RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (Full Version)

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



Message

AllenK -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 1:58:17 PM)

One rail move: MAR from Gibraltar to Gdynia in Poland.

Italians move a MECH back to Saville.

The Japanese continue the slow retre.. erm ... tactical re-positioning towards the coast.

Over to Mayhemizer for the rest of the impulse.



Mayhemizer_slith -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 2:06:47 PM)

I will continue tonight, about in 4-5 hours from now.



Mayhemizer_slith -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 7:16:04 PM)

Germany moves few units in USSR border.

Germany rebases Ju52 and Ju88 to east. Ju88C rebases one hex NE to close gap in Baltic Sea from Allied bombers.

Italy rebases Ju87 to east and fighter from Gibraltar close to Madrid.

On a 10 turn continues.



warspite1 -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 7:44:57 PM)

If I declare war on Italy (with the Soviets) I get a 'Relocate Units Digression' - and the two Italian bombers are earmarked for relocation. What is that all about please?



Mayhemizer_slith -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 7:47:55 PM)

I think it is not allowed to be in 3 hexes of USSR border. ATR needs to move one hex west, not sure about Stuka.

Edit: If Axis can choose, Stuka moves 2 hexes SW.



warspite1 -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 7:48:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mayhemizer

I think it is not allowed to be in 3 hexes of USSR border. ATR needs to move one hex west, not sure about Stuka.
warspite1

Okay thanks



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 7:53:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mayhemizer

Edit: If Axis can choose, Stuka moves 2 hexes SW.

You didn't get to choose. The Stuka was ordered to Krakow.



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 9:30:38 PM)

There will be a slight delay with our impulse. I thought I would get the naval part done fairly quickly. But I had no idea that sending a convoy point to the West Med would screw up the Allied convoys. And the hour is to late for me to have any patience fixing convoy routes. That shouldn't even need fixing!



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 9:32:15 PM)

Anyone wonder how placing a CP in the West, and East Med, could screw up the Allied resource transportation? Gibraltar closed the Mediterranean route after all.



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 9:36:45 PM)

Well. The answer is that France, from time to time, has traded the Algerian resource to CW. It has been railed to Morocco and then it only needed 2 convoy points to reach a factory in UK or Bilbao. Rather cost effective for CW.

So this is how it used to be.

[image]local://upfiles/29130/64A3F3038AF7470A90CADBE8D3C75AB2.jpg[/image]



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 9:41:27 PM)

Then, for supply purposes, I placed a CP in both the East and West Med.

And MWIF, in its wisdom, decided that the two convoy point route to Bilbao from Algeria wasn't optimal enough. It decided that there was a better route. No matter that the convoy points needed for that route were already used by other resources. Efficiency, after all, is important!

Here is the new route.

[image]local://upfiles/29130/5D83FFDFA261428C9B730E8BA63A369E.jpg[/image]



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/11/2017 9:43:20 PM)

I couldn't understand how adding a CP to the East Med could reduce CW production so I investigated and when I found the answer I was completely drained of energy. I am sorry about that and of the delay. [:(]



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 11:38:19 AM)

I am sorry to say that the convoy situation is worse than ever. It might very well be that I do not give the correct orders but what I used to do doesn't work any longer. And I am tired of workarounds. With US into the war the convoy system worked fairly well for me. And then we updated and it seems worse than ever.

[image]local://upfiles/29130/3E9C81DECAB541C49AC0191749E177E8.jpg[/image]



AllenK -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 11:42:01 AM)

If you want a hand, let me know what you are trying to accomplish, send me the file and I'll have a go. Although, if my faulty navigation is anything to go by, you might get all the right routes but not necessarily in the right order.



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 11:48:52 AM)

Thank you.

Just take the current save you mailed us and see if you can change the route from US to Libreville. If you can change it so the convoy route goes through the Caribbean and Mouths of the Amazon then I will make a new effort. Every time I try it , at once, reverts back to the route I do not want used.



AllenK -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 12:37:02 PM)

I can get it to work but only in US naval movement by taking 3 CP's out of the East Coast. Doing so doesn't appear to effect the US or CW production but I don't know whether you have plans for those CP's that need them to remain in place. I suspect (and hope) if they were being utilised for sending resources/BP's elsewhere, then the game would be forced to use the route you want in the same way it is when I removed the CP's.



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 12:46:50 PM)

Thank you for the help, AllenK. [&o] [:)]

But not really the answer I was hoping for.

I can get the Algeria resource going the way I want if I do not have a convoy route through the Med. But if I want supply in the Med I get the convoy route automatically. I'll mail you a save and if you have the time I would appreciate if you tried to send the Algeria resource to UK, or Spain, by using just two convoy points. (Not through the Med and around entire Africa).

If not, then I am back to either misusing lots of convoy points or finding a workaround.



AllenK -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 2:13:45 PM)

Okay, I'm sending the file back to you. It's more in the category of work-around but by idling the Algerian resource, rerouting a couple of the Canadian resources and putting a CP into the Bay of Bengal you have all factories working. It's not completely efficient as it's taking 2-3 more CP's to ship one of the South African resources, rather than the Algerian one, to Bilbao.



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 8:40:06 PM)

And it uses up oil for production.

I thought that I finally should be able to efficiently use the convoy points to maximize production and be able to save some oil.

[>:]



AllenK -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 9:01:44 PM)

You have 4 oils being saved and every factory producing. I left all the oils as you had set them for saving or production. You didn't specify you wanted to save more and looking at the CP set up you have, I don't think I could get any more non-oil resources to a factory without putting in more CP's.

Your appreciation for help freely given, sir, is duly noted.



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 9:33:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AllenK

You have 4 oils being saved and every factory producing. I left all the oils as you had set them for saving or production. You didn't specify you wanted to save more and looking at the CP set up you have, I don't think I could get any more non-oil resources to a factory without putting in more CP's.

Your appreciation for help freely given, sir, is duly noted.

I am sorry.

I should have been more clear in my answer. It had nothing to do with your assistance. I truly appreciate it. However, your solution was the same as mine. A solution we shouldn't be forced to make.

You are indeed correct that more CPs are needed to get non-oil resources to factories. But I shouldn't have to do so. You shouldn't have to do so. Now we had to idle the Algeria resource. It costs CPs. The Cyprus resource can not be used because it takes the same route around Africa. It also costs CPs.

Just take a look at this convoy route in the picture below. It can't be changed. Fortunately, this resource doesn't override the others if they use the convoy in Cape Verde. But I have plenty of convoy points in the Caribbean that should be transporting resources that don't. I have to move them to other sea areas. More risky sea areas because the convoy lines can not be changed. During this game CW had to, in my opinion had to, use oil for production instead of resources just because the programmer doesn't see the issue. Or want to fix it. Or for whatever reason I never understood. CW also have had to use a lot more convoy points at sea than they should because the routes have never been as optimal as they should. Because they couldn't be changed that way.

Some of this, I am sure, could have been fixed if I was better at it. But it shouldn't be that hard.

So I am truly sorry, Sir, that I failed to clearly direct my frustration where it belongs.



[image]local://upfiles/29130/2B49D8775F3B424C882436E2BD20EA4B.jpg[/image]



AllenK -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/12/2017 11:13:50 PM)

Thank you Orm.

I've had another go. I'm not sure if the manual over-ride function for routing is working correctly as it doesn't seem to over-ride and force a route through and take another resource offline if the CP's aren't available. By taking the CP out of the West Med, for which the only purpose it was serving was putting the French sub in supply, I think I've got things about as optimum as they can be.

Note, the Cyprus resource would always have to go the long way around Africa due to the Gibraltar Straits being closed. The other idle resource is in India and I don't think you have the CP's available to form a chain to the UK. You are now saving 5 oils.

If you look around the map you'll see a fair number of CW CP's returned to port, as the US CP's are now shipping the resources.

Edit: If you need to have that CP in the West Med, you could try putting it back now everything's set up. If it all goes pear shaped again, then a workaround is to send the Algeria resource to Canada. Then send a UK resource to Bilbao (using the CP now available in Biscay). You will then need to send a Canadian resource to U.K. You will probably need to put some CP's back to sea for this.



rkr1958 -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/13/2017 1:25:45 AM)

It makes no sense to me that your convoy routes can get so screwed up by "adding" a CP to a sea area. I've experienced this countless number of times. My solution, or workaround" is to idle the offending resource that unnecessarily "gobbles" up CP points like PacMan. Then I edit the game file to increase a saved oil by one point near the factory that went idle when I idled the offending resource. I then use that saved oil for production to offset the resource I had to idle. Not elegant but this whole thing takes me less than 5-minutes versus spending 1 or 2, or even more, frustrating hours working on to solve it but never getting solved and giving up!



brian brian -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/13/2017 2:54:37 AM)

that seems like it will be the best solution, going forward. just set up an oil somewhere, say on a non-factory city, that the other side promises not to bomb. Then increase this marker once in a while via editing the game file, and only use the oil when MWiF refuses to allocate convoys the way the players wish. Kind of a way to get a manual override on the production system.



warspite1 -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/13/2017 6:27:50 AM)

quote:

My solution, or workaround" is to idle the offending resource that unnecessarily "gobbles" up CP points like PacMan. Then I edit the game file to increase a saved oil by one point near the factory that went idle when I idled the offending resource. I then use that saved oil for production to offset the resource I had to idle.


quote:

that seems like it will be the best solution, going forward. just set up an oil somewhere, say on a non-factory city, that the other side promises not to bomb. Then increase this marker once in a while via editing the game file, and only use the oil when MWiF refuses to allocate convoys the way the players wish. Kind of a way to get a manual override on the production system.


With the greatest respect (and I am genuinely pleased that you have something that works for you) that is not the best solution. Editing game files? Promises not to do this or that and if a happens put your left leg in and if b occurs you put your left leg out. Right. I don't even know what that means.

A computer game is supposed to make life easier. Well this game is actually much harder and much more complicated than the board game. Why not add an optional override capability? That way, worst case, you still have to do what you would in the board game (so no time saved), but at least you know at the end of it you have the right number of CP's on the board, and you simply insert the number of production points, no. of oil point etc into an override table. These nos. are then used for a) checking trade agreements are met b) checking build points available for production.

It was decided that netplay would be the overriding priority. As has been pointed out repeatedly, what is the point of that when the game is still broken? The game needs fixing in key areas and has been since launch - but those areas are simply ignored and, when whole gaming days are lost like yesterday, the frustration is off the chart.





Mayhemizer_slith -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/13/2017 8:25:39 AM)

Override is a great idea. Being able to manually fix production and saved oils would be awesome!



AllenK -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/13/2017 1:29:46 PM)

I'll post this to Tech Support later as it encapsulates convoy problems. An algorithm that picks a route through 11 sea zones over one that takes 2 is in need of some adjustments.

On it's own it would be a nuisance but not being able to change it because manual convoy routing appears to have stopped working is a bit of a killer.



Nikolai II -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/13/2017 10:03:00 PM)

Now that I have reached the end of the thread I thought I should add my appreciation for your work in reporting about the game you played (while also bettering it). It's reminicent of the old WiF annual that could have the occasional AAR as well. Thanks. [:)]



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/14/2017 10:31:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikolai II

Now that I have reached the end of the thread I thought I should add my appreciation for your work in reporting about the game you played (while also bettering it). It's reminicent of the old WiF annual that could have the occasional AAR as well. Thanks. [:)]

[&o] [:)]

I hope that you continue to follow our war as it unfolds, so that you can see all the dumb moves I make. Hopefully, some of my mistakes can be taken for brilliance when I have luck on my side.

Plenty of fun playing the game. Even more fun that someone takes their time reading it. Thank you.



Orm -> RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR (3/14/2017 10:35:04 AM)

USSR declared war on Italy.

USA aligns Brazil.

Land: USSR, China
Naval: France, CW, USA

No Port Strikes. No naval air.

Naval Movement:

CW:
One CP is sent to replace each of the convoy points lost in the East Med and the Bay of Bengal. One CP is also sent to West Med.

HMS Furious sail to the 3-box of Arabian Sea.

A couple of British cruisers sail to the Red Sea.

A British cruiser reinforce the 0-box of the Arabian Sea.

HMAS Canberra patrols the Tasman Sea.

France:
The French Submarine begins patrolling the Italian Coast.

US:
The US Marine Corps sail from the West Coast to the Austral Sea area. Escorted by one cruiser.

USS Saratoga and USS Enterprise along with two escorting cruisers raid the Marianas.

Brazil send out their merchant fleet to assist with the convoys to UK. Brazil also begins to patrol the convoy lanes with their fine battleships.

The last submarine in Singapore is sent to China Sea.

The Fleet in India is sent to South China Sea.

USS Wasp sail for Cape Verde.

One TRS in SA load a HQI and sail to the Raid Sea. The second TRS in SA load a INF and sail to the Arabian Sea. Each are escorted by one BB.

USS Lexington sail to the 3-box of Arabian Sea.

Two cruisers patrols the SE Indian Ocean.

Plenty of sea areas available for naval combat.

[image]local://upfiles/29130/F50C3427B64844C19691607E08F109A5.jpg[/image]
Picture from Jan/Feb '42 Impulse #13 (Allied) - Naval Combat



Page: <<   < prev  147 148 [149] 150 151   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625