Yet another 1914 game report

@Aristokles

You cannot loose the German fleet R1.
It is absolutely unattackable by the 1 French DR or the Russian DR after eliminating the UK fleet (Yes, I use DR for Dreadnought!).

G1 all ships wipe out British Fleet is MANDATORY!

@zanetheinsane:

@Aristokles:

Brief thoughts �
The RR rules being what they are, we�ve decided to not play with them for the time being.  Having said that, while they certainly are open to abuse by the Allies, I think they on balance favor the CP.

From the threads I have been reading, the only CP wins seem to be when the Russian Revolution was in play. Without it, Russia just seems to be a complete disaster. They have the ability to either turtle in Moscow with 60-70 units, or run around hitting stacks.

Or if they know the inevitable is likely they can even take their massive stack of units and head south and obliterate the Ottoman army without repercussions.

It seems odd that even though the rule is “optional”, it’s almost a necessity for the CPs to even stand a chance.

It is not odd, but logical that the RR rule must be in play.
In fact it cannot work for both variants to be balanced! Impossible!
On another note a WWI game without RR (rules) isn’t a WWi game for me!

The RR definitely helps the CP, but as has been said, the Allies can ‘game’ it to minimize the damage.

The RR is particularly useful if the Russians simply retreat everything to Moscow- the CPs take several russian territories and simply have to contest Moscow (and hope to continue contesting it at the end of the Russian turn to force revolution)/.

BJCard have I missed something?
Thought it was not necessary to contest Moscow; Russia could control it or contest it.
I will check p14 of FAQs again.

Not to hijack this thread, but we’re thinking about changing the Russian Revolution rule to allow the Central Powers to decline the armistice if they want to.  That would keep Russia from “gaming” the rule.  Of course, there is only one revolution, so accepting it is a one-time opportunity.

wittman, I thought the CPs had to contest Moscow- I don’t have the rulebook with me right now, please let me know your findings.

Krieg, that potential rule change would probably be a good thing.

Nice idea Krieg.

BJCard: Just reread the section and in the rule book it is as I said: control or contest.

Should you be working you naughty man!

So all the CPs need to do is hold 3 territories bordering Moscow and one other (Poland/Sevastopol for example) at the end of the Russian turn?

Man I’ve been playing this wrong!

Work is overrated.  The new plant isn’t built yet!

Yes, three bordering moscow(are 5 in total) must be controlled and a 4th original territory(not Serbia or Romania) either controlled or contested and Moscow either contested or still in Russian hands.

Thought you were at your desk, excuse the presumption.
One day I too will have constraints; not yet though.

Well, I am at my desk, so your presumption is correct; just not a lot of work to do for now.

Good to get the RR cleared up.  Thanks!

@Krieghund:

Not to hijack this thread, but we’re thinking about changing the Russian Revolution rule to allow the Central Powers to decline the armistice if they want to.  That would keep Russia from “gaming” the rule.  Of course, there is only one revolution, so accepting it is a one-time opportunity.

That’s a great idea. It would indeed keep Russia from gaming the revolution. And it I love that the CP’s can choose to fight on for additional IPCs or choose to stop if things look bleak.

@Krieghund:

Not to hijack this thread, but we’re thinking about changing the Russian Revolution rule to allow the Central Powers to decline the armistice if they want to.  That would keep Russia from “gaming” the rule.  Of course, there is only one revolution, so accepting it is a one-time opportunity.

Excellent Idea !!

Two Thumbs UP !!

Kim

If the CPs decline the armistice, does the revolution nevertheless occur and, for example, make Russian controlled territory off limits to the other Allies?

Does Russia still get a turn to fight off the Central Powers?

Or does the Revolution, in this case, have no effect on the game?

@Krieghund:

Not to hijack this thread, but we’re thinking about changing the Russian Revolution rule to allow the Central Powers to decline the armistice if they want to.  That would keep Russia from “gaming” the rule.  Of course, there is only one revolution, so accepting it is a one-time opportunity.

@Flashman:

If the CPs decline the armistice, does the revolution nevertheless occur and, for example, make Russian controlled territory off limits to the other Allies?

Does Russia still get a turn to fight off the Central Powers?

Or does the Revoluiton, in this case, have no effect on the game?

@Krieghund:

Not to hijack this thread, but we’re thinking about changing the Russian Revolution rule to allow the Central Powers to decline the armistice if they want to.  That would keep Russia from “gaming” the rule.  Of course, there is only one revolution, so accepting it is a one-time opportunity.

I’m almost positive it probably means “No revolution happens”

A thousand times yes on making that ruling official though.  Destroys gaminess without complicating things further.  Forces Russia to play like it wants to survive instead of “How can I self destruct for the most damage”.

Not very historical, as the Armistice was signed about 6 months after the Communist Revolution, and over a year after the Tsar was overthrown.

In fact it was only signed after the Germans renewed the offensive when Russian delegates stalled in hope of more Allied intervention.

It means that when the revolution conditions (as per the Rulebook) are met for the first time (once per game), the Central Powers have a choice.  If they all agree to an armistice, it goes down exactly as indicated on page 14 of the FAQ thread.  If any Central Powers player refuses the armistice, everything continues on as normal - Russia has a new government, but it has no effect on the game.

Try it out and let me know what you think.

Should be an improvement. I wasn’t comfortable with the Central powers having to think if they really wanted to take Livonia/Belarus/Tartarstan; just too counter-intuitive.

I DEFINITELY like this. I’ve played on the Allies side twice now (though not as Russia, per se), and both times my teammates and I figured out the best way to “kamikaze” Russia’s army and still trigger the revolution, destroying a large CP stack and denying them a a victory city in one fell swoop!

@Krieghund:

It means that when the revolution conditions (as per the Rulebook) are met for the first time (once per game), the Central Powers have a choice.  If they all agree to an armistice, it goes down exactly as indicated on page 14 of the FAQ thread.  If any Central Powers player refuses the armistice, everything continues on as normal - Russia has a new government, but it has no effect on the game.

Try it out and let me know what you think.

@Krieghund:

It means that when the revolution conditions (as per the Rulebook) are met for the first time (once per game), the Central Powers have a choice.  If they all agree to an armistice, it goes down exactly as indicated on page 14 of the FAQ thread.  If any Central Powers player refuses the armistice, everything continues on as normal - Russia has a new government, but it has no effect on the game.

Try it out and let me know what you think.

Two thumbs up for me…i will be using RR rules now!

@wittmann:

BJCard have I missed something?
Thought it was not necessary to contest Moscow; Russia could control it or contest it.
I will check p14 of FAQs again.

Going back a few post, you guys got it right (in later posts). You can either contest Moscow, or it can be Russian controlled. You (as CP) would contest Moscow to trap the Russian army in Moscow if you have the 3+1 territories you need to force the Revolution. If Moscow is contested when Russia’s turn comes up, they  won’t be able to attack the adjacent territories that are in CP control (Walla Revolution). The UK can be the spoiler here though if it is the Germans that force the Revolution, by ampib landings, or by killing off your CP army that is contesting Moscow (coming up from India) before the Russians turn comes up. The turn order is huge when trying to force a Revolution.

BTW I think it should be up to the CP to decide if the Revolution happens, so the allies can’t use it to their advantage. I’m on-board with it being a one time deal if the CP refuse too.

I also think that we should look into the CP taking full control of Moscow could also forces a Revolution, and the CP could refuse the deal here as well if it was in their best interest (still can only refuse it once per game). If it is in the best interest for the CP to take Moscow (for VC) then so be it. If it is in the best interest for the CP to force a Revolution to remove the Russian army from the game to preserve thier own resources then cool.

We had one game were the Russians left Moscow nearly unprotected (only their new builds), so that if the CP took it they would only get a handful of IPCs, but it would preserve their huge Russian army, and the Revolution would be off the table as long as the CP held Moscow. This felt kinda wrong that the Russians would give up Moscow, then have the opportunity destroy the CP army once help arrived (if they even need help). Just my 2 cents.