[WarInEur] RE: Effects and repairs of Transportation hits

Sat May 3 12:33:33 EDT 2008

I have long held a view of transportation hits that made sense but contradicted an explicit rule:, that 
a hit on one facility in a hex did not effect production by the other facilities.  

 I always figured that a T-hit represented a sucessfull 4-week air campaign that compromised use of the 
rail roads connections and thus bottled up the products of the MC or RC so that they couldn't support the 
Axis War Machine that production Cycle. At the end of the Cycle the Axis rolled to see whether the T-hits 
effects persisted into the player turns and would disrupt the production use of the hex's centers next cycle. This viewpoint made T-hits a problem only during Axis production, or if multiple T-hits could be attained on the 
same branch of the Axis rail net.  It also explained why a T-hit was indiscriminately effective against both MC 
and RC. Unfortunately, it doesnt sync with the rules explicit declaration that a T-hit on one Ploesti center does 
not effect the others for production purposes.   

Having looked at the rules from SPI and DG and noting that CWIE-1 coding failed to comply with the requirement that a hex 
could suffer more than one type of hit at the same time,  I believe Kent is correct that the latest DG correction 
would be better ignored. The difficulty of repairing Resource Center hits provides the needed break on the Axis war economy. 
If CWIE-2 and BWIE do not remove RC hits by converting them into easily repaired T-hits there will be a lot less german production. 

 I disagree that there is a true contradiction here. The rules for availability of Foreign centers has always been ideosyncratic. 
The Iragi centers have to be routed through Venice in the SPI rules rather than through Istanbul. Thus even though 
there is no such requirment for the Swedish centers, there is no reason why the Soviet, Turkish and Rumanian centers 
should not be routed to Berlin via rail-lines free of active T-hits (other than the fact that there is no historical basis for 
this requirement.) 

We can do without the clarifications, guite nicely in fact.  However, in my view the actual rule that the 
rail line simply be free of enemy troops (as opposed to cuts) is rather absurdly lenient.  I would have reguired that the RR 
to a Turkish or Soviet or Romainian center be "friendly" all the way between the center and Berlin under some interpretation 
of Friendly that excluded a cut in the line. 

Kent goes on to present an interpretation of the original rules that requires serious consideration.   First he quotes the mechanics 
of Hit placement  

>"If the Hit is effective he places a marker on the Map Hex or the Production display." (or both)> Then he suggests that there has been long-standing misunderstanding of what happens when a T-hit is awarded by the Bombing accuracy table. 

>When a T hit occurs a Manufacturing Hit marker or a Resource Hit marker would be placed in the appropriate box on the production display AND a Transportation Hit marker would be placed on the map.> > This Transportation Hit is "an incidental effect of strategic bombing and while a hex suffers such a result it cannot be used for rail movement in the following four game turns, nor may supply be traced through it." 

>These are TWO SEPARATE HITS. A Transportation Hit against a MC would cause two markers to be placed, one on the production chart showing the MC was damaged and the other on the map showing the rail line was blocked. Both of which would need to be repaired separately, and independently of each other. So, it is possible to repair the MC but still leave the T hit in place or vis versa. A RC repair is unique in that it repairs both the RC and the T hit.
THE ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATION would be this: 

When a Transportation hit occurs the T-hit marker can be placed both on the production chart to indicate which center is temporarily  inoperable and also on the map to indicate the incidental effect of strategic bombing on the weekly player turns. 

A Transportation hit on a center DOES NOT effect the production status of other production centers in the hex. 

Successful repair of a transportation hit does not effect other hits on that same production center (because hits are repaired one at a time.)  However, rolling "RC" when attempting repairs of a transportation hit will repair a T-hit. 

WHERE IS THE DIFFERENCE?   Kents suggestion would flood the production chart with markers for MC-hits and RC-hits while mine would
flood the production charts with markers for more easily repairable T-hits.  Since production points are supposed to be calculated before repairs are attempted, the short run effect is exactly the same.  The difference is that next cycle the Allies will be able to target different centers since many of their previous turn's T-hits will still be in effect as Resource center hits on the production chart. 

WHICH OF US IS RIGHT:  I truly don't know.  I do know that given the rate at which RC are repaired the following is practically a statisical certainty   -----If the allies SB's attack only Resource centers (once they have a statistical chance of knocking them out), then assuming that they have a base with which to attack Ploesti the Axis won't have any resources centers working other than Sweden and Turkey on at least one turn before the start of 1945. The Axis can prevent Collaspe of their Economy only by a very large commitment to Air defense in 1943 (shooting down the bombers before they make bombing runs) or an all out commitement in 1944. 

 If we used Kent's practice of placing RC-hit markers whenever a Resource center suffers a T-hit this process would be greatly excellerated. 

As a side note, I believe that this is the explaination for the relatively lax rule for the Swedish centers, otherwise the German economy 
collaspes in War in the West as soon as the rules indicate that Turkish and Romanian centers are no longer available. 

Bob in Louisville 

Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 08:04:54 -0400> From: warineur-request at mailman.halisp.net> Subject: WarInEur Digest, Vol 46, Issue 2> To: warineur at mailman.halisp.net> > Send WarInEur mailing list submissions to> warineur at mailman.halisp.net> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to> warineur-request at mailman.halisp.net> > You can reach the person managing the list at> warineur-owner at mailman.halisp.net> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific> than "Re: Contents of WarInEur digest..."> > > Today's Topics:> > 1. Re: SB hits on Polesti (Don Lazov)> 2. More on Ploesti (Kent & Sue Haunschild)> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > Message: 1> Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 06:14:06 -0500> From: Don Lazov <dlazov at comcast.net>> Subject: Re: [WarInEur] SB hits on Polesti> To: Kent & Sue Haunschild <kentsue at cox.net>> Cc: Warineur <warineur at mailman.halisp.net>> Message-ID: <4819A5FE.6030205 at comcast.net>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"> > I concur and support Kent's interpretation. Remove the DG clarifications > as they confuse the issue and stick with the SPI ruling. I think they > pull this from either the non-official KC/LA errata (players groups).> > Kent & Sue Haunschild wrote:> > There is some confusion in the rules regarding a SB hit on Ploesti and > > subsequent Denial of Centers> > > > SPI [25.0 Ploesti> > > > General rule:> > Ploesti has five Resource Centers located in the one hex. This > > requires a special treatment (when Ploesti is a target), governing the > > placement of Flak, designation of target, and application of bombing.> > > > SPI [25.14] A Transportation Hit on one of the Ploesti Centers does > > *not* affect the other Ploesti Centers for the purposes of Production.> > > > SPI [25.15] The same rules apply to the two Swedish and the two Iraqi > > Resource Centers which are in the same hex.> > > > SPI [26.71] Denial of Foreign Centers:> > > > 3. Ploesti, Soviet Union, and Turkey: These Centers are available as > > long as the Axis player can trace a Rail line free of enemy units from > > them to Berlin.> > > > > >> >> > DG [25.0] Ploesti> >> > Ploesti has five Resource Centers located in the one hex. > > This requires a special treatment (when Ploesti is a target), > > governing the placement of Flak, designation of target, and > > application of bombing.> >> > > >> > DG [25.14] A Transportation Hit on one of the Ploesti Centers does not > > affect the other Ploesti Centers for purposes of Production.> >> > > >> > DG [25.15] The same rules apply to the two Swedish and the two Iraqi > > Resource Centers that occupy the same hex.> >> > > >> > DG [26.7] Denial of Centers> >> > > >> > 3. Ploesti, Soviet Union and Turkey: These Centers are available so > > long as the Axis Player can trace a Rail Line, free of Enemy units, > > from them to Berlin.> >> > > >> > The bold type on the word "not" in SPI {25.14] was in the SPI printing > > to give emphasis to the word. It appears clear that in the original > > version a T hit did not severe the connection between other RC in the > > hex with Berlin. Only a enemy unit was capable of accomplishing > > that. At first glance the DG rules appear to mirror the original SPI > > rules.> > > > But then comes to clarifications that were not in the SPI rules and > > change the understanding of a T hit.> > > > DG _26.71 (clarification) Denial of Centers, Item 2 Sweden: Assuming > > Germany owns a port on the Baltic Sea, sea passage from Narvik or a > > Swedish port to a German Baltic Sea port and then rail to a German > > Manufacturing Center is assumed to always succeed (regardless of > > locations of enemy units or transportation hits on rail lines), once > > the resource point reaches a neutral or Axis-controlled port from a > > Swedish resource center._> > > > DG _26.71 (clarification) Denial of Centers; Item 3 Ploesti, Soviet > > Unit and Turkey: The entire length of the rail line used to trace from > > the resource center to Berlin must be free of a Transportation hit > > after bomb damage repairs have been done. Note this means that a > > Transportation hit on Berlin that is not repaired has serious effects, > > this can be considered political ramifications._> > > > Both of these "clarifications" are numbered the same and contradict > > each other. When clarified in regard to the Swedish Resource Centers > > transportation hits have no affect. Yet when clarified in regard to > > Ploesti, Soviet Union or Turkey they do. The clarification goes on to > > expand the transportation hit effect to make Berlin a nexus which when > > hit severs the rail line to "some" of the Foreign Centers but not all.> > > > Now take a look at the Setup instructions for the WitW 1944 Campaign.> > > >> > SPI & DG> >> > German Destroyed Resource Centers (Type Marker)> >> > Leuna (R)> >> > Brux (R)> >> > Dulmen (R,T)> >> > Reishoiz (R)> >> > Ploesti, 1st (T)> >> > Ploesti, 2nd (R)> >> > > >> > Notice that the T hit on Ploesti,1st does not affect the other four RC > > in the same hex. The RC hit on Ploesti, 2nd is a separate event and > > is listed separately.> >> > > >> > SPI/DG [24.83] Definition of a Bombing Hit:> >> > > >> > ....A Transportation Line Hit is effective against the Rail line and > > *also* against *either* a Manufacturing Center or Resource Center in > > the same hex....> >> > > >> > Both DG and SPI have the same wording. A transportation hit does two > > things. It cuts the rail and it damages the MC or RC. These are > > separate events. It is not cutting the rail that affects the Center > > but rather the secondary effects of the SB hit.> >> > > >> > Both the DG rules 26.71 are underlined and in bold type indicating > > that they are new errata incorporated in 2004. I think it is obvious > > that they were not well thought out, clearly reverse the understanding > > of the published rules and should be ignored until they can be removed > > in a later revision. If we allow the clarifications to stand it means > > that single T hits on Ploesti or Berlin can have a catastrophic effect > > on German production which had no corollary in the real world.> >> > > >> > I therefore conclude that the clarifications are erroneous and > > misleading because a transportation hit has no effect insofar as > > denying a centers ability to trace a rail line to Berlin. This means > > that as long as the hexes defining a rail line are free of enemy units > > (or enemy controlled hexes) the Center is functional for the purposes > > of production. This understanding is in accordance with published > > rules and the clarification with regard to the Swedish RC, even if it > > contradicts the clarification for the Ploesti, Soviet Union, and > > Turkish Centers.> >> > > >> > > >> > Comments?> >> > __ > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------> >> > _______________________________________________> > WarInEur mailing list> > WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net> > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur> > > -------------- next part --------------> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...> URL: http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20080501/4bf383b6/attachment-0001.html> > ------------------------------> > Message: 2> Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 07:05:10 -0500> From: "Kent & Sue Haunschild" <kentsue at cox.net>> Subject: [WarInEur] More on Ploesti> To: "Warineur" <warineur at mailman.halisp.net>> Message-ID: <001201c8ab83$9b0d3a60$81bcb246 at kent839ba1def4>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"> > > > If you read my earlier email on the List the "rules" are identical between SPI and DG the problem is the two DG clarifications one of which says Transportation Hits don't count and another which says they do. So even the DG clarifications contradict each other.> > I think the problem arose because CWIE1 had a flaw. The error, which Greg has freely admitted and pointed out on the List numerous times, was that he interpreted a Transportation Hit as being more devastating than a RC or MC hit and replaced a hit of the previous type with a transportation Hit and ignored a MC or RC Hit if a T hit already existed. However, a T hit is much easier to repair than either a MC or RC hit. The result was runaway Axis production because the SB campaign was ineffective. > > This flaw was compounded when DG made their revision because there was a lot of input from gamers on the List whose only experience was with the computer version. In their view something had to be done to curb the Axis production because it was clearly out of control, but they failed to realize that correcting the code error and allowing Hits of both types each of which had to be repaired independently of the other would correct the problem all by itself.> > At least that's my belief. I really see no justification for the "clarification: because it directly contradicts the rules that say a transportation hit on one target has no effect on other targets in the same hex for the purposes of production. Even the mechanics of the production process bear this out. "If the Hit is effective he places a marker on the Map Hex or the Production display." (or both)> > I also think there is a misunderstanding about the T hit. When a T hit occurs a Manufacturing Hit marker or a Resource Hit marker would be placed in the appropriate box on the production display and a Transportation Hit marker would be placed on the map.> > This Transportation Hit is "an incidental effect of strategic bombing and while a hex suffers such a result it cannot be used for rail movement in the following four game turns, nor may supply be traced through it." These are two separate hits. A Transportation Hit against a MC would cause two markers to be placed, one on the production chart showing the MC was damaged and the other on the map showing the rail line was blocked. Both of which would need to be repaired separately, and independently of each other. So, it is possible to repair the MC but still leave the T hit in place or vis versa. A RC repair is unique in that it repairs both the RC and the T hit.> > Kent> -------------- next part --------------> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...> URL: http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20080501/fafacb52/attachment.html> > ------------------------------> > _______________________________________________> WarInEur mailing list> WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur> > > End of WarInEur Digest, Vol 46, Issue 2> ***************************************
_________________________________________________________________
Get Free (PRODUCT) RED™  Emoticons, Winks and Display Pics.
http://joinred.spaces.live.com?ocid=TXT_HMTG_prodredemoticons_052008
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20080503/e814d1e8/attachment-0001.html