Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [wifdiscussion] Re: Vichy question

Expand Messages
  • craftybstd@aol.com
    ... Well, there s a big difference between building out the AMPH pool and laying down an AMPH on turn 1. I quite often do the latter. My philosphy is that
    Message 1 of 132 , Oct 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 10/1/2003 4:23:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "LGB" <lgb42@...> writes:

      >--- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, "spjacobi" <spjacobi@y...>
      >wrote:
      >
      >> Yes, and I imagine there are CW players who build a SYNTH plant on
      >> the first turn.  This is another "so what"?  If I'm Germany
      >pursuing
      >> an anti-CW strategy, I would love to see the CW build out its
      >entire
      >> AMPH fleet.  More power to them.  This is another make weight
      >> argument.
      >
      >
      >In point of fact there are many very experienced players on this list
      >who have advocated for years that the CW should lay down an AMPHIB on
      >turn 1.  Any of them want to comment?
      >
      >Lane
      >

      Well, there's a big difference between building out the AMPH pool and laying down an AMPH on turn 1. I quite often do the latter. My philosphy is that there are certain units that the CW is going to want when it is time to go on the offensive. If you wait until you are getting ready to use them, however; you (1) telegraph your intentions, (2) possibly miss unexpected opportunities earlier as the units were not available, and (3) have to be extremely careful not to screw up your gearing.

      Russ
    • Andrew Baird
      Yes, and the original question was specifically RAW Vichy. It s what can happen though when one tries to chime in via mobile, going solely off memory. :) From:
      Message 132 of 132 , Mar 18
      • 0 Attachment
        Yes, and the original question was specifically RAW Vichy. It's what can happen though when one tries to chime in via mobile, going solely off memory. :)


        From: "William Popovich popovichwilliam@... [wifdiscussion]" <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com>
        To: "wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com" <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 7:22 AM
        Subject: Re: [wifdiscussion] Vichy question

         
        LOC Vichy needs to be mentioned in any question - it is not only not a standard rule, it is not a "rulebook" option. There are levels of options' reliability, IMO.:
        Highest level - those in the rules are the most tested, and the most official
        Next level - those which have been printed by ADG in some form since the last version of rules has been edited and erraticized. Less tested and less available to players, but since they are published since the last rules set, a chance some of them will be incorporated in the next rules (like a new oil rule, or some version of o-points)
        Next level - those which have been printed by ADG before the last version of rules came out - this implies that they were considered for inclusion in the rules and not accepted for that (LOC Vichy, while played by a subset of the list, is one of these)
        Next level - house rules. Even those which are logical (like the one I usually use that lets you remove units before production)



        On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:03 AM, Andrew Baird darkotaku@... [wifdiscussion] <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
         
        Now that I'm home, I can see where the discrepancy comes from - this is true for RAW Vichy.

        LoC Vichy explicitly delays the collapse to the end of the step, allowing you to enter other admin groups without having to have FTC.




        From: "William Popovich popovichwilliam@... [wifdiscussion]" <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com>
        To: "wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com" <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 6:10 PM
        Subject: Re: [wifdiscussion] Vichy question

         
        The moment Vichy is collapsed, the results are implemented. So Italians don't rail in on a Free French railroad.

        On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:31 PM, jhammond@... [wifdiscussion] <wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
         
        Hi Gentleman

        We just had an interesting sequence of events in our game and I want to verify that we are interpreting the rules correctly.  We're playing RAW Vichy.  Germany took Paris and imposed Vichy.  Italy is at war with CW and FR.  North Africa is a Vichy territory.

        JF42, Impulse 1 US corps captured Algeria, killing a FR Vichy corps in the process.  No Axis units were in Algeria at the time.  Allies control the coastal hexes from Morocco to Algiers but no hexes east of Algiers and nothing south of the rail line.  

        JF42 Impulse 7 Axis player declares he is collapsing Vichy during at the end of declaration of war step.  During the rail phase Italy rails a corps into Bone (minor port in East Algeria).  

        Based on a careful reading of the rules, we interpret this action to mean that since an Axis unit moved (railed) into a Vichy territory after Vichy was collapsed, Algeria becomes conquered by the Axis for the remainder of this turn, with the exception of Allied controlled hexes.

        However, since the Allies occupy Algiers, at the END of this turn, during Conquest phase, the US will conquer Algeria and have the option to revert it to Free France (except for hexes occupied by the Axis units.

        Are we interpreting these rules correctly?  Also, is the IT rail into Bone legal considering that Vichy was collapsed in an earlier phase?

        Thanks

        John












      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.