RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for?

RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (Full Version)

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

Message

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/21/2009 9:40:32 PM)
I occasionally get asked as to how MWIF differs from WIF FE. Here is the heart of section 10 of the Players Manual, which answers that question (list compiled by Patrice). === 10.5 Deviations Though few in number, there are places where RAC distinctly deviates from RAW. The use of the unified world map is far and away the most important. Most other deviations are handled as optional rules. Still, there are some places where I decided to make changes to exploit the capability of the computer. For instance, the computer can generate an infinite number of generic counters, so there is no counter-imposed limit on the number of partisan units. Nor are the US Entry chits drawn from a finite chit pool, but rather from an infinite pool according to a statistical distribution. The decision making for converting RAW to RAC involved dozens of people and for the most part was based on group consensus. Although, of course, I had the final say, so all errors are mine. Here is a complete list of the Deviations in RAC: 1.2 Scale Units MWIF permits an unlimited number of: partisans, fortifications, factories, and infantry-type divisional units. The last is an optional rule which has important restrictions. 1.3 Markers You are not limited by the number of generic units in the game except for synthetic oil plants. This includes unlimited: pilots and offensive, US entry, and neutrality pact chits. 2.1.2 Sea areas The hexside northeast of Amsterdam is a canal hexside but it can not be used for naval movement. 2.3.1 Stacking Limits Any and all hexsides of a land hex can be fortified, but only one fortification per hexside. 2.5 Control Initial hex control To determine start lines for the other campaigns use the toggle switch for turning on flags. Every hex will then display a flag indicating which major power controls the hex. At the start of a game, your major power controls all hexes within its home country borders, except any hexes flagged as belonging to the enemy. Again, if you are not sure who controls what, the flags indicating hex control should be toggled on. There are many changes to the non-European parts of the world. For example, North Borneo has been split into 3 separate territories, all of which are controlled by the Commonwealth in 1939: Sarawak, British North Borneo, and Brunei. Changing control Starting communist Chinese cities, when playing with the optional rule for additional Chinese cities, are: Lanchow, Sian, Yennan, Sining, Tianshui, Ningsia, and Tungkwan. 9.2 How to declare war The player is given the opportunity for making some special decisions during the DOW on Minors subphase: Finland Borderlands and Bessarabia claims by the USSR, Occupy Greenland Iceland and Occupy Northern Ireland by the US, Close the Burma Road by Japan, Add Polish units by the Commonwealth and Add Interned Units. The DOW on Minors subphase is also when a player can announce he is breaking a neutrality pact. 9.4 US entry Attempting to Declare war Other players are informed how many chits were needed. The US player decides exactly how many are reported if a range of possibilities exists. 9.5 Neutrality pacts Effect of neutrality pacts Once a pact is broken, both major powers remove the entry markers they have placed on their common border (see below) from the game. 11.7 Strategic bombardment Damaged factories are shown as black stacks. 11.10 Rail movement Factories For the USSR, an additional restriction applies. Either both the enemy in-supply land unit and the moving factory’s city of origin are in European USSR or they both are in Siberia (eastern USSR). Similarly, either the destroyed factory and the moving factory’s city of origin are both in European USSR or both in Siberia. The destination for the moving factory can be anywhere in the USSR. Here the European USSR and Siberia are defined by the demarcation line running north-south, three hexes to the east of Stalingrad. Limits The number of hexes the unit traverses determines the number of rail moves it expends as shown in the following table: Hex Distance Land or Aircraft Unit Factory Unit 1 - 60 hexes 1 rail move 2 rail moves 61 - 120 hexes 2 rail moves 3 rail moves 121 + hexes 3 rail moves 4 rail moves 11.16.5 Resolving attacks Choosing combat tables If units from different major powers (on the deciding side) might take the losses, the major power with the most units involved in the combat chooses. 13.1 Partisans Getting partisans There is no die roll to select a row on the partisan table. Instead, each country has a probability of partisans appearing as a value in the data for the country. The probability of partisans appearing in each country is the same as in the table. However, a separate random number is generated for each country and tested against the probability of partisans appearing in that country. The result is that partisans might appear in more than 8 countries. Setting up partisans Set up partisans that are drawn randomly from a fixed distribution that is redefined annually. They are drawn simultaneously for all major powers and set up simultaneously. After all partisans have been placed, the effects upon any overrun hexes are implemented one hex at a time. 13.2 Entry markers New markers are added to the marker pool at the start of each year, which changes the distribution from which a marker is randomly drawn. 13.3.1 US Entry markers The regular entry markers drawn have no effect on the markers drawn for neutrality pacts. 13.3.2 US entry options Other players are informed how many chits were needed. The US player decides exactly how many are reported if a range of possibilities exists. 13.6.5 Building units When units are randomly drawn, you do not see the actual units selected until after all your production decisions are final. 13.7.3 Mutual peace The area ceded by the USSR is everything east and south of hex row 46 and hex column 155, inclusive, plus the 3 ports Okhotsk, Magadan, and Petropavlovsk. 14.2.1 Fighters Combat air patrol (CAP) CAP may only be flown for hexes where an enemy attack is possible. For example, you may not fly CAP during the port attack phase over an empty port. 14.4 Carrier air units If the carrier air units are flying from a land hex, they can only fly rebase missions. 22.4.7 Siberians Siberia is defined as that part of the USSR which is east of the north-south demarcation line running 3 hexes east of Stalingrad. 22.4.9 Fortification units The gearing limits for fortifications is +3 per turn. For example, if you built 2 fortification hexsides in the previous turn, you could build up to 5 in the current turn. All six hexsides can be fortified, but, regardless of type, only one fortification is permitted per hexside. 22.4.15 Chinese Warlords Warlord units are treated like any other unit for all purposes except that no Warlord unit may move nor advance after combat more than 6 hexes from its home city. They can attack from that 6th hex to a hex where they could not move to, but could not advance after combat. 22.4.17 Heavy weapons units Not part of MWIF product 1. 22.4.18 Air Cav Not part of MWIF product 1.

micheljq -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/23/2009 2:05:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets I occasionally get asked as to how MWIF differs from WIF FE. Here is the heart of section 10 of the Players Manual, which answers that question (list compiled by Patrice). === 10.5 Deviations The decision making for converting RAW to RAC involved dozens of people and for the most part was based on group consensus. Although, of course, I had the final say, so all errors are mine. Thanks for the post, heu sorry what is RAW and RAC anyway? quote: 13.6.5 Building units When units are randomly drawn, you do not see the actual units selected until after all your production decisions are final. Just an observation, could be interesting that we do not see our enemy's production in the computer version? quote: 14.4 Carrier air units If the carrier air units are flying from a land hex, they can only fly rebase missions. Why carrier air units on land can't do the same actions as a land based air unit? Thanks, [:'(]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/23/2009 5:42:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: micheljq quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets I occasionally get asked as to how MWIF differs from WIF FE. Here is the heart of section 10 of the Players Manual, which answers that question (list compiled by Patrice). === 10.5 Deviations The decision making for converting RAW to RAC involved dozens of people and for the most part was based on group consensus. Although, of course, I had the final say, so all errors are mine. Thanks for the post, heu sorry what is RAW and RAC anyway? quote: 13.6.5 Building units When units are randomly drawn, you do not see the actual units selected until after all your production decisions are final. Just an observation, could be interesting that we do not see our enemy's production in the computer version? quote: 14.4 Carrier air units If the carrier air units are flying from a land hex, they can only fly rebase missions. Why carrier air units on land can't do the same actions as a land based air unit? Thanks, [:'(] Rules as Written and Rules as Coded (those are defined in the first part of section 10, which I had trimmed off). RAW is from Australian Design Group and can be downloaded from their website. RAC is a modified version of that is an adaptation of RAW specifically for WMIF. The production builds for your opponents (and allies) can be seen, but not until after you are done your own production. The key point of that sentence though is that you do not see the details of the your own units that are selected randomly until after you have completed your own production; you don't know if you have drawn the best units, the worst, or the mediocre in-between. Carrier air units represent much smaller groups of airplanes than land based units. When operating at sea from carriers, their effectiveness is comparable to a larger group of land based airplanes. On land, they are simply fewer planes, hence to rule for them only being able to rebase when on land (otherwise it distorts the balance of the simulation's design).

micheljq -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/23/2009 7:39:25 PM)
OK thanks for answers. I am glad to learn that we cannot see our opponent's production of the current turn before we finished ours.

paulderynck -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/24/2009 12:30:18 AM)
Yeah. Me too. Who said this game has no Fog of War? [;)]

sajbalk -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/26/2009 4:09:03 PM)
USE chits. I understand that there are infinite chits, so the USE chits drawn for Pacts or even for entry do not effect the future pool. However, in the original game the pool distribution changed year by year. So, in MWiF if you draw a chit in 1940, it is only influenced by the 1940 distribution? That is, there is no carryover from "left over" 1939 chits?

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/26/2009 6:07:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

USE chits. I understand that there are infinite chits, so the USE chits drawn for Pacts or even for entry do not effect the future pool.

However, in the original game the pool distribution changed year by year.

So, in MWiF if you draw a chit in 1940, it is only influenced by the 1940 distribution? That is, there is no carryover from "left over" 1939 chits?

It is a cumulative distribution. Here's the code:
========

  case Year of
    1939:                  // Average = 70/30 = 2.33
    begin
      case RollX(rsEntryChit, 0, TEntryChitRoll.HighRoll, nil, nil,
          TEntryChitRoll.RollRange) of
        0: Result := 0;        // 4   3   1

        1..9: Result := 1;     // 6   7   9

        10..16: Result := 2;   // 6   7   7

        17..22: Result := 3;   // 7   6   6

        23..28: Result := 4;   // 5   6   6

        else Result := 5;      // 2   1   1 (29)
      end;
    end;

    1940:                  // Average = 101/53 = 1.91
    begin
      case RollX(rsEntryChit, 0, TEntryChitRoll.HighRoll, nil, nil,
          TEntryChitRoll.RollRange) of
        0..4: Result := 0;     // 12   6   4  -> 5

        5..23: Result := 1;    // 12   8   10 -> 19

        24..36: Result := 2;   // 11   5   6  -> 13

        37..45: Result := 3;   // 10   3   3  -> 9

        46..51: Result := 4;   // 6    1   0  -> 6

        else Result := 5;      // 2    1   0  -> 1 (52)
      end;
    end;

    1941:                  // Average = 154/68 = 2.26
    begin
      case RollX(rsEntryChit, 0, TEntryChitRoll.HighRoll, nil, nil,
          TEntryChitRoll.RollRange) of
        0..4: Result := 0;     // 12   0   0  -> 5

        5..24: Result := 1;    // 13   1   1  -> 20

        25..40: Result := 2;   // 14   3   3  -> 16

        41..52: Result := 3;   // 14   4   3  -> 12

        53..62: Result := 4;   // 9    3   4  -> 10

        63..66: Result := 5;   // 5    3   3  -> 4

        else Result := 6;      // 1    1   1  -> 1 (67)
      end;
    end;

    1942:                  // Average = 213/82 = 2.60
    begin
      case RollX(rsEntryChit, 0, TEntryChitRoll.HighRoll, nil, nil,
          TEntryChitRoll.RollRange) of
        0..4: Result := 0;     // 12   0   0   -> 5

        5..24: Result := 1;    // 13   0   0   -> 20

        25..41: Result := 2;   // 15   1   1   -> 17

        42..56: Result := 3;   // 17   3   3   -> 15

        57..70: Result := 4;   // 13   4   4   -> 14

        71..78: Result := 5;   // 9    4   4   -> 8

        else Result := 6;      // 3    2   2   -> 3  (79..81)
      end;
    end;

    else
    begin // 1943 +        // Average = 284/94 = 3.02
      case RollX(rsEntryChit, 0, TEntryChitRoll.HighRoll, nil, nil,
          TEntryChitRoll.RollRange) of
        0..4: Result := 0;     // 12   0    0   -> 5

        5..24: Result := 1;    // 13   0    0   -> 20

        25..41: Result := 2;   // 15   0    0   -> 17

        42..57: Result := 3;   // 18   1    1   -> 16

        58..73: Result := 4;   // 15   2    2   -> 16

        74..85: Result := 5;   // 13   4    4   -> 12

        else Result := 6;     //   8   5    5   -> 8  (86..93)
      end;
    end;
  end;
end;
// ****************************************************************************
class function TEntryChitRoll.HighRoll: Byte;
// ****************************************************************************
// # of chits (minus 1) to randomly select from for each year
// ****************************************************************************
begin
  case ChitYear of
    1939: Result := 29;

    1940: Result := 52;

    1941: Result := 67;

    1942: Result := 81;

    else Result := 93;     // 1943 +
  end;
end;

The 3 or 4 numbers in the comments (following //) reflect changes in RAW over the years. The 3rd and 4th entries are for the current version of RAW.

For example,

In 1942 there are 81 chits. The chance of drawing a '3' is 16/81. That is because the '3' chits are in the quanitites 6+3+3+3+1 in the years 1939->1942.

Taxman66 -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 1:09:54 AM)
Some of us still don't like this decision, and believe that overly aggressive actions by the axis that cause the next year's chits to enter sooner a good thing... and conversly overly aggressive actions by the allies that keep the low value 1940 chits recycling out, then back into the USA pools also a good thing. sigh [image]http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/image/s7.gif[/image]

brian brian -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 1:21:00 AM)
so basically, the '5' chit from 1939 could appear in pools several times then. likewise, the odds of drawing a lot of zeroes have also gone back up, after several were taken out in the last change.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 8:48:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brian brian so basically, the '5' chit from 1939 could appear in pools several times then. likewise, the odds of drawing a lot of zeroes have also gone back up, after several were taken out in the last change. There is no '5' chit in the physical sense. It is more like roulette where the wheel spins and 5 can come up repeatedly or not at all.

KosMic -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 4:38:14 PM)
In essence, this change from RAW may result in the same overall "average" but introduces MUCH higher variability in the process. Under RAW, you may pull a number of "0" chits in a row, but eventually you WILL pull higher value chits, as the odds of pulling another "0" chit is reduced each time you pull one, and eventually reaches no chance of doing so. The same applies with any other particular value of chit. The RAW system leads to a covergence towards the mean over time, which narrows the range of the possible timing of US entry. In the RAC system there is no such feedback loop. Each pull is independent of what has gone on before. This is a major change from RAW that will lead to a more variable US entry. I'm not exactly sure how major the repercussions will be on the game. But I am concerned. Will this lead to a 1940 US entry into the war? Or 1944 comes around and the US is still sitting on the sidelines? Only time will tell.

Froonp -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 5:17:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KosMic In essence, this change from RAW may result in the same overall "average" but introduces MUCH higher variability in the process. Under RAW, you may pull a number of "0" chits in a row, but eventually you WILL pull higher value chits, as the odds of pulling another "0" chit is reduced each time you pull one, and eventually reaches no chance of doing so. The same applies with any other particular value of chit. The RAW system leads to a covergence towards the mean over time, which narrows the range of the possible timing of US entry. In the RAC system there is no such feedback loop. Each pull is independent of what has gone on before. This is a major change from RAW that will lead to a more variable US entry. I'm not exactly sure how major the repercussions will be on the game. But I am concerned. Will this lead to a 1940 US entry into the war? Or 1944 comes around and the US is still sitting on the sidelines? Only time will tell. Maybe in MWiF, the odds of picking a "0" chit can decrease each time a "0" chit is picked. Likewise, maybe the odds of picking a "5" chit can decrease dramatically (going nearly to 0) each time a "5" chit is picked. Talking of the 1939 chits.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 5:40:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KosMic In essence, this change from RAW may result in the same overall "average" but introduces MUCH higher variability in the process. Under RAW, you may pull a number of "0" chits in a row, but eventually you WILL pull higher value chits, as the odds of pulling another "0" chit is reduced each time you pull one, and eventually reaches no chance of doing so. The same applies with any other particular value of chit. The RAW system leads to a covergence towards the mean over time, which narrows the range of the possible timing of US entry. In the RAC system there is no such feedback loop. Each pull is independent of what has gone on before. This is a major change from RAW that will lead to a more variable US entry. I'm not exactly sure how major the repercussions will be on the game. But I am concerned. Will this lead to a 1940 US entry into the war? Or 1944 comes around and the US is still sitting on the sidelines? Only time will tell. True, but I find the whole idea of a finite distribution distasteful. For example, imagine that all the die rolls were done the same way. Having rolled a 1, you then know that you will not see another 1 until you have 'rolled' each of the other 9 numbers. The last number in each 10 wouldn't be random at all. If you find that to be an attractive idea, then we have very little in common concerning this topic. In both cases the reduction in variation lends itself to 'gaming' the system. WIF FE players are used to 'gaming' the US entry, and consider it an integral part of the game. Indeed, I have had people complain that disassociating the US Entry from the Nazi-Soviet neutrality pact chit draws is 'wrong', but MWIF does that too. I consider these both to be an artifact of WIF FE counter mix limitations (e.g., in WIF FE the Nazi-Soviet chits all have American flags on them). That CWIF (an ADG game) was written to use an infinite distribution, instead of a finite one, is good evidence that Harry Rowland wanted WIF to use the infinite version. Along the same lines, the change from a 6 sided die to a 10 sided die increased the variation of all random outcomes [I really liked the 6 sided dice simply for the aesthetics of how they bounced on a glass table top.] The change from the 1D10 CRT to the 2D10 CRT also increased the variation of the land CRT results. Any arguments advocating less variation in outcomes (in general) could be applied to both those changes in the WIF rules too.

sajbalk -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 6:43:31 PM)
The finite chits in the paper game have the following effects: 1. If you draw bad chits, those are gone and cannot be drawn again (assuming no recycling). 2. If you draw good chits, those are gone ... 3. If the USSR has really good chits (to prevent GER from breaking the Pact), then the US must have worse chits. 4. If the Pact is held until 1942, as deliberate USSR or GER strategy, the US will draw much better chits since the earlier pools will be exhausted. 3 and 4 above are abolished by having, effectively, no interaction between the pools. This is fine and perhaps how HR would have designed it given no constraints. However, there will be no acceleration of chit additions, so US entry will, on average, slow. I am concerned that the effect of past draws has no impact at all on future draws. I had thought this was designed so that you get infinite chits in 1939 using a 1939 distribution. Then 1940 using a 1940 distribution. This is not the case. Instead it is 1940 using a mixed 1939 and 1940 distribution. I know in the past Patrice has run Monte Carlo simulations to show average US entry and gear up and the ability of GER to break the Pact. These have also included a standard deviation. Would it be possible to run the same sort of simulation with the infinite chits? My concern is that if a "5" is drawn, there is still the same chance of drawing a "5" next. Same for a "0". I think this part of the program should be reconsidered. I favor the seperate chits pools, but a decreasing chance of drawing a chit if you have previously drawn a chit. For that matter, if there is no need to ever add the next year's pool, why not just use the original pools?

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 7:15:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sajbalk The finite chits in the paper game have the following effects: 1. If you draw bad chits, those are gone and cannot be drawn again (assuming no recycling). 2. If you draw good chits, those are gone ... 3. If the USSR has really good chits (to prevent GER from breaking the Pact), then the US must have worse chits. 4. If the Pact is held until 1942, as deliberate USSR or GER strategy, the US will draw much better chits since the earlier pools will be exhausted. 3 and 4 above are abolished by having, effectively, no interaction between the pools. This is fine and perhaps how HR would have designed it given no constraints. However, there will be no acceleration of chit additions, so US entry will, on average, slow. I am concerned that the effect of past draws has no impact at all on future draws. I had thought this was designed so that you get infinite chits in 1939 using a 1939 distribution. Then 1940 using a 1940 distribution. This is not the case. Instead it is 1940 using a mixed 1939 and 1940 distribution. I know in the past Patrice has run Monte Carlo simulations to show average US entry and gear up and the ability of GER to break the Pact. These have also included a standard deviation. Would it be possible to run the same sort of simulation with the infinite chits? My concern is that if a "5" is drawn, there is still the same chance of drawing a "5" next. Same for a "0". I think this part of the program should be reconsidered. I favor the seperate chits pools, but a decreasing chance of drawing a chit if you have previously drawn a chit. For that matter, if there is no need to ever add the next year's pool, why not just use the original pools? If you are interested in this there is no need to run a simulation. The code excerpt I gave shows the means and calculating the standard deviation from the given distributions can be done by anyone who took an introductory statistics course (and passed[;)]). [I used to teach statistics.]

paulderynck -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 9:54:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets I really liked the 6 sided dice simply for the aesthetics of how they bounced on a glass table top If you roll your 10-sided dice out of a cup into the game boxtop, they'll sometimes spin like a top for 30 seconds before coming to rest. Now that's exciting !!

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 10:05:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets I really liked the 6 sided dice simply for the aesthetics of how they bounced on a glass table top If you roll your 10-sided dice out of a cup into the game boxtop, they'll sometimes spin like a top for 30 seconds before coming to rest. Now that's exciting !! Ah, but I own over 100 of the small 6 sided dice and they bounce like Mexican jumping beans on a 1/8 inch glass tabletop.[:D]

paulderynck -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 10:14:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: sajbalk The finite chits in the paper game have the following effects: 1. If you draw bad chits, those are gone and cannot be drawn again (assuming no recycling). 2. If you draw good chits, those are gone ... 3. If the USSR has really good chits (to prevent GER from breaking the Pact), then the US must have worse chits. 4. If the Pact is held until 1942, as deliberate USSR or GER strategy, the US will draw much better chits since the earlier pools will be exhausted. 3 and 4 above are abolished by having, effectively, no interaction between the pools. This is fine and perhaps how HR would have designed it given no constraints. However, there will be no acceleration of chit additions, so US entry will, on average, slow. I am concerned that the effect of past draws has no impact at all on future draws. I had thought this was designed so that you get infinite chits in 1939 using a 1939 distribution. Then 1940 using a 1940 distribution. This is not the case. Instead it is 1940 using a mixed 1939 and 1940 distribution. I know in the past Patrice has run Monte Carlo simulations to show average US entry and gear up and the ability of GER to break the Pact. These have also included a standard deviation. Would it be possible to run the same sort of simulation with the infinite chits? My concern is that if a "5" is drawn, there is still the same chance of drawing a "5" next. Same for a "0". I think this part of the program should be reconsidered. I favor the seperate chits pools, but a decreasing chance of drawing a chit if you have previously drawn a chit. For that matter, if there is no need to ever add the next year's pool, why not just use the original pools? If you are interested in this there is no need to run a simulation. The code excerpt I gave shows the means and calculating the standard deviation from the given distributions can be done by anyone who took an introductory statistics course (and passed[;)]). [I used to teach statistics.] No need for a statisitics course to know there is a great deal of difference between the two methodologies. Although I think I'd be more comfortable with doing it the way the board game does it, your point about the design of CWiF is interesting. I guess I wonder just how much input Harry had into this part of it. There have been very detailed studies of the U.S. entry chit distributions and their effect on when the U.S. can come in - done by people on the Yahoo list, but they did not address Steve's Points 3 & 4. (BB Iowa Steve I mean.) My personal experience is that the distributions in all the pools stay close to the means, but where real good or bad luck can occur is when the U.S. loses a chit for an Allied action or when it moves a chit from the Entry Pool to the Tension Pool. Just last night I had one zero in the Ge/It pool with six other chits, any one of which would, when moved to Tension, put me at the level needed for War Appropriations next turn. You can guess what happened. (Really the most annoying thing about luck like that is you can't bitch and whine about it without giving away too much info to the Axis.)

paulderynck -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/27/2009 10:17:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets I really liked the 6 sided dice simply for the aesthetics of how they bounced on a glass table top If you roll your 10-sided dice out of a cup into the game boxtop, they'll sometimes spin like a top for 30 seconds before coming to rest. Now that's exciting !! Ah, but I own over 100 of the small 6 sided dice and they bounce like Mexican jumping beans on a 1/8 inch glass tabletop.[:D] You've been playing too many of those Columbia games from Canada. "O.K. Boys, this next sand pail full of dice will be for my attack just south of Leningrad..."

Norden_slith -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (3/29/2009 9:49:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets I really liked the 6 sided dice simply for the aesthetics of how they bounced on a glass table top If you roll your 10-sided dice out of a cup into the game boxtop, they'll sometimes spin like a top for 30 seconds before coming to rest. Now that's exciting !! Ah, but I own over 100 of the small 6 sided dice and they bounce like Mexican jumping beans on a 1/8 inch glass tabletop.[:D] You've been playing too many of those Columbia games from Canada. "O.K. Boys, this next sand pail full of dice will be for my attack just south of Leningrad..." Not really. Eastfront (and Eurofront) are not quite that bad, though you could roll up to 16 dies at once. But in Europe Engulfed from GMT, now there you could potentially roll over a hundred dice (as assault doubles the dies). They do provide resulttables (rolled with 3D6) though. So Steve, if you like that, EE is for you. But maybe you need a second glasstable, just for the dice :-).

Caquineur -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (5/7/2009 6:15:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets ...It is a cumulative distribution. Here's the code: ... begin // 1943 + // Average = 284/94 = 3.02... Steve, Shoudn't it be 274/94 = 2.91 ? Or am I missing something ? Alain

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (5/7/2009 6:45:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Caquineur quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets ...It is a cumulative distribution. Here's the code: ... begin // 1943 + // Average = 284/94 = 3.02... Steve, Shoudn't it be 274/94 = 2.91 ? Or am I missing something ? Alain Yes. Paul and Nils and reviewing this distribution in detail, using several likely event calendars for the war and a simulation model to track the running US chit total(s). Their intent is to improve the distribution so it follows WIF FE experience more closely.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (5/21/2009 7:44:35 PM)
I am making a final push on finishing the Players Manual. One of the forms that I have been most concerned about is the setup tray. Here is how that form is described in the Players Manual (my final version, but the editor, Mike, will probably find ways to improve my writing). First of 3 in the series. [image]local://upfiles/16701/B78B56CF95A948749B924F5B1D8C8114.jpg[/image]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (5/21/2009 7:51:56 PM)
2nd in the series of 3. This form has undergone a least a couple of dozen of major incarnations. The beta testers had many suggestions (i.e., complaints). In essence, the form enables the player to perform an enormous number of functions. Designing the layout and the mouse & keyboard interface was not intuitively obvious. The screen shots of the form you see here are for a screen width of 1280. The form can be resized from the left edge so only a half dozen units are visible in each list. Or it can be expanded to as wide as your screen(s) can show. I have double monitors and I could set it up to show 40 units in each row. The vertical height was a major concern. We wanted the setup tray's footprint to be as small as possible vertically, so as much of the the detailed map (where the units are being placed) as possible is visible . [image]local://upfiles/16701/43D5CF87315049879349E70F153845D4.jpg[/image]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (5/21/2009 7:52:42 PM)
3rd and last in the series. [image]local://upfiles/16701/440D66A8E8F24F0AA1404589905AAFFA.jpg[/image]

obermeister -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (5/22/2009 6:54:42 PM)
Crap. I am jonesing so bad for this game to come out! [X(][&o]

Litsne -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (6/2/2009 8:39:13 AM)
I haven't checked all 14 pages, so I hope I do not repeat anything, but I wonder if the LAIO specification is/will be available for download? [8\|]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What kind of manual(s) should we ask for? (6/2/2009 9:35:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Litsne I haven't checked all 14 pages, so I hope I do not repeat anything, but I wonder if the LAIO specification is/will be available for download? [8\|] Welcome to the forum.[:)] I don't believe I have posted that. If you are really interested, send me an email (SHokanson@HawaiianTel.net).

Page: << < prev 10 11 12 13 [14]

1.90625