Slitherine

quote:

I agree with you that if there are no ships in the naval combat, then there is no naval combat. The key word here is 'naval', with a clear implication of there being a navy present. If there are ships in the sea area but they are not included as part of the combat (i.e., in a sea section not included), then they are not fighting and there is no reason for the air planes to be flying. More or less the same thing you said.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck

The rule for overrunning units (11.11.6) is pretty straight-forward, apart from what happens with surprised or used Convoys. It says:

" [...] If a land unit from the other side moves into a port containing any of your naval units, they must rebase. Before they do, roll for each face-down or surprised naval unit there.
If you roll a ‘5’ or higher, you keep control of the unit. If you roll a ‘1’, the enemy major power takes control of it until destroyed (option 46: partisans destroy naval units instead of taking control). Place it in the Repair pool. On a roll of ‘2’ ~ ‘4’, it is destroyed. [...] "

The key sentence is if you roll a '1' for a naval unit (convoy), your enemy takes control of it *and places it in the Repair pool*. Since convoys can't be repaired, as they cannot be damaged, what happens to it? Does the overrunning player get control of it, or is it destroyed?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck

The rule for Chinese Warlords (22.4.15) says:

"[...] When a warlord’s home city is conquered (or captured by the other Chinese faction), the warlord unit is immediately removed from the game, even before other combats are resolved (and ones that would have included their units). [...]

The use of the word "conquered" here is problematic. That word, while obviously having a normal English meaning, has a specific in-game use, in conjunction with the fall of minors or majors. Am I correct in assuming that a better wording of the above rule should use the word "occupy", ie the same word used US Entry Action 10 - Japan occupies Chinese City? From the context of the rule, I think it seems obvious that this specific "conquest" could occur during combat, but I'd like some verification of this.

quote:


quote from rules:

A target hex can be any hex that contains an enemy controlled usable factory. A factory is usable if the controlling side could transport a resource to it and, if they did, it would produce a production point (see 13.6.1).

quote:

ORIGINAL: ullern
Problem number one is what the words "could transport a resource to it " means. Problem number two is what happens if the factory is later captured, destroyed, or it's impossible to take a resource at end of turn.

Problem number one first:
A fairly normal situation in China is that China still got Kunming, but the only way to transport resources to Kunming is via the Burma road. And for this example: say that none of the allies are willing to lend China any resources. I would claim that the Kunming factory is still usable with the above definition, because Commonwealth can lend it’s Burma oil to China. That CW didn’t choose do so this turn is none of the concern for the axis. The rules say the factory is usable if the “side” could transport a resource to it. And the allies can if they want to.

quote:

Another example of problem number one, which might have a different ruling than the previous example:
Say USA did lend a resource to China, but the CP needed to transport the resource is still in port in Manila. This is sort of the same issue up above. Because the Kunming factory could produce if another country on the same side sent out a CP - a single naval move.
(If you rule that the factory is usable in this situation, you have to consider ruling it usable if there is a CP anywhere on the map that would allow the resource to be transported.)

quote:

So the question is what does the words "could transport a resource to it " mean. The fact that the rules doesn’t allow you to change lend lease during the “implementing actions” it that enough to make it unusable. Could if the other side moved some units, as of right now?

quote:

Problem number two:
Simple example:
A factory is strategically bombarded, later it is captured. The first owner still looses the production point, and later looses the factory so he looses two production points in this example. (Actually this example is really not under any discussion at all for this is clarified in the rules: the rules states that production points lost in strategic bombardment “will be lost from the factory owner’s production point total for the turn.”)

More advanced example:
Russia: In this example the only resource that can be transported to the Krasnodar factory is the oil two hexes east. First the German strategically bombs Krasnodar. USSR looses a production point from the total. Later the German strategically bombs the oil resources. Now the factory is no longer usable, but it was when it was strategically bombed, so the production point lost is still lost.

Conclusion
The above example shows it’s possible for a country to get a negative number of production points. (Some of the rules needs to be clarified though.) The rules do also not state what happens when a country gets a negative number of production points so this does also need clarification.

quote:

A relevant example of the last point:
In this game France has already lost Metz and Algeria, and the Italian have ZOCed the resource in the alps leaving France with four resources in France. But at that point the front has temporarily stopped. The French are strategically bombarded and looses a total of six production points. Now there are only four usable resources in France, but France does also have the Senegal resource, the Iraq oil and the Indo China resource. And all these are linked by CP, so France can have seven production points if she wants to, minus six = one. But as always the number of CP at sea are too few for the allies, so at end of turn the CW and French agree that CW can use all the CPs for resource transportation. Leaving France with only 4 -6 = minus 2 production points. But in addition the CW did lend both a resource and a three BP to France. The CW looses the resource anyway, but CW sends the BP to France. Now France have -2 production points and receives 3 BPs, what happens?

quote:

With all the above examples you may think anything is allowed. That’s not the case: Say you tried to destroy a factory with strategic bombardment. You didn’t destroy it, but the production points in the hex are lost. You spend a HQ to unflipp the bombers to try a second round in the same turn. “BEEP!” Not allowed! This is stated two places: Most clearly it’s stated in one of the later paragraphs of the 11.7 rule “You can’t lose more production points in a turn than there are usable factories in the hex or more oil than there are oil resources there.” But it’s also stated in the first paragraph of target hexes: “A factory is usable if the controlling side could transport a resource to it and, if they did, it would produce a production point.”

quote:

The last part of that sentence is of course also important. A factory that is already successfully strategically bombarded would not produce a production point if a resource is transported to it. So that means the factory is considered not usable with this rule. The rule clearly states that only usable factories and oil resources can be targets, so this protects the factory from further bombing raids until next turn.
(What if the hex contained two factories and one of them isn’t usable because it already lost a production point to strategic bombardment, but the other factory is usable. Are both factories lost if you get two ** on the result table?)

Just my two cents ... err

quote:

3 - The captured factory that had already lost a production point through strategic bombing is different from the Krasnodor question but is a related example of redundant/overkill loss of production capacity. That the factory was usable at the time of the strategic bombing means that a resource was ‘committed’ to it, and the loss of a production point reflects the loss of both the factory and a resource (though which resource specifically is unknown). Once the factory is captured, it is removed from the major power’s factory group when determining production points. I would not penalize the major power twice for the loss of the factory. However, nor would I “give back” the resource point that was lost. So if the major power: (1) started the turn with 4 factories and 3 resource points, (2) lost a production point due to strategic bombing, and (3) had that same factory captured during the turn, I would say he has only 2 production points available, since he effectively has 3 factories and 2 resources available. If nothing changes by the end of the next turn, he would have 3 production points. Alternatively, if he started with 3 factories and 4 resources, and the same events transpired he would again have 2 production points (2 factories and 3 resources available). And lastly, given 3 factories and 3 resources, would also result in 2 production points.

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames

This may sound silly, but someone in our current game is under the impression that, in a naval combat with only planes involved, an air-to-air combat can still occur. I tried to tell him that without ships to target, there can be no bombing mission to escort.

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames

This may sound silly, but someone in our current game is under the impression that, in a naval combat with only planes involved, an air-to-air combat can still occur. I tried to tell him that without ships to target, there can be no bombing mission to escort.

Our gaming group was still confused, based on our various interpretations of the rules. Our solution was to allow an air combat as long as at least one side has air-to-sea factors involved.

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames
Our gaming group was still confused, based on our various interpretations of the rules. Our solution was to allow an air combat as long as at least one side has air-to-sea factors involved.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck

The rule for overrunning units (11.11.6) is pretty straight-forward, apart from what happens with surprised or used Convoys. It says:

" [...] If a land unit from the other side moves into a port containing any of your naval units, they must rebase. Before they do, roll for each face-down or surprised naval unit there.
If you roll a ‘5’ or higher, you keep control of the unit. If you roll a ‘1’, the enemy major power takes control of it until destroyed (option 46: partisans destroy naval units instead of taking control). Place it in the Repair pool. On a roll of ‘2’ ~ ‘4’, it is destroyed. [...] "

The key sentence is if you roll a '1' for a naval unit (convoy), your enemy takes control of it *and places it in the Repair pool*. Since convoys can't be repaired, as they cannot be damaged, what happens to it? Does the overrunning player get control of it, or is it destroyed?

I'd say that you take control of it immediately.

I say that because the rule for "taking control" of overrunned ships had them being immediately controlled by the overrunning power in the initial rule. The rule was then changed in that now the overrunned unit is not more immediately controlled, but must be "repaired" first, but convoys were not thought of IMO.

I think that this "repair" is in fact the refurbishing of the ship with miscellaneous equipment (navigation instruments, communication, detection...), maybe various weapons (all Browning or Vickers MG being replaced by MG17 for example), and also a whole crew from the new major power.

As convoys can't be "damaged", they can only be immediately transfered to the controller.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mmn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck
The rule for overrunning units (11.11.6) is pretty straight-forward, apart from what happens with surprised or used Convoys. It says:

" [...] If a land unit from the other side moves into a port containing any of your naval units, they must rebase. Before they do, roll for each face-down or surprised naval unit there.
If you roll a ‘5’ or higher, you keep control of the unit. If you roll a ‘1’, the enemy major power takes control of it until destroyed (option 46: partisans destroy naval units instead of taking control). Place it in the Repair pool. On a roll of ‘2’ ~ ‘4’, it is destroyed. [...] "

The key sentence is if you roll a '1' for a naval unit (convoy), your enemy takes control of it *and places it in the Repair pool*. Since convoys can't be repaired, as they cannot be damaged, what happens to it? Does the overrunning player get control of it, or is it destroyed?

I'd say that you take control of it immediately.

I say that because the rule for "taking control" of overrunned ships had them being immediately controlled by the overrunning power in the initial rule. The rule was then changed in that now the overrunned unit is not more immediately controlled, but must be "repaired" first, but convoys were not thought of IMO.

I think that this "repair" is in fact the refurbishing of the ship with miscellaneous equipment (navigation instruments, communication, detection...), maybe various weapons (all Browning or Vickers MG being replaced by MG17 for example), and also a whole crew from the new major power.

As convoys can't be "damaged", they can only be immediately transfered to the controller.

This occurred in my gaming group last sunday. After a bit of discussion we agreed that the overrunning power would take control of half the CPs (round up). We thought that since 2 CPs make up a ship it could suffer a D result (which we thought was in effect happening) leaving 1 CP to take control of.

/Morten

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Here is what the Clarification document from Harry have about Strat bombing :

***********************************
11.7 Strategic bombardment
Q If the hex later changes sides what happens to the effects?
Ans> Destroyed factories stay destroyed.

But what about the effects of the strategic bombing. are
they lost, applied to the power bombed, or the power owning
the factory hex, what affect does the change in the
number of useable factories have?
Ans The points are still lost to the major power that controlled
the factory during the bombing, even if it changes hands
later in the turn. Please explain your last question - what
case concerns you? Date: 11/6/97

Target hexes
Q 11.7, Target hexes
Replace the 1st paragraph with:
“A target hex can be any usable enemy controlled factory
hex. A factory hex is usable if the controlling side could
transport a resource to it and, if they did, it would produce
a production point (see 13.6.1).”
What is meant by ‘could’ here
World in Flames Clarifications 35
a) has a path by which a resource can be shipped to the
hex.
b) Is permitted by 13.6.1 to ship a resource to it.
Ans “Could” means that you are in a position AT THAT
MOMENT to transport a resource there (e.g. convoy
points in position if necessary). Date: 8/6/97

The bombing
Q 11.7, The bombing
Replace the 5th paragraph with:
“You can’t lose more production points in a turn than
there are usable factories in the hex or more oil than there
are oil resources there.”
Is this usable in the sense of ‘usable factory hex’ defined
above, or of ‘usable factory’ defined in 13.6.1?
Ans In the above sense. Date: 8/6/97
***********************************

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
There will be A2A in a sea area as long as one side has FTR. Having bombers presents is irrelevant, and having ships is irrelevant too. Even air groups composed only of FTR will fight each other. Both try to dominate the same stretch of water, so why would they not fight and wait for ships to be present ?
Air Groups try to win Air superiority over sea areas in the absence of ships, to allow for vulnerable ships to come latter, when the A2A strength of the enemy is softened.

quote:

I can accept that rules interpretation. My only question is: why no fighter-to-fighter combats over land? Certainly air superiority is important there as well. Of course this is a game, and the rules can't always make perfect sense, but if fighter-only combats are possible at sea, it seems they should be allowed over land as well.

quote:

The clarifications you found here are quite good, and I am happy to accept them. I will point out though that this disallows many of the examples I wrote, and is also inconsistent with Patrice's first answer, but in line with Steve's answer.

quote:

The loophole example Steve refered to in my mail exist though . (Steve's point 4)

quote:

4 - The answer to your question concerning France losing 6 production points due to strategic bombing hinges on the convoys. At one time the WIF rules had the players designate which resources where going to be routed through which convoys at the start of a turn. That is no longer the case in WIFFE. Instead, the routing of resources through convoys is done during the production phase. Because of this, the loophole you describe exists: the French player can purposely starve his factories of resources by devoting his convoys to transporting CW resources. This has to do with the pipeline constraints imposed by convoys when determining total production points. The French would end up with zero production points (negative production points being meaningless). They would receive the 3 build points from CW.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frederyck

What happens to a minor country's units if the country first is aligned, then becomes neutral and then is aligned again? For example, say that

a) the Russian player claims Bessarabia but is refused -> Russia must declare war against Rumania (19.6.2 Rumania)
b) when this happens, Rumania is allied to for example Germany. (19.2 Entering the war)
c) Rumanian units are set up according to the rules (19.4 Minor country units)
d) Russia attacks one Rumanian unit and destroys it but fails to take the hex. The German player decides to add this unit to his force pool. (19.4 Minor country units - Production)
e) In the next peace step, Germany enforces a peace between USSR and Rumania (19.6.2 Rumania), making Rumania neutral once more.

What happens to the Rumanian units now? There are a few on the map, a few Reserves on the production circle and one in the German force pool.

quote:

And what happens later the next turn if Germany decides to align Rumania again?

quote:

There are probably some applicable rules for this somewhere, but I am rather uncertain which ones to apply in this situation.

quote:

The rule about conquest convers this doesn't it ?
This is a complete conquest of Rumania, so Rumanian units are removed from the game (from memory). Whatever, the effects of complete conquest should be applied to Rumania.

quote:

I am also not sure where you're coming from, Patrice. If Germany manages to enforce a peace between Rumania and the USSR, it is pretty clear that Rumania is not conquered, and therefore does not suffer the consequences of conquest.

quote:

would say that in the event of an enforced peace, all Rumanian units on the map, on the production spiral, in the construction, repair or reserve pools and in the German force pool are removed from play. If/when Rumania is subsequently aligned, their units are returned to the map according to the normal alignment rules without any reductions to their forces from being conquered and liberated.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

would say that in the event of an enforced peace, all Rumanian units on the map, on the production spiral, in the construction, repair or reserve pools and in the German force pool are removed from play. If/when Rumania is subsequently aligned, their units are returned to the map according to the normal alignment rules without any reductions to their forces from being conquered and liberated.

And I say that I agree totaly with you .