rule.

The supporters of position (i) claim that this is just informative, a kind of guide for the reader, and that the actual steps in the order of play is defined in the order of play chapter, while any requirements as to play order within a step is only limited by specific rules withing that step. (Eg, the DOW section clearly states that DOW on minors come after DOW on majors.)

Generally, I support the latter interpretation, both in the manner that I read the rules, as well as from a wifzen perspective.

From a gameplay perspective, I see two important reasons for letting the CW declare war after the US has agreed with itself on whether to declare war or not.

1) First of all, the US was already a non-belligerent ally of the CW already before they actually entered the war. There is simply no way that the US would declare on Japan without first warning the UK about the act. With interpretation (ii), Japan will usually get a surprise impulse against the CW, which will give them the opportunity to claim several important islands/ports. (NEI, etc). This seems wrong to me.
2) Second, from a balance and historical perspective, it should hurt a bit for Japan to not declare on the US. If they can just wait the US out, and still accomplish their most important objectives, there is really very little incentive for Japan to DOW the allies first. (Rabaul alone is way more important than getting to do a port strike vs Pearl Harbor.)



Froonp -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/4/2006 4:54:31 PM)

I would put this decision in the hands of the game designer (Harry Rowland), if the rule was not clear enough, as this is an extremely important feature.
For the moment, I've got no time to check seriously the rule to see if it is not clear enouth, at the light of the point that you made.



pak19652002 -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/4/2006 6:53:31 PM)

Have you posted this question to the main WiF discussion group?


quote:

ORIGINAL: hakon

The following topic has been discussed in both the playing groups I regularily play in:

When the US tries to declare war on Japan, they have to roll a die to see if the dow is successful.

The question is, Can the CW

i) wait with their DOW until after the US DOW has been confirmed,
ii) or must they declare war at the same time that the US declares that they will TRY to declare war.


------

The argument for position (ii) relies on a statement in the beginning of the RAW ruleset, stating that "the rules are laid out in order of play", interpreting that sentence as a universal rule.

The supporters of position (i) claim that this is just informative, a kind of guide for the reader, and that the actual steps in the order of play is defined in the order of play chapter, while any requirements as to play order within a step is only limited by specific rules withing that step. (Eg, the DOW section clearly states that DOW on minors come after DOW on majors.)

Generally, I support the latter interpretation, both in the manner that I read the rules, as well as from a wifzen perspective.

From a gameplay perspective, I see two important reasons for letting the CW declare war after the US has agreed with itself on whether to declare war or not.

1) First of all, the US was already a non-belligerent ally of the CW already before they actually entered the war. There is simply no way that the US would declare on Japan without first warning the UK about the act. With interpretation (ii), Japan will usually get a surprise impulse against the CW, which will give them the opportunity to claim several important islands/ports. (NEI, etc). This seems wrong to me.
2) Second, from a balance and historical perspective, it should hurt a bit for Japan to not declare on the US. If they can just wait the US out, and still accomplish their most important objectives, there is really very little incentive for Japan to DOW the allies first. (Rabaul alone is way more important than getting to do a port strike vs Pearl Harbor.)




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/4/2006 8:38:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hakon
The following topic has been discussed in both the playing groups I regularily play in:

When the US tries to declare war on Japan, they have to roll a die to see if the dow is successful.

The question is, Can the CW

i) wait with their DOW until after the US DOW has been confirmed,
ii) or must they declare war at the same time that the US declares that they will TRY to declare war.


------

The argument for position (ii) relies on a statement in the beginning of the RAW ruleset, stating that "the rules are laid out in order of play", interpreting that sentence as a universal rule.

The supporters of position (i) claim that this is just informative, a kind of guide for the reader, and that the actual steps in the order of play is defined in the order of play chapter, while any requirements as to play order within a step is only limited by specific rules withing that step. (Eg, the DOW section clearly states that DOW on minors come after DOW on majors.)

Generally, I support the latter interpretation, both in the manner that I read the rules, as well as from a wifzen perspective.

From a gameplay perspective, I see two important reasons for letting the CW declare war after the US has agreed with itself on whether to declare war or not.

1) First of all, the US was already a non-belligerent ally of the CW already before they actually entered the war. There is simply no way that the US would declare on Japan without first warning the UK about the act. With interpretation (ii), Japan will usually get a surprise impulse against the CW, which will give them the opportunity to claim several important islands/ports. (NEI, etc). This seems wrong to me.
2) Second, from a balance and historical perspective, it should hurt a bit for Japan to not declare on the US. If they can just wait the US out, and still accomplish their most important objectives, there is really very little incentive for Japan to DOW the allies first. (Rabaul alone is way more important than getting to do a port strike vs Pearl Harbor.)


Having just reread the rule, the point of dispute seems to lie in interpreting "All major powers on this side announce which major powers on the other side they are declaring war on this impulse." Specifically whether "declaring war" means: (1) the US player announcing he is going to try to declare war on Japan, or (2) the US player announcing the same and then rolling for his declaration of war on Japan. If the interpretation is #1, then the Commonwealth has to decide whether to declare war on Japan concurrently before seeing the die roll outcome of the US attempt. If the interpretation is #2, the Commonwealth player gains the benefit of the extra intelligence.

There is another major effect derived from how this is interpreted. If #1 is followed, then there could be US Entry effects of the Commonwealth declaring war on Japan, which, in turn, could affect whether the US player succeeds in his declaration of war attempt.

I would have to read the code in MWIF to see how Chris implemented this in CWIF.

My personal take is for #1, which has the effect of inhibiting the Commonwealth from declaring war on Japan until the impulse after the US has succeeded.

And yes, that gives Japan a 'free' surprise attack impulse on the Commonwealth. I see the Commonwealth being very careful about US public opinion up to the point that the US declares war. Even to the point of risking the loss of territory and combat casualities.



lomyrin -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/4/2006 10:12:52 PM)

The issue of DoW's being according to #1 or #2 above was recently argued in length on the Wifdiscussion list and no consensus was reached. Some are convinced #1 is right, others are equally convinced #2 is right. They all wished for ADG itself to clarify the intent of this rule interpretation but so far no clarification has been forthcoming from ADG.

Lars 



sajbalk -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/4/2006 10:26:27 PM)

This issue is in wifdiscussion group and no definitive answer is there. I would lean toward CW not being able to DOW without offending the US as a matter of accuracy, but it is different for the game. Some similar disputes exist as to bonuses and losses on the 2D10 table and the way to play with Territorials.

On a side note, this version of WiFFE will be taken by many, including me, as an excellent guide to how the rules should be interpreted. It will be taken by just as many as the definitive way to play WiFFE rules.

Not to add pressure or anything. [;)]




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/4/2006 11:14:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk
This issue is in wifdiscussion group and no definitive answer is there. I would lean toward CW not being able to DOW without offending the US as a matter of accuracy, but it is different for the game. Some similar disputes exist as to bonuses and losses on the 2D10 table and the way to play with Territorials.

On a side note, this version of WiFFE will be taken by many, including me, as an excellent guide to how the rules should be interpreted. It will be taken by just as many as the definitive way to play WiFFE rules.

Not to add pressure or anything. [;)]


Yeah, I am aware that if the program works well and the game is enjoyable, it is likely to set a de facto standard. That''s just one of the reasons I'm being so careful with the rules.

But really, rules interpretations are a small matter to me in comparison with making the game playable and enjoyable. Eliminating bugs, a clean player interface, good looking maps, units, and forms, smooth execution for PBEM and over the Internet, and a solid AI opponent, each and every item on that list is overwhelmingly more important to me than the rules lawyers' quibbles.



Froonp -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/5/2006 12:18:50 AM)

quote:

Having just reread the rule, the point of dispute seems to lie in interpreting "All major powers on this side announce which major powers on the other side they are declaring war on this impulse." Specifically whether "declaring war" means: (1) the US player announcing he is going to try to declare war on Japan, or (2) the US player announcing the same and then rolling for his declaration of war on Japan. If the interpretation is #1, then the Commonwealth has to decide whether to declare war on Japan concurrently before seeing the die roll outcome of the US attempt. If the interpretation is #2, the Commonwealth player gains the benefit of the extra intelligence.

There is another major effect derived from how this is interpreted. If #1 is followed, then there could be US Entry effects of the Commonwealth declaring war on Japan, which, in turn, could affect whether the US player succeeds in his declaration of war attempt.

After having read again the 9.2 rule now, I think that :
1) All major power announce their declarations of war to all Major Power they wish.
2) All major power announce their declarations of war to all Minor Countries they wish.

3) Then, all US Entry rolls are made, and the first declarations of war US Entry results do not affect the later declarations of war :

Quote from RAW :
"Each declaration of war on a major power or neutral minor country could trigger a US entry effect (see 13.3.3), which are rolled for after all declarations of war. "

Which leads me to believe that the USA, as any other Major Power, declares his declaration of war simultaneously with everyone, and then the results are rolled for thereafter.

I can also ask Harry.

Edit : That's done, I've asked Harry Rowland.



hakon -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/5/2006 2:01:44 AM)

Obviously, this is very unclear in raw, the confusing sentence being "The rules are laid out in order of play", and whether this should be interpreted as an actual rule or just reading guidelines. The way i see it, mwif is an excellent opportunity to settle this issue. Either Japan OR the UK will obviously get a surprise impulse against the other, if USA declares war on Japan. (The UK declaring war on Japan before it is clear that the US will succeed with their declaration in not likely, imo.)

So, one of two:
- Either the CW is surprised by japanese forces invading british controlled territory a week or so after the US declares war on Japan, which basically means that Japan acts like they are better prepared for the US DOW that the UK are (or that the UK did not agree with the US about the need to declare war on Japan, so refraining to attack them when the US did),
- Or the US/Roosevelt keeps the UK/Churchill well enough informed about the processes in the USA leading up to a US DOW on Japan to in fact be able to cooperate with the US in taking advantage of initial Japanese paralysis after the declaration, if any. (Generally, the US can not do very much in their suprise impulse against Japan, except perhaps perform some sub operations.)

Both can be argued for, but the question is which is less unlikely.

It will of course be very interesting to hear what Harry has to say about this.



Mziln -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/5/2006 9:20:14 PM)

Please clarify for me:
 
If you search the RAW for "US entry" the outline for the turn says the US DoW comes at the end of the turn.  All other countries would make a DoW durring the D2.1 Declare war step. Or does the US get an extra chance at the end of the turn to make a DoW?
 
If the US DoW comes at the end of the turn the issue of who can do a DoW next would depend on who whould have the inititive the next turn.
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The Turn
After you have set up your game (see 24.1), you play a series of two-month turns until the scenario is over (this will be from 5 to 36 turns, depending on the scenario). Both sides perform a series of activities in every turn. There are 3 stages at the start of the turn that everyone takes part in. Then there is a sequence of impulses that each side performs alternately. After those impulses are over, there are a few more stages for everyone. Then the turn is over and you start a new turn (easy isn’t it?!?).
 
3.1 Sequence of play
The sequence of play in a turn is:
A. REINFORCEMENT STAGE
B. LENDING RESOURCES STAGE
C. INITIATIVE STAGE
D. ACTION STAGE
Repeat D1 through D3 until the action stage ends.
D1 Determine weather
D2 First side’s impulse
Every major power on the first side performs these steps:
D2.1 Declare war
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
E. END OF TURN STAGE
Both sides perform these steps in this order:
E1 Partisans
E2 US entry  (9.4 US entry)
E3 Return to base
E4 Final reorganisation
E5 Production
E6 Intelligence (option 63)
E7 Peace
E7.1 Conquest
E7.2 Allied minor support
E7.3 Mutual peace
E7.4 Vichy declaration
E7.5 Liberation
E7.6 Surrender
E8 Victory check (& option 30: factory destruction)



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/5/2006 10:30:42 PM)

The line, E2 US Entry, refers to US Entry Options, section 13.3 et al. Curiously, 13.2 Entry Markers isn't mentioned here, but it obviously comes between Partisans (13.1) and US Entry Options (13.3).



mlees -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/6/2006 12:42:00 AM)

Hmmm. I might point out that if you were playing the "Days of Decision" game in conjunction with WiF, the DOW order is determined by whoever won the initiative rolls, right?

In that type of game, the neutral USA player could conceivably have "won" initiative for the turn. (The bidding system is in place to help with this. For an important turn, a player tries to bid high enough to ensure he gets to do an action.) Therefore, his DOW will come first, and assuming that the political phase doesn't end before the CW player can act, he too can DOW on the same turn.

This to me simulates a close communications relationship between Winston Churchill and FDR. If the political turn ends before the CW player can DOW as well, then that to me can be explained by postulating that they were not, at least as far as the DOW issue goes...

I feel that if, in the real world, Pearl Harbor did not happen, and FDR was thinking about trying to DoW Japan (whether or not Germany and Italy were involved), he most definately would have been consulting with Churchill on the "Bat Phone". With the CW forces pretty much occupied in Europe, dragging Japan (by then a treaty signatory to the Axis Pact) into war would have most definately been of concern to Churchill.

Would Churchill have declared war on Japan, assuming the USA did, without some overt act of aggression by Japan? Maybe, maybe not. depends on the military situation in Europe, I guess...

Who cares what Stalin would have thought. *snickers*

Now, I realise that Steve is only working on WiF FE only, and DoD is a distant "maybe, someday. Maybe."... But if you lock the sequence of play now too rigidly so that all DOW's must be declared before the USA roll is cast, then it might be a bit of a sticky wicket to redo later, if a DoD module comes to be a reality.



hakon -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/6/2006 6:17:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees

Would Churchill have declared war on Japan, assuming the USA did, without some overt act of aggression by Japan? Maybe, maybe not. depends on the military situation in Europe, I guess...



I think an equally valid question would be, would FDR declare war on Japan at all, without making sure he had Churchill on his side?



Mziln -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/7/2006 1:25:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
Would Churchill have declared war on Japan, assuming the USA did, without some overt act of aggression by Japan? Maybe, maybe not. depends on the military situation in Europe, I guess...


Yes Churchill would have declaired war.

(1) The USA and the Commonwealth both under estamated Japans abilitys prior to WWII
(2) Churchill would have done anything to get the USA into the war. He would be betting that the Axis would support Japan and he would have the USA helping in the Atlantic, Europe, and the Mediterranean.


Would FDR declare war on Japan without an overt act of aggression? Eventually.



Froonp -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/12/2006 10:37:39 PM)

Just posting to let you know that I actually asked Harry Rowland, the designer of WiF FE and director of ADG, and he told me that he played it that the result of the US DoW is not known by the other countries wishing to declare war at the same time.

Anyway, this is in line with the fact (clear this one) that US Entry effects of all Declarations of War are only rolled after all declarations are made, and they have no effect on the other Declarations of War done at the same time. They all apply after.

As a last note, this is how our groups would have played it (the case did not arise indeed, that I remember).



mlees -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/13/2006 6:44:43 PM)

I realise that the argument you put forth is based (correctly) on the sequence of play as written.

I was merely pointing out that this does not really reflect the reality of two month turns, and the closeness of FDR/Churchill...

Churchill: "Well, the US President has asked the US Senate for a Declaration of War against the Japanese Empire. They are debating it right now, and a vote is scheduled in two days. After discussing the issue with His Majesty, I am here to announce that the United Kingdom is officially, as of this moment, in a state of war with the Empire of Japan."

Two days later. Churchill: "Doh!"

Hmmm... Sounds like a Benny Hill skit.



Neilster -> RE: US Dow on Japan, CW follow up (10/14/2006 1:29:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
Hmmm... Sounds like a Benny Hill skit.

I always liked the Benny Hill skit with the song about the Streakers' Ball. The final verse was about the young couple getting married at the Streakers' Ball, leading to the classic last line...

"And the ladies always knew who the best-man was, at the Streakers' Ball". [:D]

For the English as a second language folks, a streaker is someone who likes to appear in public with no clothes on, usually running. You know what I'm talking about. [;)]

Cheers, Neilster





Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.015137