In a bizarre news conference beamed live from a VIP transport plane of the Chinese Air Force that was crossing Mongolian airspace on the way to Russian airspace;  Lin Liheng, the Chinese Air Force Commander lately in charge of all Chinese air units in Iran, denounced the Chinese regime before she and all aboard were killed when the plane crashed. Lin was fleeing with her family and some of her staff, proclaiming that ongoing Chinese government oppression of her Christian faith had made her decide to mis-deploy certain military units and made sure key technical and code details were easily intercepted by Western intelligence services in the recent conflict in the Persian Gulf. Lin, with pride, said she did this in an attempt to make the atheist Communist party of China pay for all the evil that it had done.

Shortly after, all contact with the plane was lost and was later found to have impacted with the side of a mountain with all personal aboard lost. Adding to the mystery, Mongolian air traffic controllers have reported that the plane had turned around and was heading back to Chinese airspace when it fell off radar contact. This follows a week of massive shakeups in the Chinese hierarchy with the Admiral of the Chinese expeditionary fleet, the Ambassador to Iran and the secretary in charge of MidEastern relations and a few others either being arrested, shot while being arrested or found having committed suicide.

India expresses her deepest condolences to the families of all those who have lost their lives due to the war and expresses concern that the aftermath of the war is becoming bloodier than the war itself.

India also welcomes Iran as a probationary member of PROTO (assuming all internal PROTO voting goes as planned).

Errrr... what?

Have Iran handed over those they are required to under the most recent UN Sec Council Resolution?

Nor has the Kurdish question been settled with Iran, surely accepting Iran as a member of PROTO whilst these matters are still outstanding seems foolish and shortsighted. How can you support Iran given these matters are outstanding?

In reply to UK (msg # 79):

To become a probationary member of PROTO, Iran agreed to (among other things) recognize Kurdistan and hand over those responsible for the WMD attacks (Revolutionary Guard) to Russia.  This deal was made with the consent of UN Security Council Member Russia.  The UN resolution happened after the PROTO deal was brokered, causing some confusion.  In any case, if Iran still wants PROTO membership, they need to obey the UN Resolution (including handing over WMDs).

Kurdish/Iranian borders must be negotiated in good faith, being fair to both sides, and not used to punish Iran.  India has offered to help Iran eliminate the troublesome Revolutionary Guard if they make peace with the moderates.  PROTO assistance in this dire time can help Iran from becoming another mess of a civil war in a region which already has too many.

Is this acceptable to the international community?

GM says: No they have not. One faction has hinted that it MIGHT be willing to do so, but it has NOT happened. Your intelligence service deems the likelyhood small that it will happen because that faction is no longer in enough control to do so.

GM says: One faction wanted PROTO membership but that faction no longer has monopoly on power, making it less of a sure thing (see above).

Hence, probationary PROTO status.  They must do these things to become an actual PROTO member.  An offer from India is on the table to help them, but they have yet to respond.

In reply to Brazil (msg # 83):

NEWS (post CC#2)

Isfahan, Iran: Al-Jazeera and Press Trust of India (PTI) reporting:

Joint statement from Iranian president (GM: nationalist faction, legally elected), together with the leader of the moderate faction, the Indian ambassador and the UN high representative:

Iranian President says: We stand here today together in peace pronouncing the first steps to a new era. There has been enough bloodshed. Iran will comply with the UN resolution. We have made peace between nationalists and moderates. Our WMDs are destroyed, we will close our WMDs factories and invite UN inspectors. We have arrested some of the IRGC leadership responsible for the WMD attacks and the recent war and will turn over these to India for transport to the ICC in Hague. We have sent an emissary to Kurdistan to initiate a transition.

The Indian ambassador says:"India is happy to have negotiated this deal so that peace will prevail. Indian forces will take charge of the IRGC prisoners and assist the legally elected government of Iran to capture the other criminals and stabilise the country. As we speak several Indian planes carrying much needed humanitarian aid are approaching Iranian airspace where NATO and allies still have a NoFlyZone in effect. We ask that you let our planes through. These will be followed by 2 bde Indian airborne forces and 6 mech brigades as soon as they can be ready."

UN high representative says: It looks like the UN resolution will be fulfilled without any more bloodshed. I am officially asking UK, who is in charge of implementing the resolution, to stand down, for now, in light of this development.

END NEWS

Should we asume ISIS is acting as its real world counterpart (forcing conversions under death threat, killing anyone that opposes them or does not convert, destoying Jonah's mausuleum and mosques, etc...)?

The UK, and I am sure the international community at large, welcome this news. Forces will remain in the area for a short while until the terms of the resolution have been met but all active operations are immediately suspended.

GM says: Yes!

Once again, several questions:

Will the modifications in rules v20140606 affect CC3?

Will initiative be rolled again or we go with what was in previous CCs?

If the latter, how will that afect the Caliphate (what initiative it has and what advantages has it bought with it)?
This message was last edited by the player at 11:48, Tue 19 Aug 2014.

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 88):

Quick question, does Iraq want any assistance from us, also, is the government of Syria OK with US, UK and german forces being used to help them out as they have requested UN aid in repelling the caliphate

GM says: Different factions within the Iraq govt say different things, but your intelligence service says Saudi is cooperating with Iraqi forces, so even if you don´t get an official answer in practice they would welcome it.

Syrian govt says: US, UK, Germany and any other country are welcome to fight the rebels, under a UN flag, as per the UN resolution, as long as it is understood that the Syrian govt is the rightful ruler of Syria, the Syrian country will keep its borders after the insurgents have been vanquished and that foreign forces will leave when asked by the Syrian govt.

Attention. Attention. There will now be an unscheduled faith change.

To fill a loophole [as is, one player could legally keep a War Round going indefinitely by refusing to agree that the WR is over thus allowing them to continuously keep attacking an enemy] I am going to arbitrarily end this War Round#1 and declare what was to be CC#3ofWR#1 to be CC#1ofWR#2. I think we can all agree that quite enough happened so far in WR#1 anyways to have filled up a whole month. For everyone this means almost nothing so we should be ok there, but do remember to subtract 1 Supply point from your reserve for every unit that has attacked.

Which brings us to our next 'change-without-a-difference', for reasons of game balance I will have to double everyone's reserve of Supply units, it was ridiculously too low, except for Iran which has been involved in several rounds of combat earlier with the Kurds which would have eaten into their reserve.

If Iran wants to consider themselves at 'War Footing' (sec 6.8) then it is fine with me, but the only change I will allow at this point is a doubling of available Supply units.

>Will the modifications in rules v20140606 affect CC3?
No. I am trying very hard just to use v20140503 for this combat, I think making significant rule changes in middle of a fight is bad. Does not mean that where there is a question I might rule in ways that harmonize with v20140606; just we are not going to go there officially.

>Will initiative be rolled again or we go with what was in previous CCs?
With things turning to the Caliphate I suppose there is some good reason to reroll initiative, but I just want to get this war and whole Turn over with so, NO. I will find a place for the Caliphate somewhere.
This message was last edited by the player at 15:07, Wed 20 Aug 2014.

"Ding", Round 2!


Iran says: No thanks.


My name is GM and I support this message.

While I agree with your motives and I am as much wanting to finish this turn as everyone, see that this deprives Saudi Arabia of any advantage due to TLs, MR, air, etc. against the Caliphate and makes any Saudi intervention useless as I have not enough initiative points to reveal a single stealthy unit.

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 93):

A MR rank 4 nation is effectively just another name for an insugancy in progress. You can take out the Caliphat's regular forces easily enough,but eliminating evey last stealth unit and keeping them from regenerating eg pacifying the insurgency is going to take us well into the 2030 Turn anyways.

That's why I've been advocating since military rules began to be discussed to treat insurgencies aside from regular combats.

But well, let's try to finish this turn at last...

Initially I only used the detailed combat rules as a way of stress testing them, but that is done now and I am happy with what I have learned. This means it is time to kick this war into a higher gear (we have been at this for what now, ... 4 months?!) so it is time to start introducing the rules which are more appropriate to combat on Core Worlds, the Quick Combat rules and give them a test too. Given what I expect of what is going to happen this round it should not be a problem, combat is bound to be more diffuse and less set to specific moves. For the moment we are going to pretend that War Rounds and rounds in Quick combat are the same.

-----------------------------------------

Actions for Saudi Arabia

WR#2 Saudi Arabia attacks Islamic Caliphate with
1 Green armor
4 Green mech brigades
4 vet MR
5 exp MR

Mil Rank 3 nation. Final Combat Strength is 869

defender is Islamic Caliphate
Hex H19
1 Reserve Tank Brigade (ex-Syrian and Iraqi units)
1 Reserve Mechanized Brigade (ex-Syrian and Iraqi units)
3 Green Motorized Brigades (ex-Syrian and Iraqi units)
10 Reserve Infantry Brigades (Stealth Ability, various militia)
1 Green Artillery Brigades (ex-Syrian and Iraqi units)
2 Green SAM Brigades (ex-Syrian and Iraqi units)
1 Reserve IRBM squadron (ex-Syrian unit)

Hex I22
4 Green Infantry Brigades (ex-Syrian and Iraqi units)
10 Reserve Infantry Brigades (Stealth Ability, various militia)

Mil Rank 4 nation. WMDs are used. Final Combat Strength is 698

Odds are 869/698 = 1.24 which becomes 1:1

17:52, Today: Combat Cycle Ref rolled 2 using 1d10. WR#2 Saudi Arabia attacks Islamic Caliphate.

Results: 80% loss to the Attacker, reduced to 60%, 0% to defender

Islamic Caliphate says: Allah has punished the faithless!!!! Praise be to Allah!!!

CCR says: ...and now I need to stop here to think about how this relates to units damaged and units destroyed. See, I told you I needed to test the Quick Combat rules.

Losses
Saudi Arabia
1 Green armor        1xCD Reserve
4 Green mech brigades  2xCD Reserve
4 vet MR            2xCD Reserve
5 exp MR            3xCD Reserve
This message was last edited by the player at 22:56, Sun 31 Aug 2014.

In reply to Combat Cycle Ref (msg # 96):

Actions for China
1 Experienced Support planes squadron (CCC) CD 1x Reserve
4 Veteran Multirole planes Squadrons CD 4xReserve
10 Experienced Multirole planes Squadrons CD 10xReserve
6 Experienced Support planes squadrons (Transport) CD 6x Reserve
Move from H20 to H22

Shouldn't this be said before orders were given?

Rules change a lot in both cases, and what was an air attack against only the forces in I22 (and with the advantages of being air attack), followed by the land attack agains the remainders of forces in I22 is now an attack against the full Caliphate army without the advantage of air units nor from better quality units, and using only a small part of my forces.

Not even the all units in the area which could reasonably be involved, as rules say, as those would have included (at least) the forces in I22 (moved there in CC2, as per msg #65), that have not been counted and the Saudi reserve units (quality as such not being counted in quick wars) in I21-I22 and the green MR and support air units, all of which could reasonably be involved (IMO).

In resume: this has turned what was a feasible plan agains the troops in I22 and air raids against H19 into a suicide attack against the full force of the Caliphate.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:26, Sat 23 Aug 2014.

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 98):

And deprived the Caliphate of its greatest weaoon, the effect of their stealth units. And made them all subject to the divisor of a 4MR nation. And the use of the detailed rules always was the temporary exception, an experiment at my pleasure which has ended and returned to the published rules. And with a roll of 2 for your attack it was going to suck for you no matter which section of rules were used.

But most of all, you brought along a shockingly tiny force for your grand invasion of a physically small nation hoping to take advantage of the quirks in the division of our maps and turn sequences to try and take on your enemy in easily manageable  pieces. The Caliphate is not a potted plant, there are no time locked gates between hex H19 and H20, the Caliphate can and will react, and in the next round so can you too....
This message was last edited by the player at 01:34, Sat 23 Aug 2014.

This may be true, but my complain is that I was not warned those will be the rules. As rules stood, the air combat phase, with Saudi high quality air against the mainly low quality units without air defense would have changed a lot, and after that ther would have been the land combat. So a ningle roll of 2 would not have been so much damaging (and while roling twice in a roll is possible, is not expected).



In fact the force brought along was greater, more than double in land forces:



But it seems most of the land forces sent did not enter in the definition for could reasonably be involved.
This message was last edited by the player at 10:15, Fri 29 Aug 2014.

As rules stood when I planed it, my numbers were:

Air phase:

Hex I22:

Saudi 2 vet + 2 exp air units: 890

ISIS:  4 green infantry 110 (reduced to 27 as per 12.9) even if the gerrillas joined, they would add 55 CP, for a total of 165 (reduced to 41 per rule 12.9)
Odds: 890:41 = 21.7, so table would have been 7:1, and the 2 rolled would have meant 10/100, as you say, with a roll of 2 for your attack it was going to suck for you no matter which section of rules were used.

Should I follow with the land phase, where the forces sent against re remans would have been 1334 CP (and even in only the units you sent to combat woyuld have been, there would have summed 682 aagainst the remainders of the ISIS forces)?

The air stike in J19 was a little more risky, as the 2 vet + 3 exp MR air units (1068 CP) would have to confront 329 (164 when 12.9 is applied, as there were SAM) if the gerrillas hide or 383 (178) if the guerrillas fought, just a mere 2:1 (where a roll of 2 would have meant 40:20, so no so disastrous when counting losses)

EDIT: 1068 CP against the 178 (after 12.9 is applied) would have been 6:1, and the roll of 2 would have given a reuslt of 20/100. END EDIT



As shown above, with the rules I assumed they will be used, this shockingly tiny force was in fact an overwhelming one. But this change of rules have reduced my forces (as they have a divisor of 3, instead of 2 for green, 1 for experienced and a multiplier of 1.5 for veteran) while augmented the Capiphate ones (as all its reserve forces have a divisor of 4 instead of the usual 10).

And now, as told to you'll by email, I don't know when I will connect again for some (I hope few) days (or at best I will sporadically). Don't think I took my ball and went home, it's just a router problem I hope to be fixed ASAP (but I'll be surprised if before monday or thuesday).
This message was last edited by the player at 10:21, Fri 29 Aug 2014.