@DessertFox599 said in 1914 Tournament Rules Game Play:
i only play with those rules. They are great.
Nice mate.
What are you finding the CP need for a bid?
Are you playing with the time limit?
Playable Nations in 1914
-
I love the idea of countries falling into revolution, but how would we perform this? What factors would we use to tell if a country is falling into revolution?
Presumably through some kind of chart similar to the income tracking chart. Call it, say, a social stability chart. The marker for each country would move up and down (mostly down) based on various game-event inputs such as the length of the war, the accumulation of casualties, major victories or defeats, etc. The chart’s outputs could take the form of increases or decreases in industrial productivity, army combat morale bonuses or penalties, and so forth. The closer a country gets to the bottom of the social stability chart, the closer it comes to having its war effort collapse through civilian revolution and/or military mutiny.
-
@Imperious:
Britain joins after an attack on any neutral (only the CPs can ever attack neutrals!)
USA really needs a chart to track its attitude to war; its entry certainly shouldn’t be automatic after X turns.
The game would be ruined since the Central powers would avoid UK the entire game, A variable entry USA is also a game breaker. It must be fixed because the games balancing would prove impossible. The game must be Historical, not full of nitpicking rules that destroy play balance.
How is a fixed entry in any way historical, unless you think that everything that happened HAD to happen as it did? There can be balance without scripting the game (Russian Revolution happens turn Y, Italy enters turn X, USA enters turn K, etc etc etc)
One cool way for USA to enter that my friends and I did for 1939 Europe and for WWI was a provocation system.
For example, it’s 1 pt for every allied DD/TRN that is sunk on a axis/cp turn, 2 pts for battleship/carrier.
2 pts for every IPC germany collects from a neutral territory, 1 for every IPC a Central/axis power collects from an originally french/british territory, plus some for convoys (which changed based on game for us, you get the idea), and MINUS points for every IPC that is SBR’ed out of Germany.If the points are at a certain total on USA’s turn, they declare war.
This adds a dynamic to the game that is new and interesting for A&A, where wholesale beatdown of the enemy must be balanced with the threat of a sleeping giant. Adds a lot of variety to the game.
There may be some whining about how that makes the game too political, but WWI was a very different war from WWII and to think that the US entry had to happen because it did happen is a disservice to any attempt at studying history and making a game historical.
Will it be harder to make the game balanced for both sides if the US entry is based on actions rather than a preset schedule that ignores the conditions in the game? Probably. But, unless what you like in A&A is the ability to replay the exact same scheduled events over and over again with a little variability in dice to spice it up, it will be a better game if the political situation is decided by factors that would decide it in reality rather than scheduling it based on what already happened in reality, ignoring that differences in events leading up to those key events that you would script would in fact change the script.
-
@Imperious:
The only way to make a balanced game is to allow Historical developments at specific times, not variable. American entry was assured after the Zimmerman note no need to figit with what happened. If it does not add to the game it does not need a place in the game. Axis and Allies is a broadstroke of History put in a game. It’s not supposed to account for every single incidental because these types of rules bog down an otherwise good game.
So Global is not balanced and has no chance of being so? That game has plenty of variable entries, left up to factors determined by player choice.
If Russia is trouncing Germany and is twice as rich as when it started, would it make sense that it’s people be disillusioned with the war and that they revolt?
By the logic quoted above, who cares? Revolution turn X, even though Russian morale is at its highest in decades! Huzzah!If Germany has pulled back all of its subs and surface fleet to defend its home waters and elects not to violate belgian neutrality, would the UK (not to mention the USA) have been as gung-ho about entering, or even entered?
By the logic quoted above, who cares? USA hasn’t been provoked at all, but, TO WAR!Scripting the events of the game while completely ignoring the developments in the game is what is truly ahistorical.
Thinking of history as a set sequence of events that couldn’t have happened any other way is dangerous when it comes to analyzing how and why events occurred. A historical game would be one that takes the miliary success into account when determining if a nation will have a revolution, not ignoring all of that to keep a schedule that is based on a succession of events that could very well look nothing like what is happening in the game.
A historical game takes the causes and effects in historical patterns into account, not insisting that events be maintained on a schedule no matter what, no matter how much the previous events deviate from the real-world script.
The central powers being caught between destroying the enemy and avoiding angering the US only adds to the potential for the game to avoid being played the same way over and over again, getting boring in a couple months.
Unless you believe that because of the variable entries in global (not the sheer size of the game), it is impossible to balance, there is no reason to believe that  in WWI variable entry/revolution is an automatic balance killer.
–-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine this scenario:The CP are focusing all of their effort on knocking out France, keeping only enough in the East to ensure the safety of their most important territories.
Russia is booming, entirely safe for as long as France can hold out, and Russia is in fact doing well enough that the Central powers may have to divert attention from France to ensure their defenses hold. Conceptually, we would imagine that morale in this scenario would be higher in Russia than it was in the war, as the CP made huge advances into Russia and the situation was looking grim.
But whoops! Turn X came along! Russian Revolution, against all odds! Russia is out of the war or whatever. France stands alone. CP wins.
It’s quite plausible that if Germany knows that the revolution will happen according to a timed script, rather than factors that would logically lead to the revolution, they can ignore russia only enough to keep from taking Vienna or Berlin or whatever, and then once the revolution happens, they are home free.
Is it possible to balance the game with this possibility? Probably. But how bizzare would the game be? France has to be strong enough if Germany decides to ignore russia. But if France is that strong, will Germany have any real coice or motivation to go after Russia?
Similarly, UK and France KNOWING when USA would enter would allow them to do some historically (from a pattern/plausibility point of view) asinine things.
How can the game be historical when both sides know when these huge events will happen when in reality they were much muddier?
Obviously we don’t know all the details of the game, but scripting the game has a very good chance of making balance MORE difficult, especially with the case of Russia. Unless you want to throw out the revolution altogether.
Having a simple system that tracks the US involvement and Russian Revolution presents its own challenges, but if far from impossible to balance, and may be easier to balance than a game where those two are scripted.
-
I love the idea of countries falling into revolution, but how would we perform this? What factors would we use to tell if a country is falling into revolution?
Have two extra roundels included with the game. One tracks USA provocation, one tracks russian revolution. Track on IPC chart; it’s got numbers. Once total is to X amount, event happens.
USA: Add for convoys attacked, allied ships sunk on axis turn, IPC collected by CP from neutral/french/british.
(can be possibilites for subtraction)Russia: Add for territories lost, attacks that result in a territory not being taken, subtract for German/Austrian territories taken, etc.
-
How is a fixed entry in any way historical, unless you think that everything that happened HAD to happen as it did?
Because events occur as they did in History. No atomic bombs in 1914, or tanks. Russia does not fall in 1923, etc.
It is no different from global, you have no choice as to when US or USSR enters ( unless provoked early)
So Global is not balanced and has no chance of being so? That game has plenty of variable entries, left up to factors determined by player choice.
This “choice” is only that the axis can attack early, otherwise these allies automatically enter the game at fixed turns. Where are the rules in global where you roll dice to determine when somebody is at war.?
-
OK, where I’m at with the revolution chart:
First of all there were revolts, mutinies and revolutions in most participating counties as casualties mounted up, food ran short & everyone got sick of the war. So, ALL major countries have a marker on the Disorder & Revolution chart.
This has 3 zones: Safe; Disorder & Revolution.
Safety would run from say, +20 to -20 with everyone starting at 0.
Between -20 & -30 Disorder sets in. Armies and fleets ordered into attack may mutiny (die roll?). Otherwise the country plays as normal, and with some + scores can drag itself out of Disorder.
Over a certain point Revolution occurs. The model I have for Russia might apply to any country:
You need 2 extra sets of units; “Reds” and “Blacks”.
Roll a die for each tt held by that power. Depending on certain factors the area might stay loyal (leave units in place); turn to the Communists (replace with Red units) or go Nationalist (replace with Black).
Loyal units remain controlled by the original player. They may attack original enemies, Reds or Blacks. They can still place new infantry & cavalry units as long as they have depots. Victories over revolutionaries may move them back up into Disorder.
Reds are more likely to take over industrial areas (i.e. with factories); Nationalists only those areas where their people are the majority (e.g Ukraine, Ireland, Bosnia).
In the case of Russia, Germany controls the Reds/Bolsheviks. They are not permitted to operate outside Russian home tt. Germany/CP is considered to have aided the Red takeover, so how to define their respective areas of control? The German player cannot simply use the Bolsheviks to vacate Reds area for Germany to move into.
The presence of Red units in one country will, make Red takeover in neighboring tts more likely.
So what moves a nation up and down the chart:
Defeats in battle
High casualties in a battle (win or lose)
Loss of convoys/supply routes (food shortages)
Passage of a year (war weariness)
Loss of Victory Cities (defeatism)Victories in battle and capture of VCs might move a nation up, but of course the trend should always be downward; it becomes a matter of surviving intact rather than defeating the enemy through occupation.
The game ends when all nations of one side are defeated (all factories captured) or in Revolution.
-
@Imperious:
Because events occur as they did in History. No atomic bombs in 1914, or tanks. Russia does not fall in 1923, etc.
It’s irritating and uncalled for that you insinuate that because I think it should be possible that events vastly different in the game from 1914-1916 than in the actual years 1914-1916 should lead to a different 1917 in the game than in the actual year 1917 is me somehow asking for something as asinine as having atomic bombs in the game when nothing at the time available would have made that possible. Please don’t try to argue if you are about to that the Russian revolution happening how and when it did (or even at all) was already locked into place in August 1914.
Berlin fell in 1945 to the Soviets. Should the next edition of A&A after this (assuming it’s WWII) schedule that approximate time in game terms to be its fall? Why not? What is the major difference between that and the Russian Revolution in terms of one needing to played to and one needing to be scheduled? I am not saying there is not a major difference, I am wondering what it is if it exists and if that difference then means that it should be scheduled.
@Imperious:
It is no different from global, you have no choice as to when US or USSR enters ( unless provoked early)
<sigh>Can you not see how that is a choice? Japan (and Germany or italy I suppose) can choose to have the USA enter on 1, 2, or 3. EuroAxis can choose 1,2,3,4 for Russia. Japan and Russia on the pac map can start anytime, or not at all.
@Imperious:
This “choice” is only that the axis can attack early, otherwise these allies automatically enter the game at fixed turns. Where are the rules in global where you roll dice to determine when somebody is at war.?
Not true at all. Russia can choose to go to war with Japan, and in some circumstances, UK may want to risk going to war early with Japan too. Who said anything about rolling dice to determinine who is at war? I didn’t, unless you want to say that taking of territories and killing ships (which uses dice, sure) is me saying that, in which case I would argue right back that in global the fortunes of Germany on its first turn (which requires rolling dice) has huge consequences on when they go to war with Russia and sometimes even Japan’s plan in the pacific. But I never said that we should do something along the lines of rolling a handful of dice and if we get a Yahtzee, USA enters. That’s what you make it sound like to me. As I have described it, the provocation system would have clear causes and effects, and they would be measured cumulatively until they got to the point that the USA is provoked.
In the end, your argument doesn’t really hold much water because although the fixed turn entries come about eventually, the players can (and often do) CHOOSE to attack before the auto-war conditions are triggered. Unless you want to argue that that itself causes the game to be impossible to balance, and then show that Global is imbalanced because of that you really have no leg to stand on to say that allowing variable entry is automatically a balance doomer. It would be one thing if everyone always waited until the effects resolved automatically, but that is far, FAR from the case. You can’t just ignore that in the VAST majority of games played at least ONE political situation is changed before it would have automatically happened.
Who is to say that if not provoked early, the USA can enter the war at a later turn automatically, but that game circumstances may have Germany wanting to risk USA coming in before that (hence a provocation system)? As for how variable entry is bad for balance, I see it as quite the opposite. In fact, the provocation system for the US could coincide quite nicely with CP success. The better the central powers do (killing ships, taking territories), the more likely the axis is to provoke the USA. The more the allies need help coincides with Germany doing more that would anger the US which coincides with the USA entering earlier. Scheduling it means if Germany is cleaning up then USA will be in too late to be balanced, and if Germany is getting hosed then USA will be in too early to be balanced. What’s really unbalanced is scheduling fixed events that completely ignore the situation at hand, and cannot be prevented because they are scheduled.
It’s understandable that you did not address the most important issue I mentioned, since I wrote so much so here it is:
What will the effects be of having a scheduled Russian Revolution when Russia is doing WELL?
That question in my mind slaughters the possibility of the Russian Revolution as being hard-scheduled as a remotely good option.</sigh>
-
Those seem like pretty good causes to start a revolution. I think overall it would need to be simplified a lot. One major issue I see is the need for extra pieces and charts.
Also, it might be a lot simpler to get rid of disorder, and just have a point where there is revolution. As for what revolution actually means, well… if it is for more than just russia a possibility that could get complicated.
As for more countries than russia having the possibility of Revolution I see a lot of pros and cons.
Each country could have a different value for when they have a revolution, and a different revolution result.
I would not mind personally if only Russia were able to have a revolution for simplicity’s sake. Tons of ideas all around right now.
-
Russia fell because it suffered more defeats and setbacks. It could have happened to any power, so it seems only fair to keep open the possibilities.
You might see the “Disorder” stage as equivalent to that between the February and October revolutions; strikes and mutinies (and the Tzar overthrown), but the government still keeps the war going. At a pinch you could use WWII A&A units for Reds and Blacks.
-
Russia was a bit more unstable at the beginning of the war though. They were very ill prepared and the revolution of 1905 wasn’t that far in the past. It’s not necessary that only one nation have revolution possibilities, but if it were only 1, Russia is the best choice.
-
Perhaps for Communism, Russia was fertile soil. But there were Soviet takeovers in Bavaria and Hungary, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavarian_Soviet_Republic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Soviet_Republic
Austria-Hungary would be more prone to nationalist uprisings, with well over half the Empire containing other nationalities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_and_religious_composition_of_Austria-Hungary
-
Remember I am not talking about what happened, but what was most likely to have been the case in 1914. Anyone betting on which country would have been most likely to have a major uprising would have bet on Russia (not that they would have known it would have been a communist uprising of course).
-
It’s irritating and uncalled for that you insinuate that because I think it should be possible that events vastly different in the game from 1914-1916 than in the actual years 1914-1916 should lead to a different 1917 in the game than in the actual year 1917 is me somehow asking for something as asinine as having atomic bombs in the game when nothing at the time available would have made that possible. Please don’t try to argue if you are about to that the Russian revolution happening how and when it did (or even at all) was already locked into place in August 1914.
Sorry you feel that way. All events that are not directly part of WW1 should be on fixed timelines. Otherwise, if the Americans never enter the central powers will usually win. If the Russians don’t fall or fall late due to DICE rolls, the game will end in Allied victory. Like Global 40, you can’t have variable entry. The game can only be balanced one way and the game would suck if people could glitch entry to their advantage. If Germany does not attack Belgium, i guess UK stays out of the game? Is this what you want? It’s garbage.
Berlin fell in 1945 to the Soviets. Should the next edition of A&A after this (assuming it’s WWII) schedule that approximate time in game terms to be its fall? Why not? What is the major difference between that and the Russian Revolution in terms of one needing to played to and one needing to be scheduled? I am not saying there is not a major difference, I am wondering what it is if it exists and if that difference then means that it should be scheduled.
To balance a game the starting dispositions need to be fixed, not the ending dispositions.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 10:36:27 am
It is no different from global, you have no choice as to when US or USSR enters ( unless provoked early)<sigh>Can you not see how that is a choice? Japan (and Germany or italy I suppose) can choose to have the USA enter on 1, 2, or 3. EuroAxis can choose 1,2,3,4 for Russia. Japan and Russia on the pac map can start anytime, or not at all.</sigh>
Easy. The Allies have no choice unless the Axis attack early. A scenario of “CHOICE” WOULD BE THE ALLIES CAN ATTACK THE AXIS AT ANY TIME. But that is not global.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 10:36:27 am
This “choice” is only that the axis can attack early, otherwise these allies automatically enter the game at fixed turns. Where are the rules in global where you roll dice to determine when somebody is at war.?Not true at all. Russia can choose to go to war with Japan, and in some circumstances, UK may want to risk going to war early with Japan too. Who said anything about rolling dice to determinine who is at war? I didn’t, unless you want to say that taking of territories and killing ships (which uses dice, sure) is me saying that, in which case I would argue right back that in global the fortunes of Germany on its first turn (which requires rolling dice) has huge consequences on when they go to war with Russia and sometimes even Japan’s plan in the pacific. But I never said that we should do something along the lines of rolling a handful of dice and if we get a Yahtzee, USA enters. That’s what you make it sound like to me. As I have described it, the provocation system would have clear causes and effects, and they would be measured cumulatively until they got to the point that the USA is provoked.
Funny you don’t mention USA or USSR entering war with the Germans by their own choice? Oh wait they cant. You should make rules to allow USA to immediately begin her attack on Germany. That should balance out too. Oh heck just have them all start at war and eliminate the political rules. That should magically balance too. Im surprised you haven’t already advocated this.
In the end, your argument doesn’t really hold much water because although the fixed turn entries come about eventually, the players can (and often do) CHOOSE to attack before the auto-war conditions are triggered. Unless you want to argue that that itself causes the game to be impossible to balance, and then show that Global is imbalanced because of that you really have no leg to stand on to say that allowing variable entry is automatically a balance doomer. It would be one thing if everyone always waited until the effects resolved automatically, but that is far, FAR from the case. You can’t just ignore that in the VAST majority of games played at least ONE political situation is changed before it would have automatically happened.
Ill never Heil Again…
Who is to say that if not provoked early, the USA can enter the war at a later turn automatically, but that game circumstances may have Germany wanting to risk USA coming in before that (hence a provocation system)? As for how variable entry is bad for balance, I see it as quite the opposite. In fact, the provocation system for the US could coincide quite nicely with CP success. The better the central powers do (killing ships, taking territories), the more likely the axis is to provoke the USA. The more the allies need help coincides with Germany doing more that would anger the US which coincides with the USA entering earlier. Scheduling it means if Germany is cleaning up then USA will be in too late to be balanced, and if Germany is getting hosed then USA will be in too early to be balanced. What’s really unbalanced is scheduling fixed events that completely ignore the situation at hand, and cannot be prevented because they are scheduled.
It’s understandable that you did not address the most important issue I mentioned, since I wrote so much so here it is:
What will the effects be of having a scheduled Russian Revolution when Russia is doing WELL?
The game will be decided by this fact and not game play. Quite obvious. especially when after 8 years of playtest of crap like that…it didn’t balance out. Plus where would Flashman be if the Revolution didn’t happen? No red pieces!
That question in my mind slaughters the possibility of the Russian Revolution as being hard-scheduled as a remotely good option.
Go ahead to do it, i don’t care but the official game will never have any of that, the events of entry are dependent on this below:
Special Events:
Russian Revolution:
Russian Revolution – Can begin on turn 10. At the beginning of turn 10 a roll is made to see if Russia goes into a civil war. On a D6 roll of 1 the country spirals into revolution. This roll is modified as follows:-2 to the roll if an allied capital is held by the Central Powers (-1 if contested)
-2 to the roll if Petrograd is held by the Central Powers (-1 if contested)
-1 to the roll if Moscow is held by the Central Powers (-1/2 if contested)
-1/2 to roll (rounded down) per additional Russian or controlled allied territory that is held (-0 if contested)
+1/2 (rounded down) to the roll per enemy territory held by the Russians or its controlled allies (+0 if contested)
+2 to roll if an enemy capital is held by the Allies (+1 if contested)
The roll is made each and every turn afterwards. If Russia goes into a revolution she will surrender and all her remaining forces (within Russia) are removed from the game. All other units outside of Russia, including any controlled territories, are considered to belong to the Russian-controlled Allies. Furthermore, Serbia, Romania, and Montenegro will remain controlled by the Russian player. However, Serbia will continue to follow the special rules for the “fall of Serbia.”Effect: Germany gains economic and total control of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belorussia, Kiev, Ukraine and Crimea. German units in any other Russian areas must retreat and the German player gains no benefit from other Russian areas. All Russian units are removed from play.
German mutiny:
On turn 13 the German Navy mutinies. The mutiny only affects German naval units. When an attack or move is made, roll a D6; on a 1-4 the attack/move may not proceed. German forces defend as normal. -
@Imperious:
Sorry you feel that way. All events that are not directly part of WW1 should be on fixed timelines. Otherwise, if the Americans never enter the central powers will usually win. If the Russians don’t fall or fall late due to DICE rolls, the game will end in Allied victory. Like Global 40, you can’t have variable entry.
<facepalm>In global 1940 you DO HAVE VARIABLE ENTRY.
I stopped reading after that. If you can’t admit that it seems that you are just trolling or at the very least not capable of having a civil discussion.</facepalm>
-
Ok then in Global USA can start the war early with Germany. Any time.
USSR can always start a war with Germany and Italy at any time.
Just wanted to make that clear, but where in the rules is that allowed?
I wonder then, why are they listed neutral? shouldn’t they just be belligerents? And what is this thing about Russia not being able to start a war with Germany before turn 3 and USA before turn 4?
-
What turn does Japan enter the war against the USA and UK in AA Global 1940?
-
What turn do you avoid the question i asked?
USSR can start attacking Germany on her first turn?
USA can immediately land troops in France?
This is an example of fixed political rules for events, because to allow otherwise means the game would be broken.
When you admit that we can continue. Why not have a game where Japan is neutral? Italy? you see the game can’t be so totally open ended as to allow all sorts of variable events causing a delay or early entry of nations. The axis decide if they enter early and employ a specific strategy to make the best use of either an early or at the FIXED ENTRY TURN that the game provides.
So using for example this variable Russian collapse ( and appearance of Flashmans illustrious ‘Red Army’ pieces fighting WITH Germany). If the conditions allowed an early event ( collapse) the Central powers will benefit too much and all those freed up pieces would decide the game. IN this case early entry would be too much of a boost for the Central powers. Thats why it is fixed at turn 13 for the START OF THE POSSIBILITY OF THIS EVENT. We allow modifiers for control of specific areas of Russia to facilitate this, but we don’t allow say Russian revolution in 1916, otherwise the game is busted.
Balance and realistic player options trump “anything for anyone at anytime” style games.
In the meantime watch and be calm…
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contestado_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_Crisis_of_1917We need yet another set of pieces simulating this war. Add them to the turn order…
My preferred scheme updated to include all the extras.
France - Blue
Britain - Brown(khaki)
USA - Green
Russia - Light Grey
Italy - Light Green
Turkey - Light Tan
Austria - White
Germany - Field Grey
Brazilian Army- Black
Mexico- red ( salsa color actually)
Indians- whiskey color
Canadians- lime green or redCommunists - Red
Nationalists - Black
Japan - Dark Blue
China - Yellow
Neutrals - Orange
Rebels- Polka dot
US border army- another shade of green
Cartwright’s- cream ( in honor of Hoss)
Protestors- yellow -
That is purposely taking my points and distorting them. When did I say that anything should happen at at anytime at all? I realize USSR and other countries in global have restrictions. That is not the same as scheduling the exact specific turn that an even can happen that cannot happen any other turn regardless of game conditions, which is what saying “Revolution happens turn X” is.
A provocation system is a cumulative process. It isn’t just a random start to hostilities. They can’t just start “any time.”
NOWHERE did I say that there should be no fixed rules at all. What I DID say was that having an even such as the Russian Revolution especially automatically happen at turn X is a bad idea.
It is asinine to assert that I was calling for an “anything goes” game.
Do you not realize that your own idea is a variable turn condition for the Russian Revolution? What turn does it happen? Well, possibly turn X. But possibly not. It could be a different turn. Look at that! A variable event! Now I am 99% sure you are just trolling instead of 98%.
You make it sound like the cumulative process like my provocation system could happen in the very early turns. Had you read my post for what it said instead of what you wanted it to say so you could attack things that weren’t there, you would see that these points would need to add up to a certain total, and would take many turns to happen unless, of course, Russia just moved all its units to the farthest east corner of the map and let the cp just waltz in.
This is an example of a variable turn effect:
"Special Events:
Russian Revolution:
Russian Revolution � Can begin on turn 10.  At the beginning of turn 10 a roll is made to see if Russia goes into a civil war.  On a D6 roll of 1 the country spirals into revolution.  This roll is modified as follows:-2 to the roll if an allied capital is held by the Central Powers (-1 if contested)
-2 to the roll if Petrograd is held by the Central Powers (-1 if contested)
-1 to the roll if Moscow is held by the Central Powers (-1/2 if contested)
-1/2 to roll (rounded down) per additional Russian or controlled allied territory that is held (-0 if contested)
+1/2 (rounded down) to the roll per enemy territory held by the Russians or its controlled allies (+0 if contested)
+2 to roll if an enemy capital is held by the Allies (+1 if contested)
The roll is made each and every turn afterwards.  If Russia goes into a revolution she will surrender and all her remaining forces (within Russia) are removed from the game.  All other units outside of Russia, including any controlled territories, are considered to belong to the Russian-controlled Allies.  Furthermore, Serbia, Romania, and Montenegro will remain controlled by the Russian player.  However, Serbia will continue to follow the special rules for the �fall of Serbia.�Effect: Germany gains economic and total control of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belorussia, Kiev, Ukraine and Crimea. German units in any other Russian areas must retreat and the German player gains no benefit from other Russian areas. All Russian units are removed from play."
By the way, what happens with the German naval mutiny if they have sunk every british ship and have the seas completely dominated, and are close to winning the war? How does a mutiny in such a scenario make sense?
-
Here is what I posted before, in greater detail.
Provocation Point System:
Russian Example:
Russian Revolution Occurs if at the start of any russian turn the Provocation Point Total is equal to or greater than 100 (for example)
Add 2 each time a CP conquers an Originally russian Territory (can be multiple times for one territory)
Add 1 each time a CP conquers a CP territory that was under Russian control at the time of its capture (Can be multiple times for one territory
Add 5 for each originally Russian IC that is captured by a CP. (Only once per IC)
Add 10 EACH TIME an originally Russian city is captured by a CP.
Add 3 each time russia attacks a territory with a land unit but does NOT capture that territory from that attack.
SUBTRACT 1 each time Russia captures an Originally CP territory
SUBTRACT 2 each time Russia captures an originally Russian territory that was under CP control.There are finer points and things that need to be clarified of course but that’s the gist.
As you can see (EDIT: As you can see if you are not going out of your way to misinterpret and intentionally misread and unjustifiably attack), such an event would be VERY unlikely to happen remotely early in the game.
Suggested Topics
