Hard Coded Romanian Coup Event

[lwarmonger]

So, German game is going well up to winter of 41. Nicely dug in, continuous front well forward, didn't manage to take Leningrad or Sevastopol, however preserved my armored forces nicely for a solid set of preliminaries early in 1942.

Then, a minor Amphibious landing in Romania is launched by the Soviet player.... triggering the coup in Romania. The entire romanian army disappears, and Romania switches to the Soviet side. In December 1941. While the Germans are barely touched.

The Romanians are a practical people. The same reason why they switched sides in 1944 was precisely why they wouldn't have switched sides in 1941/1942. Not to mention that this is an extremely gamey tactic that lends itself to abuse. I think the trigger for that coup event needs to be looked at and refined.... probably with a no earlier than 1943 start date, and a certain number of divisions required to be within the Romanian borders. As things stand, what should have been a minor nuisance turned out to end the game in a Soviet victory. This basically becomes an "I win" button for the Soviets.

[tm1]

So, German game is going well up to winter of 41. Nicely dug in, continuous front well forward, didn't manage to take Leningrad or Sevastopol, however preserved my armored forces nicely for a solid set of preliminaries early in 1942.

Then, a minor Amphibious landing in Romania is launched by the Soviet player.... triggering the coup in Romania. The entire romanian army disappears, and Romania switches to the Soviet side. In December 1941. While the Germans are barely touched.

The Romanians are a practical people. The same reason why they switched sides in 1944 was precisely why they wouldn't have switched sides in 1941/1942. Not to mention that this is an extremely gamey tactic that lends itself to abuse. I think the trigger for that coup event needs to be looked at and refined.... probably with a no earlier than 1943 start date, and a certain number of divisions required to be within the Romanian borders. As things stand, what should have been a minor nuisance turned out to end the game in a Soviet victory. This basically becomes an "I win" button for the Soviets.

WOW I guess you did not have the house rule of " No amphibious Ops " in place.

BOLD move by your opponent

[Veterin]

there are a few standard house rules that it's worth having in pretty much every multiplayer game

- no amphibious landings
- no paratrooper landings
- no temporary motorisation

everything else is pretty much preference but those 3 are standard across pretty much all games

[Zebtucker12]

Pretty sure this was patched out ages ago are you running an old version? or did he manage to move inland.

[Jango32]

Errata (01.01.00): The Romanian Surrender event is no longer triggered by the loss of Constanta, Sulina, Cogealac, or Medgidia.

[AlbertN]

Anyhow there should be some token unit in like lvl a lot fort in romanian ports. More that a fortified zone that surrenders once some foe looks at it. Or well air recon would spot transports and transports then sink without air cover.

But ideally naval invasions could be done but within x hexes of staging naval base.

[lwarmonger]

Anyhow there should be some token unit in like lvl a lot fort in romanian ports. More that a fortified zone that surrenders once some foe looks at it. Or well air recon would spot transports and transports then sink without air cover.

But ideally naval invasions could be done but within x hexes of staging naval base.

My issue isn't so much with the invasion... that was at worst a minor irritant that could be tracked down and destroyed. My issue is that a coup is hard coded to happen, and that is game destroying. It makes sense when Germany is on the ropes.... but not for a pinprick raid being conducted by a desperate Soviet Union.

[DarkHorse2]

there are a few standard house rules that it's worth having in pretty much every multiplayer game

- no amphibious landings
- no paratrooper landings
- no temporary motorisation

everything else is pretty much preference but those 3 are standard across pretty much all games

I agree with all of those and would be what I would request as well.

[DarkHorse2]

Anyhow there should be some token unit in like lvl a lot fort in romanian ports. More that a fortified zone that surrenders once some foe looks at it. Or well air recon would spot transports and transports then sink without air cover.

But ideally naval invasions could be done but within x hexes of staging naval base.

So those Romanian units that I normally send to the Soviet Garrison, need to stay behind in Romanian ports now?

*sigh*

[AlbertN]

Not what I meant, but like Russian major ports have some fortifications with their custom TOE, there can be some fattier fortified zones in Romanian ports with a larger TOE and like lvl 4 fort. I think it would prevent also a '43 landing or so at this stage - because anyhow taken a port, late war the soviets can ferry more troops in no ?

[Joel Billings]

I take it the Soviet player not only landed, but then was able to move inland and take a trigger city before the Axis player could react. Is that what happened? Were there any garrison forces left in the area? I realize this is very unrealistic, and a house rule can prevent it. One thing I've been amazed at is how many Romanian units were used to garrison the Crimea in 1942. I think there was a real perceived thread of amphibious invasions that the Axis took seriously, causing these large garrisons (over and above what would be expected for partisans. Now the Romanian coast may have been safer for a number of reasons, and ideally would not cause a surrender. One reasonable rule that we might add sometime is that no amphibious invasion should take place more than X hexes from a supplied Soviet hex (maybe 20 hexes). I'd use a house rule like this if I were playing a campaign.

[malyhin1517]

I already wrote about the case of Soviet landings in the rear, which capture large cities. This is a similar situation that arose due to the fact that the rear guard troops are in the Garrison, and not on the map. The Germans simply do not have extra troops to protect key points in the rear from the landing of sea and air assault forces. Therefore, in fact, the only way out is to ban any Soviet landings by home rules, which seriously limits the game, unlike WITE1. Perhaps it would be worth disabling this function altogether, since due to the lack of garrison units on the map, there is no one to fight the landings.

[Joel Billings]

I think that may be true for Romania, but not for Crimea. I think some of the units that were used to garrison the Crimea are not assumed to be in the Soviet Union Garrison box. If I'm wrong about that, let me know. If they are, then the player should be assumed to have to Garrison areas within 15-20 hexes along the coast (or be able to respond to an attack) to reduce the threat. That's why a house rule that limits the reach of these invasions seems appropriate.

[Denniss]

I believe the germans stationed some naval patrol groups and torp-dropping medium bombers in Romania so any landing ops would have been costly. Plus soviets hand their hands full with supporting defensive operations and evacuations via sea.
Anyway I'll add fort units to Constanta and Sulina with higher than usual exp/morale and some fort levels. Romanians had some coastal troops there defending these ports.

[AlbertN]

Ideally the code should be a max distance from the Invasion Port.

The Soviets did an amount of unopposed landings - both in the Krimean campaigns and in the Lapland ones.
In general they were short range executions, getting troops ashore - not in the guise of a D'Day but pretty much like Gallipoli.
Ships get there, troops get ashore safely, and inland somewhere there can be a garrison that reacts to it.

A different matter was to invade the homeland of another country - as per a direct landing in Romania; or even a landing about Odessa while Crimea is in Axis hand - that is beyond the capabilities of the Soviets and would have resulted in many ships (and troops) sank by enemy action.

Even in '44 with total aerial dominance the Allies landed in northern France because ... that's where their Spitfires were able to cover adequately and properly, and have not tried to land in Denmark or directly in Germany. Figure out the Soviets with their relatively limited amphibious and aerial capabilities.