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

Re : Re : Re : [wifdiscussion] [DOD] Options questions/remarks

Expand Messages
  • IA-211-BZ
    Hi, in fact, you get -1 for the 2 last player in naval ratio, it represents a political influence lowered by a lack of miitary power I guess. If the second
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 1, 2008
      Hi,

      in fact, you get -1 for the 2 last player in naval ratio, it represents a political influence lowered by a lack of miitary power I guess.
      If the second latest player sign the treaty he can avoid the -1, even if no one else sign the treaty.


      ----- Message d'origine ----
      De : pipoufle <pipoufle@...>
      À : wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Envoyé le : Dimanche, 1 Juin 2008, 1h53mn 31s
      Objet : Re: Re : Re : [wifdiscussion] [DOD] Options questions/remarks


      Thank you for the answers.
      Regarding the third point (IPO 15) : if no MP has sign the naval
      treaty, why the USA and USSR have to put the marker on the -1 side ?

      (And strange thing : on my markers, the reverse side of the "Eff"
      is "PM"...)

      Thomas

      --- In wifdiscussion@ yahoogroups. com, IA-211-BZ <IA211@...> wrote:
      >
      > Thank you, it's quite clear now !!
      >
      > Three more points also, if I can ask you :
      >
      > - We have 0 bid points at the start of the game, correct?
      >
      > ---> correct
      >
      >
      >
      > -With option GE11 (creation of Ukraine), it is said that all the
      > factories in Ukraine are now reds for the rest of the game. It means
      > that with this option, Germany gets 7 more factories! Quite a lot,
      no?
      > --> there is a high cost in PE, in addition, it cost a lot of build
      points, and it is difficult to reach the conditions about poland when
      at peace, and at war, the russian can rail the factories before
      conquest. Morover, the german is more lacking ressources than
      factories, isn't it.
      >
      >
      > But also it is said that Ukraine becomes a german "colony". What
      does it
      > means? What happens if the Soviet Union conquer Ukraine? Is she
      back in
      > the soviet union?
      >
      > --> it is a colony such as syria is a french colony. It can be
      conquered, but it stay a conquered minor country. (there is a nex DoD
      III option about this point in the latest annual factories in flammes)
      >
      >
      > -At the start of the game, it is said that the PE marker for the
      USA and
      > USSR is turn face down. There is no "face down" on this marker, but
      I
      > understand that it means "PE-1". Why not simply place the marker in
      a
      > lower position? It seems as if the Naval Treaty is in action
      (IPO15) at
      > the start, since USSR and the USA have the lowest naval ratio. By
      the
      > way, the set up gives the starting naval ratio while the London
      treaty
      > should not be sign: why? Strange...
      >
      > --> if you put the marker one section lower, then how do you
      remember that you have to put him one section upper when he produces
      ships or when he pass the naval treaty?
      > --> and in my counters there is a -1 written if I remembre well.
      >
      >
      > Thomas
      >
      > --- In wifdiscussion@ yahoogroups. com, IA-211-BZ <IA211@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Hi Thiimas, somle answer below
      > >
      > > Hello,
      > >
      > > We are preparing a new WIF game, with DoD 3. Some options raise
      > > questions to us. Since it seems there are some DoD players here, I
      > hope
      > > we wil find help.
      > >
      > > - IPO15: Naval treaty. We don't really point the pros & cons of
      this
      > > option, and who has interest (and when) to play it. It seems that
      it
      > can
      > > lead a -1 PE for Germany for example, pushing them to build naval
      to
      > > leave the last position in naval ratio and recover a normal PE.
      But it
      > > also prohibits the build of naval units for the nation that have
      the
      > > highest ratio. Any thoughts/experience about this option?
      > > --> this option major interest is to lower the USE, it is thus
      very
      > attractive for the axis. If the german build enough ships to have a
      > better ratio than the russian, and take these option, it also allow
      him
      > to avoid the -1 PE (while being out of the treaty, the 2 last score
      have
      > -1 to their PE, but only the last score if being in the treaty)
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > -CW8: India independant. Nothing is said regarding Pakistan,
      while the
      > > WiF map done to play also Patton in Flames let the possibility,
      and
      > > while there is a Pakistan force pool. How do you manage it?
      > > --> no pakistan in this option.
      > >
      > >
      > > -Also regarding the charts in the middle of the rules book "Major
      > power
      > > charts". There is a "Max trade (Res/build)" information. What is
      it
      > for?
      > > --> When both allies are not active, you cannot trade more than
      this
      > number. for example if you are restricted to 2/5, you cannot send
      more
      > than 2 BP or 5 ressource to one ally. If you and your treaty partner
      > cannot agree on a trade agreement when signing a treaty, the player
      who
      > play the treaty option can then ask for his allies' max of one
      category,
      > he will then give his max of the other category. For example a 2/4
      sign
      > a treaty with a 1/5, the 2/4 can ask for 5 ressources but he then
      must
      > give back 2 BP.
      > >
      > >
      > > -Last point: what about the minor country alignement rules in
      WiFFE
      > RAW?
      > > I think they are obsolete with DoD? I mean we cannot aligne Irak
      by
      > only
      > > having corps in Syria for example?
      > >
      > > --> totally obsolete, you have to forget the political part of
      wif (no
      > alignment of yougoslavia for corps too)
      > >
      > > Thanks for your help!
      > >
      > > Thomas
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
      > > Do You Yahoo!?
      > > En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure
      protection
      > possible contre les messages non sollicités
      > > http://mail. yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
      > Do You Yahoo!?
      > En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure
      protection possible contre les messages non sollicités
      > http://mail. yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >



      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure protection possible contre les messages non sollicités
      http://mail.yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • pipoufle
      So the treaty is in place at the start? Because the USA and USSR have the -1 from the start... Who has signed it in the start? Thomas ... represents a
      Message 2 of 2 , Jun 1, 2008
        So the treaty is in place at the start?
        Because the USA and USSR have the -1 from the start...
        Who has signed it in the start?

        Thomas

        --- In wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com, IA-211-BZ <IA211@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi,
        >
        > in fact, you get -1 for the 2 last player in naval ratio, it
        represents a political influence lowered by a lack of miitary power I
        guess.
        > If the second latest player sign the treaty he can avoid the -1,
        even if no one else sign the treaty.
        >
        >
        > ----- Message d'origine ----
        > De : pipoufle <pipoufle@...>
        > À : wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        > Envoyé le : Dimanche, 1 Juin 2008, 1h53mn 31s
        > Objet : Re: Re : Re : [wifdiscussion] [DOD] Options
        questions/remarks
        >
        >
        > Thank you for the answers.
        > Regarding the third point (IPO 15) : if no MP has sign the naval
        > treaty, why the USA and USSR have to put the marker on the -1 side ?
        >
        > (And strange thing : on my markers, the reverse side of the "Eff"
        > is "PM"...)
        >
        > Thomas
        >
        > --- In wifdiscussion@ yahoogroups. com, IA-211-BZ <IA211@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Thank you, it's quite clear now !!
        > >
        > > Three more points also, if I can ask you :
        > >
        > > - We have 0 bid points at the start of the game, correct?
        > >
        > > ---> correct
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > -With option GE11 (creation of Ukraine), it is said that all the
        > > factories in Ukraine are now reds for the rest of the game. It
        means
        > > that with this option, Germany gets 7 more factories! Quite a
        lot,
        > no?
        > > --> there is a high cost in PE, in addition, it cost a lot of
        build
        > points, and it is difficult to reach the conditions about poland
        when
        > at peace, and at war, the russian can rail the factories before
        > conquest. Morover, the german is more lacking ressources than
        > factories, isn't it.
        > >
        > >
        > > But also it is said that Ukraine becomes a german "colony". What
        > does it
        > > means? What happens if the Soviet Union conquer Ukraine? Is she
        > back in
        > > the soviet union?
        > >
        > > --> it is a colony such as syria is a french colony. It can be
        > conquered, but it stay a conquered minor country. (there is a nex
        DoD
        > III option about this point in the latest annual factories in
        flammes)
        > >
        > >
        > > -At the start of the game, it is said that the PE marker for the
        > USA and
        > > USSR is turn face down. There is no "face down" on this marker,
        but
        > I
        > > understand that it means "PE-1". Why not simply place the marker
        in
        > a
        > > lower position? It seems as if the Naval Treaty is in action
        > (IPO15) at
        > > the start, since USSR and the USA have the lowest naval ratio. By
        > the
        > > way, the set up gives the starting naval ratio while the London
        > treaty
        > > should not be sign: why? Strange...
        > >
        > > --> if you put the marker one section lower, then how do you
        > remember that you have to put him one section upper when he
        produces
        > ships or when he pass the naval treaty?
        > > --> and in my counters there is a -1 written if I remembre well.
        > >
        > >
        > > Thomas
        > >
        > > --- In wifdiscussion@ yahoogroups. com, IA-211-BZ <IA211@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Hi Thiimas, somle answer below
        > > >
        > > > Hello,
        > > >
        > > > We are preparing a new WIF game, with DoD 3. Some options raise
        > > > questions to us. Since it seems there are some DoD players
        here, I
        > > hope
        > > > we wil find help.
        > > >
        > > > - IPO15: Naval treaty. We don't really point the pros & cons of
        > this
        > > > option, and who has interest (and when) to play it. It seems
        that
        > it
        > > can
        > > > lead a -1 PE for Germany for example, pushing them to build
        naval
        > to
        > > > leave the last position in naval ratio and recover a normal PE.
        > But it
        > > > also prohibits the build of naval units for the nation that
        have
        > the
        > > > highest ratio. Any thoughts/experience about this option?
        > > > --> this option major interest is to lower the USE, it is thus
        > very
        > > attractive for the axis. If the german build enough ships to have
        a
        > > better ratio than the russian, and take these option, it also
        allow
        > him
        > > to avoid the -1 PE (while being out of the treaty, the 2 last
        score
        > have
        > > -1 to their PE, but only the last score if being in the treaty)
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > -CW8: India independant. Nothing is said regarding Pakistan,
        > while the
        > > > WiF map done to play also Patton in Flames let the possibility,
        > and
        > > > while there is a Pakistan force pool. How do you manage it?
        > > > --> no pakistan in this option.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > -Also regarding the charts in the middle of the rules
        book "Major
        > > power
        > > > charts". There is a "Max trade (Res/build)" information. What
        is
        > it
        > > for?
        > > > --> When both allies are not active, you cannot trade more than
        > this
        > > number. for example if you are restricted to 2/5, you cannot send
        > more
        > > than 2 BP or 5 ressource to one ally. If you and your treaty
        partner
        > > cannot agree on a trade agreement when signing a treaty, the
        player
        > who
        > > play the treaty option can then ask for his allies' max of one
        > category,
        > > he will then give his max of the other category. For example a
        2/4
        > sign
        > > a treaty with a 1/5, the 2/4 can ask for 5 ressources but he then
        > must
        > > give back 2 BP.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > -Last point: what about the minor country alignement rules in
        > WiFFE
        > > RAW?
        > > > I think they are obsolete with DoD? I mean we cannot aligne
        Irak
        > by
        > > only
        > > > having corps in Syria for example?
        > > >
        > > > --> totally obsolete, you have to forget the political part of
        > wif (no
        > > alignment of yougoslavia for corps too)
        > > >
        > > > Thanks for your help!
        > > >
        > > > Thomas
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
        > > > Do You Yahoo!?
        > > > En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure
        > protection
        > > possible contre les messages non sollicitÃÆ'©s
        > > > http://mail. yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
        > > Do You Yahoo!?
        > > En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure
        > protection possible contre les messages non sollicités
        > > http://mail. yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > __________________________________________________
        > Do You Yahoo!?
        > En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure
        protection possible contre les messages non sollicités
        > http://mail.yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.