Options

Options (Full Version)

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

Message

Tonqeen -> Options (4/22/2009 8:03:34 PM)
Where can I see all the options that can be chosen when you start the game? I read it will be 80 of them.

paulderynck -> RE: Options (4/22/2009 9:04:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tonqeen Where can I see all the options that can be chosen when you start the game? I read it will be 80 of them. Here is what I plan on using: [image]local://upfiles/24497/FB51CC7AE4EA4076A2C23CAFC9846205.jpg[/image]

SLAAKMAN -> RE: Options (4/22/2009 9:43:50 PM)
paulderynck, Youre omitting the sacred 2D10 CRT, Convoys & Cruisers, rough seas, oil tankers, Guards Banner armies, Food in Flames, Hitlers War, Partisans & Warlords, HQ & Railway movement, enroute interception, Ukraine, Intel, extended game, Nationalist attack, Japanese command conflict and flying bombs??!!! What greenhorn Slaakery! Sacrilege!!!! [X(] [:-]

Jagdtiger14 -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 2:54:29 AM)
I thought I read somewhere that MWIF would only be 1d10? Glad we will have 2d10!

paulderynck -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 4:55:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN paulderynck, Youre omitting the sacred 2D10 CRT, Convoys & Cruisers, rough seas, oil tankers, Guards Banner armies, Food in Flames, Hitlers War, Partisans & Warlords, HQ & Railway movement, enroute interception, Ukraine, Intel, extended game, Nationalist attack, Japanese command conflict and flying bombs??!!! What greenhorn Slaakery! Sacrilege!!!! [X(] [:-] In our group we never play with Intelligence.[8\|]

christo -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 7:31:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN paulderynck, Youre omitting the sacred 2D10 CRT, Convoys & Cruisers, rough seas, oil tankers, Guards Banner armies, Food in Flames, Hitlers War, Partisans & Warlords, HQ & Railway movement, enroute interception, Ukraine, Intel, extended game, Nationalist attack, Japanese command conflict and flying bombs??!!! What greenhorn Slaakery! Sacrilege!!!! [X(] [:-] In our group we never play with Intelligence.[8\|] Have never played with intelligence and unless someone can convince me, we are unlikely ever to. (I'm sure there is some pun it that comment , at least according to my opponent [:D]) Christo

Tonqeen -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 11:17:45 AM)
Thanks, and is there any link or something that will describe what the certain options do? Blitz bonus etc.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 5:37:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tonqeen Thanks, and is there any link or something that will describe what the certain options do? Blitz bonus etc. At one time, in some thread from long ago, I posted a text description of each of the 80 optional rules. Those, with some revisions, now constitute section 9 of the Players Manual. At the top of the World in Flames forum is a thread called Directory. That will give you more information.

micheljq -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 6:59:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN paulderynck, Youre omitting the sacred 2D10 CRT, Convoys & Cruisers, rough seas, oil tankers, Guards Banner armies, Food in Flames, Hitlers War, Partisans & Warlords, HQ & Railway movement, enroute interception, Ukraine, Intel, extended game, Nationalist attack, Japanese command conflict and flying bombs??!!! What greenhorn Slaakery! Sacrilege!!!! [X(] [:-] Check the screenshot again dude. [>:]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 7:22:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: micheljq quote: ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN paulderynck, Youre omitting the sacred 2D10 CRT, Convoys & Cruisers, rough seas, oil tankers, Guards Banner armies, Food in Flames, Hitlers War, Partisans & Warlords, HQ & Railway movement, enroute interception, Ukraine, Intel, extended game, Nationalist attack, Japanese command conflict and flying bombs??!!! What greenhorn Slaakery! Sacrilege!!!! [X(] [:-] Check the screenshot again dude. [>:] He was referring to which options had been checked - not which ones were available.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 7:27:43 PM)
Paul's screen shot is a very nice composite of the different groups of optional rules as seen from the Start New Game form. Here is the form that is displayed during game play. If the rule is not ON it is OFF.[;)] [image]local://upfiles/16701/C628324C150A424894251C29DCCDA74F.jpg[/image]

Tonqeen -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 9:16:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: Tonqeen Thanks, and is there any link or something that will describe what the certain options do? Blitz bonus etc. At one time, in some thread from long ago, I posted a text description of each of the 80 optional rules. Those, with some revisions, now constitute section 9 of the Players Manual. At the top of the World in Flames forum is a thread called Directory. That will give you more information. Sorry if I asking alot, but where can I find section 9 of the players manual? Is it in the game and beta game? I first thougth you ment turtorial 9 but that was about supply.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Options (4/23/2009 9:54:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tonqeen quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: Tonqeen Thanks, and is there any link or something that will describe what the certain options do? Blitz bonus etc. At one time, in some thread from long ago, I posted a text description of each of the 80 optional rules. Those, with some revisions, now constitute section 9 of the Players Manual. At the top of the World in Flames forum is a thread called Directory. That will give you more information. Sorry if I asking alot, but where can I find section 9 of the players manual? Is it in the game and beta game? I first thougth you ment turtorial 9 but that was about supply. I am still writing the Players Manual. Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10 are done. Mostly done is section 8. Remaining are 1, and 6 (loading the program onto your computer and preparing for Internet Play and PBEM), and the appendices (partially done). The thread on scenarios, optional rules, and add-ons contains the text descriptions for the optional rules.

willycube -> RE: Options (4/25/2009 1:46:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN paulderynck, Youre omitting the sacred 2D10 CRT, Convoys & Cruisers, rough seas, oil tankers, Guards Banner armies, Food in Flames, Hitlers War, Partisans & Warlords, HQ & Railway movement, enroute interception, Ukraine, Intel, extended game, Nationalist attack, Japanese command conflict and flying bombs??!!! What greenhorn Slaakery! Sacrilege!!!! [X(] [:-] In our group we never play with Intelligence.[8\|] Boy now I am totally confused are you referring to a game option or everybody prays for luck and nobody uses their noggin, Christo why would you not use intelligence and what does it do when its on. And Paulderynck if it wasnt a pun why would you not play with intelligence on? What does intelligence do for a player or does not do for someone? Willy

christo -> RE: Options (4/25/2009 3:41:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willycube quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN paulderynck, Youre omitting the sacred 2D10 CRT, Convoys & Cruisers, rough seas, oil tankers, Guards Banner armies, Food in Flames, Hitlers War, Partisans & Warlords, HQ & Railway movement, enroute interception, Ukraine, Intel, extended game, Nationalist attack, Japanese command conflict and flying bombs??!!! What greenhorn Slaakery! Sacrilege!!!! [X(] [:-] In our group we never play with Intelligence.[8\|] Boy now I am totally confused are you referring to a game option or everybody prays for luck and nobody uses their noggin, Christo why would you not use intelligence and what does it do when its on. And Paulderynck if it wasnt a pun why would you not play with intelligence on? What does intelligence do for a player or does not do for someone? Willy At the end of the day there are what ?80? optionals. The length of time that it takes to play a game can vary enormously depending on what you chose. Up till now our WIF group totals 2 people. Playing Fascist Tide alone with only 2 takes a long time. We simply never had time for it. Also every optional has a bias towards one side or another. There was an interesting article about this in the 2000 Annual. Playing as infrequently as we do, it all just got too much. Christo

paulderynck -> RE: Options (4/25/2009 8:37:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willycube quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN paulderynck, Youre omitting the sacred 2D10 CRT, Convoys & Cruisers, rough seas, oil tankers, Guards Banner armies, Food in Flames, Hitlers War, Partisans & Warlords, HQ & Railway movement, enroute interception, Ukraine, Intel, extended game, Nationalist attack, Japanese command conflict and flying bombs??!!! What greenhorn Slaakery! Sacrilege!!!! [X(] [:-] In our group we never play with Intelligence.[8\|] Boy now I am totally confused are you referring to a game option or everybody prays for luck and nobody uses their noggin, Christo why would you not use intelligence and what does it do when its on. And Paulderynck if it wasnt a pun why would you not play with intelligence on? What does intelligence do for a player or does not do for someone? Willy No, I was indulging in a little self-deprecating humor. But that particular option in a FTF game of WiF is: a) kind of a pain mechanically b) considered by many to be quite imbalanced (favors Allies) So I classify it as the kind of option that could be employed to rebalance a game if the Allies were noobie players and the Axis were grognards. But in our group, the players are all grognards so we choose not to use it. Many of the options are viewed as favorable to one side or the other but my list is more personal preference and habitual use than anything else. I would be less comfortable using the unchecked options in a game (see my post #2), simply because I don't have much experience with them. Everyone has an option or two which fall in the category of pet peeves and they would be quite loathe to use them, or they would want a 'quid pro quo' option added as well if they think a particular one favors the opposite side. There are also quite a number that almost everybody uses all the time.

Froonp -> RE: Options (4/25/2009 11:23:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck But that particular option in a FTF game of WiF is: a) kind of a pain mechanically b) considered by many to be quite imbalanced (favors Allies) You talk about the Intelligence optional rule here. Well, in regards to point b), I'd say that hopefully it is imbalanced and it favors the Allies. This is all what intell did during WW2 indeed. Intell also favored the allies hugely during WW2, so I think that this optional rule is a desirable addition to a WW2 game. I personaly would not play (even as the Axis) without it. The Allied broke multiple times the Axis codes, and this gave them the edve in battles that turned the tables. For example Midway was thought by an US command that knew everything of the Japanese's plans, so even if they got good search rolls and lots of suprise, maybe this is intell that allowed them to re-roll the dices indeed. About the mechanic, well, we are used to it, and this is no pain for none of us in our game group.

paulderynck -> RE: Options (4/26/2009 5:23:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck But that particular option in a FTF game of WiF is: a) kind of a pain mechanically b) considered by many to be quite imbalanced (favors Allies) You talk about the Intelligence optional rule here. Well, in regards to point b), I'd say that hopefully it is imbalanced and it favors the Allies. This is all what intell did during WW2 indeed. Intell also favored the allies hugely during WW2, so I think that this optional rule is a desirable addition to a WW2 game. I personaly would not play (even as the Axis) without it. The Allied broke multiple times the Axis codes, and this gave them the edve in battles that turned the tables. For example Midway was thought by an US command that knew everything of the Japanese's plans, so even if they got good search rolls and lots of suprise, maybe this is intell that allowed them to re-roll the dices indeed. About the mechanic, well, we are used to it, and this is no pain for none of us in our game group. I went back and re-read the rule and reminded myself why I don't like it. It is about as silly to me as ITPOTE is to you. [:'(] Edit: When we eventually play on-line (and I hope we do) I'll drop the use of ITPOTE in return for dropping Intelligence. And I really don't care about this with respect to which sides we end up on.

Froonp -> RE: Options (4/26/2009 10:05:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck I went back and re-read the rule and reminded myself why I don't like it. It is about as silly to me as ITPOTE is to you. [:'(] Yes but why ? I don't like ITPOTE because it is not realistic and, and that's the main point, not historical at all. Anywone is still to prove me wwrong by listing a few examples of historical fleet moves that were "slowed down" because of enemy unknown presence. As all the examples I provided the main list, and I can find hundreds others, wwe see that fleets zoomed their way, and stroke what they found, or entered into battle with adversity and either were doomed or successful. But there is nothing as "oh, an enemy cruiser is reported, I'm scared I will be carefull from now on", as fleet admirals were cautioous all the time, even in home waters. But why is Intell so silly for you ? Don't you agree that Intell did a great part of the job for the allies during WW2 ? I believe this is true, so I believe that the game has to model that enormous edge they had, don't it ? Otherwize it would be like saying that LND2 with 5 Tac factors are silly for Germany in 1939, or saying that the Blitz table don't fit your need and forbidding it in your games.

LiquidSky -> RE: Options (4/27/2009 6:40:29 AM)
WiF is a fantasy game. I hope nobody is under any illusions that WiF models some sort of historical outcome. It is a game, and many things have been changed to make the game enjoyable to play. Many of those things favour the axis, because they needed some chance to be able to win. Do you honestly believe that the Italian's should even be represented by as a major power in WWII? That the Germans could have matched the allies in airpower? In our group, we allow no rule discussion to revolve around 'history'. We only allow a rule to be discussed for its 'fun factor'. And possibly for play balance if a person needs a little help, although after 20 years of playing WiF, we dont need to do that anymore.

hellfirejet -> RE: Options (4/27/2009 8:52:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: Tonqeen Where can I see all the options that can be chosen when you start the game? I read it will be 80 of them. Here is what I plan on using: [image]local://upfiles/24497/FB51CC7AE4EA4076A2C23CAFC9846205.jpg[/image] Hi guys this should not be here,I just transfered this info to the Empires in Arms forum,as they are constantly squabling about what they do and don't want in the game,while I just want more options cheers, I can't wait for World in Flames to be released looks superb!

paulderynck -> RE: Options (4/28/2009 9:39:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp Yes but why ? I don't like ITPOTE because it is not realistic and, and that's the main point, not historical at all. Anywone is still to prove me wwrong by listing a few examples of historical fleet moves that were "slowed down" because of enemy unknown presence. As all the examples I provided the main list, and I can find hundreds others, wwe see that fleets zoomed their way, and stroke what they found, or entered into battle with adversity and either were doomed or successful. But there is nothing as "oh, an enemy cruiser is reported, I'm scared I will be carefull from now on", as fleet admirals were cautioous all the time, even in home waters. But why is Intell so silly for you ? Don't you agree that Intell did a great part of the job for the allies during WW2 ? I believe this is true, so I believe that the game has to model that enormous edge they had, don't it ? Otherwize it would be like saying that LND2 with 5 Tac factors are silly for Germany in 1939, or saying that the Blitz table don't fit your need and forbidding it in your games. quote: ORIGINAL: LiquidSky �� WiF is a fantasy game.� I hope nobody is under any illusions that WiF models some sort of historical outcome.� It is a game, and many things have been changed to make the game enjoyable to play.� Many of those things favour the axis, because they needed some chance to be able to win.� Do you honestly believe that the Italian's should even be represented by as a major power in WWII?� That the Germans could have matched the allies in airpower?� �� In our group, we allow no rule discussion to revolve around 'history'.� We only allow a rule to be discussed for its 'fun factor'.� And possibly for play balance if a person needs a little help, although after 20 years of playing WiF, we dont need to do that anymore. I'll second that. And an option that allows a re-roll of a die or a secret roll of one is not to my taste, nor do I feel the game needs rebalancing to the extent that Intel does it. Most options are favorable to one side or the other - ITPOTE not so much - and the Doolittle raid got scared by a fishing boat, but this has all been discussed ad nauseum, ad infinitum, ad barfium, and I'm busy doing US Entry simulation runs.

Froonp -> RE: Options (4/28/2009 11:45:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp Yes but why ? I don't like ITPOTE because it is not realistic and, and that's the main point, not historical at all. Anywone is still to prove me wwrong by listing a few examples of historical fleet moves that were "slowed down" because of enemy unknown presence. As all the examples I provided the main list, and I can find hundreds others, wwe see that fleets zoomed their way, and stroke what they found, or entered into battle with adversity and either were doomed or successful. But there is nothing as "oh, an enemy cruiser is reported, I'm scared I will be carefull from now on", as fleet admirals were cautioous all the time, even in home waters. But why is Intell so silly for you ? Don't you agree that Intell did a great part of the job for the allies during WW2 ? I believe this is true, so I believe that the game has to model that enormous edge they had, don't it ? Otherwize it would be like saying that LND2 with 5 Tac factors are silly for Germany in 1939, or saying that the Blitz table don't fit your need and forbidding it in your games. quote: ORIGINAL: LiquidSky �� WiF is a fantasy game.� I hope nobody is under any illusions that WiF models some sort of historical outcome.� It is a game, and many things have been changed to make the game enjoyable to play.� Many of those things favour the axis, because they needed some chance to be able to win.� Do you honestly believe that the Italian's should even be represented by as a major power in WWII?� That the Germans could have matched the allies in airpower?� �� In our group, we allow no rule discussion to revolve around 'history'.� We only allow a rule to be discussed for its 'fun factor'.� And possibly for play balance if a person needs a little help, although after 20 years of playing WiF, we dont need to do that anymore. I'll second that. And an option that allows a re-roll of a die or a secret roll of one is not to my taste, nor do I feel the game needs rebalancing to the extent that Intel does it. Most options are favorable to one side or the other - ITPOTE not so much - and the Doolittle raid got scared by a fishing boat, but this has all been discussed ad nauseum, ad infinitum, ad barfium, and I'm busy doing US Entry simulation runs. OK OK, but it was about the Intell rule, not the ITPOTE. Intell favor the Allied, but, hey, I hope it does ! Who did Intell favor during the war, and how is it modeled in the game if you don't use intell ? Well, these are my reasons for always using it, there is no re-balancing issues in my choice. Also, secret rolls are not a problem within our group, we trust each other. We could play without revealing a single die roll. Sometime we don't even look at it, we trust the one who threw it.

Froonp -> RE: Options (4/28/2009 11:46:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LiquidSky �� WiF is a fantasy game.� I hope nobody is under any illusions that WiF models some sort of historical outcome.� It is a game, and many things have been changed to make the game enjoyable to play.� Many of those things favour the axis, because they needed some chance to be able to win.� Do you honestly believe that the Italian's should even be represented by as a major power in WWII?� That the Germans could have matched the allies in airpower?� �� In our group, we allow no rule discussion to revolve around 'history'.� We only allow a rule to be discussed for its 'fun factor'.� And possibly for play balance if a person needs a little help, although after 20 years of playing WiF, we dont need to do that anymore. Well, I guess we are in the early stages of the WiF FE addiction. We still think that it models some sort of historical activities, and we like that [:D] Too bad for you that you lost that state.

paulderynck -> RE: Options (4/29/2009 4:36:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp OK OK, but it was about the Intell rule, not the ITPOTE. Intell favor the Allied, but, hey, I hope it does ! Who did Intell favor during the war, and how is it modeled in the game if you don't use intell ? Well, these are my reasons for always using it, there is no re-balancing issues in my choice. Also, secret rolls are not a problem within our group, we trust each other. We could play without revealing a single die roll. Sometime we don't even look at it, we trust the one who threw it. I'd need to know all the other optionals you use/don't use before I could say the net result is balanced one way or the other. Right now I think the game with the optionals we use is quite well balanced, so we don't need Intel. And it's not to my taste not because we can't trust each other as you seem to imply but funnily enough for someone who thinks there is still a reality to the game as you do, it is because the set of effects seem to imply divine powers have been granted to one of the sides. "Re-roll a die" - What happened, did your side invent time travel and go back and drown the enemy's general in his baby tub?

brian brian -> RE: Options (4/29/2009 5:15:42 AM)
My favorite naval mission to consider in regards to In The Presence of the Enemy is the German decision to send the Bismarck west of Iceland, where they still ran into the British Patrol Line maintained by Heavy Cruisers. Kinda like the way it can work out in the game sometimes. Heavy Cruisers go to the high boxes around the North Atlantic while reaction forces wait it out in port to see what the Kriegsmarine might do. Using the Presence optional is very hard on the German ships...but very helpful for the Japanese. I have long thought though, that a given Major Power should be able to use one of it's own SUBs (not an Ally's, even a cooperating one) to get out of paying the movement penalty if the SUB is in the zone at the start of the movement phase. One of the tasks of SUBs was for recon after all. I like playing with Intell. I think a lot of players don't like it for more than the reason that the USA can buy up all of the goodies later on (which I hate....the Allies need no help in WiF, given equal opponents, as I feel Con results have been showing for a long time now). They have a hard time remembering and dreaming up uses for it in an already highly complicated game. (I think people have a similar issue with using Hidden Task Forces). It's hard enough to manage all of your units in all of their campaigns; adding more tools to your toolbox doesn't always simplify your job. I like using Intell for the Axis a lot though; knowing the weather in advance (your weathermen won a micro-battle in Greenland or some other Arctic island) can be critical for maximizing the efficiency of your impulse type decisions, and early in the game with few pieces on the board this is very important. For the Allies, I like using it to manipulate the die roll for Partisans, but I guess that will be going away in MWiF.

csharpmao -> RE: Options (4/29/2009 7:22:34 AM)
Hello, Answering the orinial question, I've also found this site (http://www.helsinki.fi/~vsaarine/wif/rules/) You will foud there , Rules (RAW 7.0) as .doc and .pdf (Part of the options can be found at chapter 22) List of optional rules (but related to rules version 6, so maybe there is some minor differences) List of scenarios with some advices I hope it can help you, and maybe others. Sharpmao

willycube -> RE: Options (4/29/2009 4:16:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp OK OK, but it was about the Intell rule, not the ITPOTE. Intell favor the Allied, but, hey, I hope it does ! Who did Intell favor during the war, and how is it modeled in the game if you don't use intell ? Well, these are my reasons for always using it, there is no re-balancing issues in my choice. Also, secret rolls are not a problem within our group, we trust each other. We could play without revealing a single die roll. Sometime we don't even look at it, we trust the one who threw it. I'd need to know all the other optionals you use/don't use before I could say the net result is balanced one way or the other. Right now I think the game with the optionals we use is quite well balanced, so we don't need Intel. And it's not to my taste not because we can't trust each other as you seem to imply but funnily enough for someone who thinks there is still a reality to the game as you do, it is because the set of effects seem to imply divine powers have been granted to one of the sides. "Re-roll a die" - What happened, did your side invent time travel and go back and drown the enemy's general in his baby tub? I try to read everyones point of view with total respect for ones feelings and their expertise in this game that I dont know yet, so why is it necessary to say "go back and drown the enemy's general in his baby tub" when Froonp is expressing his point of view, and clearly he knows what he is talking about, thats the stuff we got rid of 2 months ago. I truly dont understand this. Willy

Froonp -> RE: Options (4/29/2009 4:36:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulderynck And it's not to my taste not because we can't trust each other as you seem to imply but funnily enough for someone who thinks there is still a reality to the game as you do, it is because the set of effects seem to imply divine powers have been granted to one of the sides. "Re-roll a die" - What happened, did your side invent time travel and go back and drown the enemy's general in his baby tub? Reroll a die is 15 points, that is it is the most expensive intell option ever. I nearly 20 games, I think we never used it, because intell points tend to stay be in small numbers, and when they are over 10 or 20, generaly this transforms (in my group at least) in attempts to take the initiative, or modifying die rolls (5 points each). This said, there is not divine powers. My WiF Zen for this is : "The battle could have gone wrong, (bad die roll) but thank to extremely helpfull intell (re-rolled die) it was won (good re-roll)". Remember that you may be able to re-roll, but you may also be able to roll worse than your first roll (which is I believe the reason why we never use this). So this may as well translate into : "The battle could have gone wrong, (bad die roll) but thank to extremely deceitfull intell (re-rolled die) it was an uter defeat (re-rolled die is worse than first die). Also, keep in mind that sometime you are wasting intell in modifiers that finaly you don't use. Example, my enemy attacks me at +10, I think I can turn the tables with a little intell, and I annouce that I will modify the die roll (+1 / 0 / -1) (before it is cast). My enemy rolls a 4, which leads to the famous 3/1, I'm happy with that so I apply to it a modifier of 0 to keep it that way. I wasted my 5 intell points. Also, I can't count the times where the USA tried to steal the intitiative using intell (we call it that way) by rolling the die and giving it either to the allies or the axis, and when finally he lost. So Intell points go much more to the allied than the axis, but intell is not that much of a game breaker nor an all-mighty god like ability.

Froonp -> RE: Options (4/29/2009 4:38:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: csharpmao Hello, Answering the orinial question, I've also found this site (http://www.helsinki.fi/~vsaarine/wif/rules/) You will foud there , Rules (RAW 7.0) as .doc and .pdf (Part of the options can be found at chapter 22) List of optional rules (but related to rules version 6, so maybe there is some minor differences) List of scenarios with some advices I hope it can help you, and maybe others. Sharpmao You should not use this (RAW + optional rules) it is outdated.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

4.171875