Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

Ohh I think I know this one! Malta and Egypt are territoriy and minor country in respective order aligned to CW which does not cooperate with USSR. This means at least you need to have HQs for the foreign troop commitment. As for placing if satisfying the FTC I don´t know, perhaps only permitted set up in places you control or in other countries if you cooperate with them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

All right, here I am, back again with an arcane rules interpretation.

Why can't the USSR set up units in Egypt (or Malta for that matter) at the start of Decline and Fall?

1 - The setup instructions say the USSR sets up its units in Europe, which includes North Africa.

2 - Egypt is not a major power's home country, so foreign troop commitment restrictions shouldn't apply.

It is not that I want to set up units there; it is just that I want to know which rule forbids it.

If none can be found, then I will change the setup location for the USSR and limit them to USSR/Baltic States/Finland/ ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

Ohh I think I know this one! Malta and Egypt are territoriy and minor country in respective order aligned to CW which does not cooperate with USSR. This means at least you need to have HQs for the foreign troop commitment. As for placing if satisfying the FTC I don´t know, perhaps only permitted set up in places you control or in other countries if you cooperate with them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

All right, here I am, back again with an arcane rules interpretation.

Why can't the USSR set up units in Egypt (or Malta for that matter) at the start of Decline and Fall?

1 - The setup instructions say the USSR sets up its units in Europe, which includes North Africa.

2 - Egypt is not a major power's home country, so foreign troop commitment restrictions shouldn't apply.

It is not that I want to set up units there; it is just that I want to know which rule forbids it.

If none can be found, then I will change the setup location for the USSR and limit them to USSR/Baltic States/Finland/ ...

I think that it is because 24.1.6 says that :

********************************
24.1.6 Setting up
(...)
Where to set up
(...)
If the set up gives you some latitude (e.g. “Europe” or “Burma”), you can set up the unit in any hex you or a co-operating major power controls in that place.
A neutral major power can only set up in hexes it controls.
********************************
The CW controls Egypt, and Malta, and the CW is not a Major Power with whom the USSR cooperates.

I think that you are confusing foreign troop commitment, which is a way to enter places that belong to countries you don't cooperate with, with non cooperation which is a state that exist or don't exist.
I mean, Egypt is CW controlled, and as such don't cooperate with the USSR. This means that the USSR can enter Egypt (because a major can always enter a minor even if it don't cooperate with it), but Egypt and the CW nonetheless don't cooperate with the USSR.

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

Oh dear, we have played those rules completly wrong then... good to know how it is supposed to be played then 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Well, then we can add another exception to the one for the Chinese in Burma. In the Decline and Fall scenario the US sets up units in China, a major power with which it does not cooperate. I'll write the code that way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Well, then we can add another exception to the one for the Chinese in Burma. In the Decline and Fall scenario the US sets up units in China, a major power with which it does not cooperate. I'll write the code that way.

I think that you can safely make the assumption that each time the setup charts indicate to setup a unit where 24.1.6 would prohibit it to setup, then this means that this is an exception.
For example, if a setup chart told you to setup Russians unit in Egypt, then this would be an exception.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

OK, I hate to ask this question, but one part of the new errata or optionals in the Annual, I forget which, creates a question for me. When using Option 48, Oil, the new capability for one Major Power to use oil owned by another Major Power is intriguing. Seems like a no-brainer, we don't need to simulate administrative details of exactly when oil is transferred where in a game with 2 month turns. But when you go to use this rule, what are some limits on using it? I'm not sure if Steve will include it in MWiF, but he will quickly come across these questions if he does. Let's say the Italians use oil-dependent units worth 1.8 oil points. Then let's say in the same turn the Germans use 2.0 such points. Now, can the Italians say they borrow .4 from the Germans, so the Italians use one saved oil point and the Germans only 2, since they would then use 1.4 and 2.4 respectively? (1.4 rounds down to 1.0 for using oil in whole integer amounts.) I'm not real concerned with which way to answer that, but it would kinda need to be answered to use the rule.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian
OK, I hate to ask this question, but one part of the new errata or optionals in the Annual, I forget which, creates a question for me. When using Option 48, Oil, the new capability for one Major Power to use oil owned by another Major Power is intriguing. Seems like a no-brainer, we don't need to simulate administrative details of exactly when oil is transferred where in a game with 2 month turns. But when you go to use this rule, what are some limits on using it? I'm not sure if Steve will include it in MWiF, but he will quickly come across these questions if he does. Let's say the Italians use oil-dependent units worth 1.8 oil points. Then let's say in the same turn the Germans use 2.0 such points. Now, can the Italians say they borrow .4 from the Germans, so the Italians use one saved oil point and the Germans only 2, since they would then use 1.4 and 2.4 respectively? (1.4 rounds down to 1.0 for using oil in whole integer amounts.) I'm not real concerned with which way to answer that, but it would kinda need to be answered to use the rule.

Good point. I think the intent was for tracing the U.S. Fleet's oil when based in Australia or India and that whole numbers were forseen but I agree this will come up as either a rules abuse or a "gamer" ploy unless clarified.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

OK, I hate to ask this question, but one part of the new errata or optionals in the Annual, I forget which, creates a question for me. When using Option 48, Oil, the new capability for one Major Power to use oil owned by another Major Power is intriguing. Seems like a no-brainer, we don't need to simulate administrative details of exactly when oil is transferred where in a game with 2 month turns. But when you go to use this rule, what are some limits on using it? I'm not sure if Steve will include it in MWiF, but he will quickly come across these questions if he does. Let's say the Italians use oil-dependent units worth 1.8 oil points. Then let's say in the same turn the Germans use 2.0 such points. Now, can the Italians say they borrow .4 from the Germans, so the Italians use one saved oil point and the Germans only 2, since they would then use 1.4 and 2.4 respectively? (1.4 rounds down to 1.0 for using oil in whole integer amounts.) I'm not real concerned with which way to answer that, but it would kinda need to be answered to use the rule.

Good point. I think the intent was for tracing the U.S. Fleet's oil when based in Australia or India and that whole numbers were forseen but I agree this will come up as either a rules abuse or a "gamer" ploy unless clarified.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norman42
Its a new ruling from the 2008 annual, I assume.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norman42
Its a new ruling from the 2008 annual, I assume.

You assume well Norman.
This is an errata from the Annual 2008, at page 50.

Quote from the Annual :
***************************
Oil (AfA option 48, WiF 13.5.1)
Co-operating major powers may freely use each other’s oil, provided the oil’s owner consents.
***************************

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
This ploy is against the rule.

If the Italian has 1.8 oil point to reorg units, they NEED to use 2 oil resources. They can use 1 German and 1 Italian, or 2 Italians or 2 Germans, but they NEED to SPEND 2 Oil points.
The Germans having 2.0 oil points needed to reorg units NEED to use 2 oil resources too.

So, in this case, there are 4 oil points to SPEND, whatever you decide as the origin of the oil.

There is nothing to add to the rule to make this enforced, and no clarification from Harry to ask, this is clear from the rule itself already.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

Does Bill Clinton write WiF rules? The answer would depend on what your defition of 'is' is, I guess. Re-reading the rule when I got all the way home from my first WiF gaming session of 2008 (checking email along the way at a pit-stop), I noticed the word 'freely'. So to me, you could borrow just a few tenths from the other Major Power, cuz you can do it 'freely'. So, I don't think it is clear from the rule at all. 'Freely' kind of opens it up pretty wide, imo.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

Yes, I am serious. The question is...can you borrow just a few tenths from the other MP, or can you only borrow integer amounts? It could be played either way. I lean towards allowing borrowing tenths. If you can borrow tenths, WiF players will inevitably use that to maximize efficiency of the rounding.

Meanwhile, the newest twist to the oil rules about ships still allows you to use oil cut off in obscure pockets...by just using it for ships at sea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

If Italy has 1.7 oil units to flip face-up, and Germany has 2.1, Italy could use 0.3 from the Germans. Italy would use 1.4, and Germany would use 2.4. Then the Axis uses a total of 3 oil instead of 4. I think you might as well play it that way. It will be a slight gain in efficiency for Italy and Germany, and the three western Allies from the mid-game on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Taxman66 is probably on the right track: RAW and the Annual oil rule use 10ths of oil counters because even though theoretically there is little limit to your oil aside from what is in the rules, the counter mix & counter piles limit the use of oil markers in table-top WiF. MWiF has no such restriction. If each saved oil generates 10 oil points, you probably don't need the "free" .4 oil since you no longer are removing a whole oil counter (10 oil pts) when you spend 5-9 oil points.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

In a recent discussion with a friend we had some trouble with simultaneus conquest.

Example 1.
USSR declares war on Persia. Germany gets control of Persia. Germany and CW is at war. Iraq is a CW minor. USSR units move into Tehran. The Persian cav moves into Baghdad. In the conquest step Persia is conquered by USSR and Iraq is conquered by Germany (since the hexes in Iraq is converted to German control).

Now to the tricky example.

Example 2.
USSR declares war on Persia. Germany gets control of Persia. Iraq is a USSR minor. Germany and USSR are NOT at war. Iraq moves it cav into Tehran and reverts it to USSR control. Persia moves it cav into Baghdad. The hexes stays Persian since Germany is not at war with Iraq(USSR). In the conquest step USSR is in control of Tehran and conquers Persia. Persia is in control of Baghdad. What happens to Iraq?

I am not comfortable with what comes to my mind. Persia conquers Iraq. Germany conquers Iraq. Iraq stays a USSR minor.



RAW7 AUG04
13.7.1 Conquest
You can only conquer a home country or territory if you are at war with the major power or minor country that controls it.
All conquest in a turn occurs simultaneously.
Minor countries never conquer anything. The home country or territory is instead conquered by the minor’s controlling major power (unless it is not at war, see 2.5).
2.5 Control
However, hexes taken from an enemy major power (or its controlled minors) are controlled by the major power taking them regardless of whether those hexes are taken by units of the major power or its controlled minors, unless the major powers are not at war with each other (in which case the hexes are controlled by the minor country taking them).


-Orm