Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish

Well we are, but if a supplied unit can be disorganized then it follows that the status of organization is not dependent on supply. So why then must an unsupplied unit not be able to reorganize?

What is about supply that has to do with organization? Disorganizing a unit does not rob it of it's food or ammo; so why then is more food and ammo needed to reorganize?

I think my problem is I am not as astute as you are about the game as I have never played anyone. Let me explain form a newbies view point[me].

We have a supplied combat unit going into battle in MWIF, the unit gets a soso die roll and becomes disorganized which means in reality they have taken man power loses, equipment losses, and so on.

Now it calls on it's HQ's for supply and depending on the player he or [she] decides to resupply the disorganized unit at the cost of itself becoming disorganized and the HQ unit can not be reorganized even though it is in total supply, until the end of the turn. My question might be if no HQ unit is available, and no supply or reorg. transport plane unit available, then supplied by whom to be reorganized.

Bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Maybe I do not understand supply correctly in MWIF, very possible. If someone suggested to me that a German infantry unit 7/3 got disorganized in combat and it was isolated and it was not able to get resupplied by either a supply path to a HQ unit or a supply transport air unit and it was allowed to be reorganized at the end of a turn but due to losses it became a 5/3 unit I could live with that but that does not fly in MWIF.

So for that reason I believe that optional rule 47 must be in the game [oh okay optional]

Bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Maybe I do not understand supply correctly in MWIF, very possible. If someone suggested to me that a German infantry unit 7/3 got disorganized in combat and it was isolated and it was not able to get resupplied by either a supply path to a HQ unit or a supply transport air unit and it was allowed to be reorganized at the end of a turn but due to losses it became a 5/3 unit I could live with that but that does not fly in MWIF.

So for that reason I believe that optional rule 47 must be in the game [oh okay optional]

Bo

I think you're fixated on supply and the idea that disorganization involves the partial weakening of a counter by losses. I don't think that that is necessarily the case with this game. Corps level combat is an abstraction, and this game only has reduction in strength for supply situations. Units that survive combat are otherwise whole, even when disorganized they defend at their full strength.

That is, the German 7/3 is not disorganized because of any partial losses or use of material but because it is scattered all over the hex in away that is not conducive to combat initiative or going anywhere as a unit.

Of course the beauty of Rule 47 is that it incorporates the ideas you are quite correctly attributing to what's happening when playing with such rules. The rule adds depth but at the cost of complexity and perhaps to the odds of achieving a balanced game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Consider Bordeaux, Calais, and Rabaul: the Axis forces in those places were out of supply and isolated for months, (Rabaul for years), but maintained their cohesion. Rabaul did so in the face of continuous bombing raids.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral Delabroglio

quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

Consider Bordeaux, Calais, and Rabaul: the Axis forces in those places were out of supply and isolated for months, (Rabaul for years), but maintained their cohesion. Rabaul did so in the face of continuous bombing raids.

IIRC the German pockets on the Atlantic coast were ignored and kept bottled for three reasons, IMO in decreasing order :
1- The ports had been damaged to the point that they would have been useless
2- Therefore, the Allies did not wish to send good troops to root the Germans out when they could rely on poorly equipped French troops to wait them out
3- On the occasions when the US tried to attack entrenched Germans, they used shore bombardment and planes to "soften" the Germans and managed to inflict politically awkward casualties on French civilians. Therefore they decided not to become known as butchers and let the Germans starve the French civilians insead.

Isolated, face up unit : able to defend properly but unable to take offensive actions. If ignored, keeps enough ammunition to resist.
Isolated, face down : battle weary, ammunition depleted, especially the fancy artillery rounds. The unit has a limited defensive power, depending on its morale (white print elite or black print recruits); still enough of a fighting force to steal enoughb of the civilians' food.

German pocket at Stalingrad : the Russians partly starved them out, but kept pushing, i.e. attacking them. The trapped army could be represented in WiF terms by two corps (1 white print, 1 black print) and a division.
December : 1st Russian attack. Germans loose 1 or 2 units and the remaining one(s) gets flipped. Russian attackers flipped also, no more attack since Rokossovski was busy elsewhere and the remaining Germans were not a threat anymore.
January : 2nd Russian attack. Pocket eliminated.
WiF does not make the distinction between an eliminated unit, as in "every single soldier killed" and an eliminated unit, as in "the survivors surrendered".

Best regards

quote:

D2.3 Perform actions
The major powers that didn’t pass perform these steps in this order (their action choice will limit what they can do ~ see action limits table):
(a) Port attacks
(b) Naval air missions
(c) Naval movement
(d) Your naval combat
(e) Opponent’s naval combat
(f) Strategic bombardment
(g) Carpet bombing (option 32)
(h) Ground strike missions
(i) Rail movement
(j) Land movement
(k) Air transport
(l) Debark land units at sea
(m) Invasions
(n) Paradrops
(o) Land combat
(p) Air rebases
(q) Reorganisation

11.11 Land movement
Land movement is the normal way land units move around the maps.

Only face-up land units can make a land move.

11.11.1 How to move land units
Each land move allows you to move 1 land unit. You can only move a unit once in each land movement step.

Sometimes a unit will have unused movement points but not enough to enter the next hex. You can always move the unit into that next hex but you must then turn it face-down.

You can move a unit which starts its move out of supply but you must turn it face-down when you finish moving it.

A unit must always end its move when it enters an enemy ZOC (exception: it can continue moving if it then overruns a land unit in the next hex ~ see 11.11.6 Overruns). You can move a unit which starts its move in an enemy ZOC directly into another enemy ZOC (even a ZOC of the same unit).

11.18 Reorganisation
In the reorganisation step, you can turn some face-down units face-up. This will permit them to move and attack again in later impulses of the turn.

quote:

Option 47: (Isolated reorganization) You can only turn a unit faceup if it can trace a path to a primary supply source for that unit. You trace the path in the same way as a basic supply path, including via overseas supply paths (see 2.4.2 Tracing supply) except that it can be of any length.

2.4.2 Tracing supply

Limits on supply paths
You can’t trace any supply path:
• into an enemy ZOC (unless the hex contains a friendly land unit); or
• into a hex controlled by another major power unless it agrees; or
• into a hex controlled by a neutral country (exception: Vichy territory ~ see 17.4 and Sweden ~ see 19.7); or
• across an alpine hexside; or
• across a lake hexside (except when frozen); or
• across an all sea hexside that isn’t a straits hexside (except as an overseas supply path); or
• for any Soviet unit, into a hex controlled by any other Allied major power (and vice versa) unless the USSR is at war with Germany.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

land units that start out of supply that are not disorganized can move when starting in a ZoC but must stop when entering the nest ZoC.

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

quote:

ORIGINAL: Larry Smith

They would be a threat if the German force bypassed them and continued on, and failed to leave sufficient forces behind to contain them. That would allow those Russians to move across the supply paths of the German units that had moved deeper into Russia. Now, those particular Russian would most likely die, as they began their move out of supply, and so would end it disorganized and out of supply, unless they managed to get within range of a still viable Russian supply source. If such a move were to be coordinated with ground strikes and other attacks by Russian forces facing those Germans that went deep, it might be disastrous for those Germans, if the strikes were to leave them disrupted.

However, if one goes by the example you have posted above, assuming that was the last move of the turn for all players, and thus those disorganized Russians are still facing the main German force, then at best, those Russians would simply delay the main force.

I recall one of the tips from my 5th edition rules - they recommended the Soviet player try to get units that survived the initial strikes and attacks to move into the Pripet Marshes, then leave them there to hang as a threat over the Germans, since just by moving two strategically placed Cav units out of the marshes had the potential to make a real mess of the German supply situation. Historically, a lot of Russians did get shouldered aside into the marshes, and for much of the rest of 1941, German commanders [mostly in the Ukraine] were very much aware of the threat that hung over them from that area. And that was before they started printing the rail lines on the map! Back then, we could pretend every hex had rail capacity! I remember, after my introduction to Europa and Fire in the East, I decided that WiF needed to consider the issue of regauging the Soviet rail network to extend their supply lines, so I made rail-head counters, and moved them one or two hexes a turn, depending on the weather, and my HQ's in Russia drew supply from them. THAT slowed things down, but not as much as I was expecting.

The point is that with the original rules, forces that get bypassed could be moved into positions where they were less likely to be fussed with - favorable terrain - but could still have the potential to cause trouble. Option 47 was a good idea, but its always been incomplete, and as someone else pointed out earlier in the thread, several House Rules finessed that option, probably by requiring a unit to be in enemy ZOC's - thus, to be in contact - before 47 could be implemented. If Steve were to implement that - require the isolated unit to be in enemy ZOC's and not in contact with friendly forces [supplied or otherwise] in another hex - then the rule 47 could come into play. That would cut down on a lot of calculations. But the better way is to just not leave them be - if the targets are disrupted and out of supply, go kill them!

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Truthfully I did not even notice that the 2 Russian units were on a train line, I was showing them for other reasons, of course I would have eliminated them warspite but then that would have ruined my rule 47 Quandary

Ok so whether in supply and organized or Out of supply and disorganized that rail line is blocked for German use, it seems to be a major line for Latvia and Lithuania, that would not be too good.

This is no criticism of whether optional rule 47 is good or bad but what effects it will have on the screen I show above. Extraneous, at the end of the first turn the Russians are automatically reorganized but they are not in supply are they, how then can they move?

Might be a nightmare to program, [rule 47] only Steve knows about that.

Bo

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Truthfully I did not even notice that the 2 Russian units were on a train line, I was showing them for other reasons, of course I would have eliminated them warspite but then that would have ruined my rule 47 Quandary

Ok so whether in supply and organized or Out of supply and disorganized that rail line is blocked for German use, it seems to be a major line for Latvia and Lithuania, that would not be too good.

This is no criticism of whether optional rule 47 is good or bad but what effects it will have on the screen I show above. Extraneous, at the end of the first turn the Russians are automatically reorganized but they are not in supply are they, how then can they move?

Might be a nightmare to program, [rule 47] only Steve knows about that.

Bo

warspite1

As per my post - units out of supply can move - albeit they are disorganised in so doing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Of course any player would attack them and destroy them, they would not leave them there at those odds for being out of supply and disorganized.

Bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Truthfully I did not even notice that the 2 Russian units were on a train line, I was showing them for other reasons, of course I would have eliminated them warspite but then that would have ruined my rule 47 Quandary

Ok so whether in supply and organized or Out of supply and disorganized that rail line is blocked for German use, it seems to be a major line for Latvia and Lithuania, that would not be too good.

This is no criticism of whether optional rule 47 is good or bad but what effects it will have on the screen I show above. Extraneous, at the end of the first turn the Russians are automatically reorganized but they are not in supply are they, how then can they move?

Might be a nightmare to program, [rule 47] only Steve knows about that.

Bo

warspite1

As per my post - units out of supply can move - albeit they are disorganised in so doing.

I did acknowledge that warspite as I was editing my post for that, you posted and beat me to it

I just went back and read Zorachus99 post # 32 and found it very very interesting, brilliantly conceived and right on the mark, well at least to me, well said Zorachus99!. Never read it back then because I did not understand rule 47 but I sure do now.

Bo

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Or my question should be, can you handle it, in other words if there is no debug feature put into the main game by Steve [this means you could disorganize these units again at the end of every turn] how could this be handled by players assuming that you would ever let this situation even occur in the first place which I doubt you would.

Bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

bo as Centuur says, its optional. As its not coded there is no way to "handle it" - its just not there to be played at present.

Sorry but that is where we are right now. I want Convoy in Flames coded - but it isn't yet, it could be done next year or it may never be Until it is, like Optional 47, there is nothing to be practically done.

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Or my question should be, can you handle it, in other words if there is no debug feature put into the main game by Steve [this means you could disorganize these units again at the end of every turn] how could this be handled by players assuming that you would ever let this situation even occur in the first place which I doubt you would.

Bo

You do what you'd do if Option 47 never existed. Ground strike them and kill them. If you miss the ground strike you leave units adjacent and keep them OOS. The best they can do next turn is "ooze" to somewhere and disorganize, knowing you can then probably kill them unless they try to time it with the turn ending. Also you place your units adjacent in a manner that if they do ooze, it is you who controls where they ooze to.

In the next turn you try to ground strike them again.

If Option 47 never existed this would just be standard play in WiF with no one knowing any different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

bo as Centuur says, its optional. As its not coded there is no way to "handle it" - its just not there to be played at present.

Sorry but that is where we are right now. I want Convoy in Flames coded - but it isn't yet, it could be done next year or it may never be Until it is, like Optional 47, there is nothing to be practically done.

Actually warspite I could care less whether its in or out or if Steve ever puts it in, sometimes people do not read posts correctly, of course not you and centuur I asked how you will handle it in a MWIF game if the situation does occur without the debug tool. Please tell me what you players will do in a net play game, just ignore it? I do realize you most likely will never let this happen

Ok paul answered my question while I was composing my post thank you paul.

Bo

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

bo as Centuur says, its optional. As its not coded there is no way to "handle it" - its just not there to be played at present.

Sorry but that is where we are right now. I want Convoy in Flames coded - but it isn't yet, it could be done next year or it may never be Until it is, like Optional 47, there is nothing to be practically done.

Actually warspite I could care less whether its in or out or if Steve ever puts it in, sometimes people do not read posts correctly, of course not you and centuur I asked how you will handle it in a MWIF game if the situation does occur without the debug tool. Please tell me what you players will do in a net play game, just ignore it? I do realize you most likely will never let this happen

Ok paul answered my question while I was composing my post thank you paul.

Bo

warspite1

Sorry bo if I am being thick (a regular occurence) but I seem to be missing the point. I have no idea why there is any talk of a de-bug tool when playing the game as is.

If it (disorganised and out of supply) occurs in a MWIF game then the player deals with it as per the rules - no de-bug, no get around. It happens all the time - or at least it does to me as I suck at the game.

Sorry bo am trying to be helpful. What am I missing?

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

bo as Centuur says, its optional. As its not coded there is no way to "handle it" - its just not there to be played at present.

Sorry but that is where we are right now. I want Convoy in Flames coded - but it isn't yet, it could be done next year or it may never be Until it is, like Optional 47, there is nothing to be practically done.

Actually warspite I could care less whether its in or out or if Steve ever puts it in, sometimes people do not read posts correctly, of course not you and centuur I asked how you will handle it in a MWIF game if the situation does occur without the debug tool. Please tell me what you players will do in a net play game, just ignore it? I do realize you most likely will never let this happen

Ok paul answered my question while I was composing my post thank you paul.

Bo

warspite1

Sorry bo if I am being thick (a regular occurence) but I seem to be missing the point. I have no idea why there is any talk of a de-bug tool when playing the game as is.

If it (disorganised and out of supply) occurs in a MWIF game then the player deals with it as per the rules - no de-bug, no get around. It happens all the time - or at least it does to me as I suck at the game.

Sorry bo am trying to be helpful. What am I missing?

It is probably me not you, If an enemy unit should be behind your units out of supply and disorganized and you need to move your units forward without going back and destroying that unit, it will be continually reorganized every game turn, now if you do not like that situation [not meaning you per say] there is nothing you can do about it under the present rules, I do not how else to explain that to you.

This unit could cause trouble if left there I assume, as I have never played this game. If Steve does not put optional rule 47 into the game again I could care less, but if 2 players agree that this is annoying maybe Steve could leave the debug tool in the game so people who just happen to like rule 47 to keep the unit or units disorganized or the other option just ignore those disorganized or organized units at the turns end.

Of course you need to trust the other player, hmmm

It must be me but I do not see what I am saying is so complicated.

Bo

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

bo as Centuur says, its optional. As its not coded there is no way to "handle it" - its just not there to be played at present.

Sorry but that is where we are right now. I want Convoy in Flames coded - but it isn't yet, it could be done next year or it may never be Until it is, like Optional 47, there is nothing to be practically done.

Actually warspite I could care less whether its in or out or if Steve ever puts it in, sometimes people do not read posts correctly, of course not you and centuur I asked how you will handle it in a MWIF game if the situation does occur without the debug tool. Please tell me what you players will do in a net play game, just ignore it? I do realize you most likely will never let this happen

Ok paul answered my question while I was composing my post thank you paul.

Bo

warspite1

Sorry bo if I am being thick (a regular occurence) but I seem to be missing the point. I have no idea why there is any talk of a de-bug tool when playing the game as is.

If it (disorganised and out of supply) occurs in a MWIF game then the player deals with it as per the rules - no de-bug, no get around. It happens all the time - or at least it does to me as I suck at the game.

Sorry bo am trying to be helpful. What am I missing?