House rule: Mongolia

[Trig]

In GW36v3 games, I’ve noticed that the USSR tends to attack Mongolia almost every time. This is because there is two IPP, defended only by a militia and a Calvary, and there is virtually no incentive to not attack, as there is almost no chance of Mongolia aligning to the USSR out of box.
This is quite ahistorical, as the Soviets had good relations with their communist neighbor, (one of only a few nations to even consider is independent and not part of China) and never even planed to invade. Mongolian units even fought on the Eastern front aginst Germany.
Given this, I have decided to house rule a reason for the USSR to not attack Mongolia, and better reflect their relationship.

Mongolia:

• The USSR controls Mongolia. They may use Mongolia’s units as if they were USSR units, but they may not leave Mongolia. (This means they can border clash with Japan.)
• The USSR may move its own units into, out of, and through Mongolian territories and may conduct combat (ie border clashes) from them.
• The USSR gains any Mongolian income once at war with a major power, and may align one Mongolian unit.
• Mongolia has a recruitment roll until it aligns.
• Mongolia aligns with the USSR if attacked by a non Comintern power, or if the USSR is at war with Japan.
• If Mongolia is attached by the USSR, Japan may align it.

This allows the USSR to gain benefits from Mongolia, without attacking it, and punishes it somewhat by allowing Japan to get involved if the USSR attacks.

Thoughts?

[insaneHoshi]

I agree with the sentiment.

However i would make it simpler by giving USSR a wartime bonus of 1-2 for Mongolia being neutral, and them aligning once USSR is at war with japan.

[Chris_Henry]

I totally get the reasoning behind this from a historical standpoint. But for gaming purposes that might be harder to do I think.

Does the USSR just get two VP’s for Worldwide Communism then because of this automatically? Or, on the flip side, have you now negated the potential of them obtaining these to VP’s by making it impossible to attack?

To me, this is “giving” the USSR a lot without balancing that out for something for the Axis (presumably Japan). This allows 2 free IPP for the USSR, and the ability to reinforce/move through Mongolia freely, thus making things more interesting for Japan. I guess I’d want to see something to “re-balance”, if you will.

All that said, the Manchukuo Expansion may hit a bit on what you want? It doesn’t really grant the USSR the income or anything, but it does allow for border clashes between Mongolia and Japan. However, I do think @insaneHoshi has a pretty simple and clean way of achieving what you want as well!

Out of curiosity, at what point in the game is Mongolia taken? Our guys tend to like to keep Mongolia as a buffer between China (depending on the situation) most of the time. But I think you see it attacked later in games to try and get those two VP’s for Worldwide Communism!

[David '06]

@chris_henry What if Mongolia already counts in for the 2 worldwide communism VPs since it is, a Communist country. You don’t need to send in units to make it communist.

[Trig]

@insanehoshi That is true, but I found that that would lead to just attacking Mongolia b/c then they had a better position on China and got the money before wartime. Also, the VPs.

[Trig]

@chris_henry I really like to take Mongolia in Jul 39. It is 2 almost free IPP, and force Japan or the KMT to defend more borderlands, and can give a lend lease route or bonuses to the CCP. It is a strong position.

As for balance, the main thing the USST gets here versus OOB when the attack Mongolia early is the abilty to do some more border clashes and positioning aginst Japan in the 30’s. That and one extra unit (probably cavalry) once at war
If this gets to OP, then I might try buffing Japan with a militia or two, or the Manchukuo expansion, but it hasn’t been a big deal.

For VPs, the USSR can attack, but then has to fight any Japanese forces nearby, or can just wait and DOW Japan to gain the two territories for the VP.

The main point of this is to improve the historicity of the area, and add some options to an often boring theater.

[Adalwolf]

@trig I like to be more historical as well and I think this serves that well.

[Chris_Henry]

@david-06 That’s kind of my whole point, that seems a bit unfair to the Allies and Axis that the Comintern just kind of automatically gets two VP’s, doesn’t it? I get that they have to hold on the them still, but instead of forcing the Comintern to attack and potentially lose units, as well as devote resources to taking them in the first place, they now just automatically get them? I don’t know, it seems like a hard sell to me!

[Chris_Henry]

@trig Very good points on early reasons to taking Mongolia. I think forcing a stronger border on Japan and KMT needs to be considered more than I gave it, as I was looking at it solely from the USSR having to defend a longer border! And also a good point on a lend lease route to the CCP.

I definitely get wanting to maintain historical accuracy. But I also try and keep in mind that it’s still a game. If we’re dealing with historical accuracies, we shouldn’t even have the opportunities for neutral powers to be attacked by the Allies at all. I try and look at it as a historical fiction based on historical reality. All actual history gets thrown out the window the moment that first turn in 1936 happens!

[insaneHoshi]

@chris_henry said in House rule: Mongolia:

@david-06 That’s kind of my whole point, that seems a bit unfair to the Allies and Axis that the Comintern …

Not really, considering the allies get like 4 VPs from Victory cities that will never be in much danger.

[Chris_Henry]

@insanehoshi While I get your point, that’s already part of the OOB game though. This is adding something extra to it. I guess I’d assume the game creators took into account the Allied cities that presumably will never (or almost never fall) when making the VC’s in terms of balancing. By just giving the Comintern to VP’s that they would have otherwise have had to have earned, there’s just the potential of an unbalancing. That’s really my point. Maybe it’s not huge, I couldn’t say without playing with this. But I think one has to assume that the game OOB is “balanced” in the eyes of the creators, so deviating from that causes the potential for imbalance.

[TheVeteran]

@chris_henry mongolia usually falls in July 39

[David '06]

@chris_henry What if Mongolia could get annexed but since it is communist from the beginning of the game you don’t get the VPs for Worldwide communism

[TheVeteran]

@david-06
I would never make that trade! USsR definitely wants Mongolia as an option for Victory point territories! You would be crazy to take that away from them as an option altogether.

[David '06]

@theveteran You get 14 IPPs for annexing it in jul 1936 and not attacking it + free units. the attackingis the probem and is not historic

[TheVeteran]

@david-06 14 IPP doesn’t make up for the complete loss of those victory points , I’m sorry. It’s also not historical to annex Mongolia in 36 I don’t believe.

[David '06]

@theveteran It is less historical to invade it.

[TheVeteran]

@david-06 this game has history in it yes, but it’s a game and it’s won by victory points, you can’t take away victory points from Mongolia. It’s completely unfair.

[David '06]

@theveteran Also the Mongolians asked to be anexxed

[TheVeteran]

@david-06 when exactly ?