|
Post by rangerdave on Feb 19, 2019 1:57:43 GMT
Happy Washington's Birthday.
While the Rules aren't perfect, I think given the scope of this game there pretty darn good - not draft. Although, I really do think the San Giorgio rule is just wrong! blu3wolf, I'm a little lost on your repl comment "...will be 'landed' at the start of the Stores Expenditure Stage...". Where does that come from. I read everything lands during "D. Naval Convoy Arrival Phase:...". I do see your point about CW bombing port capacity, although with Convoy losses, the forward ports often don't max out. I'm 50/50 on whether the ship should hang around vs return home.
Love it that this game is still hanging in there.
|
|
|
Post by blu3wolf on Feb 22, 2019 11:22:05 GMT
I cant find it now I read that only things which are actually arriving, arrive during the arrivals phase. I cannot agree regarding the convoy rules - if they contain ambiguity, they must by reduction be draft rules. The draft rules part does bother me, because I am keen to play - with rules I deem sensible. I too am 50/50 on the hanging around vs returning laden. I am thrilled at the prospect of online play, but bothered by the real potential for my sitting it out due to the host's selection of rules - which are not public for consumption, as yet.
|
|
|
Post by rangerdave on Feb 25, 2019 3:42:30 GMT
Blu3wolf,
I found it. It was in the erratta. [55.3] (clarification) It is feasible that, in Game Turns where Axis Shipping Capacity is "G", their ports won't be able to handle the total tonnage arriving, (even with CW bombing). If that is the case, any excess over the usual limit may come in at Tripoli.
|
|
|
Post by ATD on Feb 28, 2019 16:29:28 GMT
The actual errata would be like dark matter - dwarfing the size of the original rules.
|
|
|
Post by rangerdave on Mar 7, 2019 2:35:00 GMT
I respectfully disagree. Yes there are a lot of rules. There are errors and confusing spots. But if you focus on minimizing changes and only fix what really needs to be fixed, (and of course ignore the abstract rules) then I think it is a very playable set of rules. At least as long as you get the myriad of paperwork/tracking/computations automated. I will continue to type away at creating my macro heavy excel playing aids with the goal of actually starting a game this summer. If I'm lucky I'll find some equally insane person to join me.
|
|
|
Post by blu3wolf on Mar 7, 2019 9:08:16 GMT
To make it playable, it seems so. The official errata are actually disappointingly short - Ive gone hunting through them seeking clarification on many matters, only to discover that the relevant section is entirely omitted. You can find them here: spigames.net/db_pages/ERR_CampaignforNorthAfrica.pdfJust four pages! I respectfully disagree. Yes there are a lot of rules. There are errors and confusing spots. But if you focus on minimizing changes and only fix what really needs to be fixed, (and of course ignore the abstract rules) then I think it is a very playable set of rules. At least as long as you get the myriad of paperwork/tracking/computations automated. I will continue to type away at creating my macro heavy excel playing aids with the goal of actually starting a game this summer. If I'm lucky I'll find some equally insane person to join me. With that approach to rules changes, Id be keen to join in. Ill keep chipping away at my automation system, though I suspect ATD will release long before I will.
I must be some level of insane, as the other day I was contemplating the viability of playing entirely pen and paper!
Blu3wolf, I found it. It was in the erratta. [55.3] (clarification) It is feasible that, in Game Turns where Axis Shipping Capacity is "G", their ports won't be able to handle the total tonnage arriving, (even with CW bombing). If that is the case, any excess over the usual limit may come in at Tripoli. This is not really what I was looking for. I read that as applying to a different circumstance - that of the case where the total tonnage as planned is too much for all ports to handle. The circumstance I was querying was where tonnage was planned, within the valid limits, to arrive at a port, but then due to bombing damage, prior to arrival of that tonnage, the shipping limit for that port is lowered below what is scheduled to arrive. Then what happens?
Its confusing enough that the convoy scheduling is per turn rather than per ops stage. In the schedule phase, you figure the convoys you will plan next turn, as being tonnage supplies and replacements, to a destination port. Some of those planned may be destroyed by bombing next turns convoy bombing segment. That is the end of the point where the convoy may be affected at sea, but the convoy isnt unloaded until the arrival phase, in a given ops stage. This part is confusing to me, because you may schedule replacements in say GT57, Ops Stage III, which are shipped in GT59's Naval Convoy Stage, and then the convoy starts to unload in GT59, Ops Stage I, Naval Convoy Arrival Phase - but the replacements not until GT59, Ops Stage III, Naval Convoy Arrival Phase. So if you ship 7500 tons in the Convoy Stage, then unload 2500 tons in the Ops Stage I Convoy Arrival Phase, then the CW bombs the port in the Land Support Air Phase, lowering its capacity... then you will not be able to unload all remaining 5000 tons in the next two Arrival Phases, obviously. That doesnt have anything to do with overall shipping capacity, but rather the limited local port capacity.
Im bothered by the proposed interpretation. On the one hand, its simple, and it would cover the complex case well and save headaches with managing a backlog of supplies at a given port (being a shipping manager as well as the logistics manager!). On the other hand though, its counter-intuitive, and doesnt make much sense for the ships to turn around partway through unloading and sail back to Tripoli.
Im currently looking at the code to handle the arrivals phase in my software, and Id obviously prefer to code something simpler rather than more complicated. I guess for now Ill make a note that Ill use that 55.3 to cover this scenario, and Ill revisit it later if I find a better solution (like having an overflow/backlog).
The overflow/backlog idea bothers me, because to some extent I suspect it could be used by a canny axis player as "free" forward storage capacity.
Perhaps the simplest explanation is that offered by 56.27: The Axis Player should remember that ports have maximum capacities; they may not receive supplies over that capacity (see Case 55.3).
That could be taken to imply that any supplies shipped which cannot be offloaded due to a change in port capacity, cannot be offloaded! Turn the ship around, take the supplies back and keep the chain going.
|
|
|
Post by rangerdave on Mar 17, 2019 3:02:39 GMT
After reading your comment, your right in that it doesn't really apply to what happens to planned shipping when capacity level is reduced. Although I still believe it is the correct thing to do. It's a rule clarification that players must agree to.
Ref. Convoy per turn vs. per OpStage. The game is big enough without doing convoys/malta/etc each 'opstage'. I think creating the turn/opstage was a good solution and putting malta/convoys under turn works well.
Ref. Repl. Repl are only planned during Opstage 1 but can arrive any opstage 2 turns later (20.63). I think it flows as when you plan the next turns convoy you easily add in the repl. in whichever opstage you want.
Of course the same issue of having a damaged efficiency level with convoy tonnage greater than allowed still applies. Again I think the "Divert to Tripoli" is the best and logical answer.
|
|
|
Post by blu3wolf on Mar 17, 2019 3:57:33 GMT
I think that's the interpretation I settled on - plan replacements in any point of GT 3, plan convoys in planning phase of GT4, and have them arrive in any arrivals phase of GT5.
Nailing down exactly how to do it has gone down in priority, as I've decided the initial version of my software will not handle naval arrivals. The player will add reinforcements/replacements manually in the arrivals phase, and track naval arrivals with pen and paper.
Similarly, the initial version being largely a proof of concept, it will also not handle aircraft. Just supplies, evaporation, movement, attrition, breakdown and combat. Hopefully by the time that is done, I'll have an idea how to handle the air war (rules for which have many proposed alterations in the name of balance) and naval arrivals (rules for which lack explanation of many corner cases).
|
|
|
Post by blu3wolf on Mar 17, 2019 15:21:18 GMT
See, its things like this that bug me, that suggest there were changes made that either were not playtested, or were playtested but never made it into the rulebook.
Just have to look at 51.0 telling us that units have attrition for lack of Stores each Game Turn, but 48.0 (sequence of play) tells us how attrition for lack of Stores happens in the Attrition Segment in the Organisation Phase of the Ops Stage... three times per turn.
Guess Ill be handling that at the same time Im dispensing Stores, i.e., the Stores Expenditure Stage.
|
|
|
Post by blu3wolf on Mar 18, 2019 6:21:11 GMT
Turns out its in the Errata: [41.65G] (clarification) Note that when the Axis Convoys are completed all shipments are considered landed.
|
|
|
Post by rangerdave on Mar 19, 2019 4:15:57 GMT
Why the Attrition Segment mentions stores one can only guess. Case 51.0 stores however is pretty clear and repeats that lack of stores is a once a Game Turn thing. Only Store issue I remember is the Prisoners using 1 stores per OpStage while other units (including Guards) use stores per turn.
I realized a glitch with my macro enabled playing aids. I have everything melded for ease of single person play. Now I'm splitting the workbooks apart into three - Axis, CW and Joint. At least I'm teaching myself the basics of VBA. It's not like I have a life or anything.
|
|
|
Post by rangerdave on Oct 4, 2019 14:00:46 GMT
Hello Again.
I am ready to try my macro enabled excel playing aids but I ran into a problem. My old reduced size, metal mounted map and magnetic strip counters did not age well. I have had to remake my metal map and magnetized counters. The good news is I'm making them full size this time, but the bad news is the cost of making full size color map copies was prohibitive so I went for B&W and am now coloring the map by hand. I do not use the original map nor the original counters (still unpunched) as I lost my first copy of CNA to a gaming room roof cave-in.
My new map is mounted and am I'm now coloring it in. Once I am finished I'll complete a couple turns of the Italian Campaign to find remaining bugs and issues with my macro playing aids. Once I validate my playing concept and macro tools, I'll be looking for 2-3 people who are interested in trying to play/get my system working across the internet.
I know most people prefer fully computerized, but with this game - its scale, its detail, its 'reaction' movement - I personnally need the map to 'see' the action. Not to mention all the variables of unit tracking (str, att/det, HQ w/arty or without, type of tanks, etc.) which is way beyond my capability to code. I can handle the basic paper tracking, aand counter movement - I just want to speed up all the slow tedious parts of the game. I think my excel macros do this pretty good.
Once I start playing, I'll see if I can figure out out to post pictures and make general comments on game play.
Wish me luck.
|
|
|
Post by ATD on Oct 4, 2019 14:40:44 GMT
Good grief. You should have spoken to me! : ) I Photoshopped, corrected and improved the map. I also made it a little larger and had both separate and one continuous (10' + long) copies printed. My system for mounting it magnetically could not be much improved upon I believe. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by ATD on Oct 4, 2019 14:57:35 GMT
I should add that a dedicated program has now superseded the Excel code! I just need time to finish it - which has been my mantra for so long now I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by blu3wolf on Oct 5, 2019 10:34:16 GMT
Dave, Im happy to help with testing your over the internet play.
|
|