Welcome to our discussion forum!
You are not logged in.
I noticed that War Weariness could be played even if the Germans do not occupy a single (VP) location in France... ...is this reasonable?
Well, historically, the Germans controlled only one VP location in France: Cambrai.
Simply not holding Cambrai -possibly just meaning being 50 kms short of the historical frontline in that sector- does not imply that the physiognomy of the war has been very different and conditions that led to the French mutiny -the protracted stalemate - no longer apply.
Of course, no French VP can also mean that the Allies have managed to establish the frontline somewhere in Belgium, but it still would change little to the fact that the Germans are the ones that grabbed land, without surrendering any. For the French, a situation still very far from the triumphalist promises of 1914, and nothing that could make them feel like they're winning the war. Even being back to the initial, pre-war, positions, arguably constitutes a stalemate.
I admit that there will always be specific game situations where it would be debatable whether or not the mutinies would have occurred, but:
1)I didn't want to write 2 pages covering every possible configuration
2) this card deals with a very complex facet of WW1. Postulates based on hypothetical scenarios are very subjective and could be discussed endlessly. I prefer to be cautious when deciding under what situations the mutinies would NOT have happened.
In addition, since the original card considers none of these situations, and since depriving the CP player of the mutiny effects can be VERY detrimental to the play-balance, I prefer these hypothetical situations, as considered in the variant, to be too few than too many.
I've set the limit to a hypothetical scenario where the Germans hold no particularly advantageous positions in France, but where the Allies have managed to reconquer at least part of the lost provinces of Alsace-Lorraine, the French Army's obsession since 1870 and explicit war goal in 1914.
This would certainly have kindled fighting spirit and given some sort of impression that victory was on the way. (In the unlikely occurrence of an Allied crossing of the Rhine further North, same effect)
I like the changes to French Mutiny. It now seems to make more sense instead of randomly crippling the French army one turn in three.
Also, earlier US entry should make it less debilitating, but as you're still working on that I guess its too early to say!
I get the point - i suppose i was just a bit frustrated when i realized in my last game that even though i had managed the small miracle of pushing the germans back to their starting positions, war weariness could still be played. It means that if the CP hold cambrai, Allied player would need to hold Metz and Strasbourg (pretty much the whole of Alsace Lorraine) to avoid play of war weariness. I guess I need to pray for another miracle and put myself into a position to capture 1 hex with french offensive to cancel the event when played
I understand that you are currently occupying Metz, with no German units in France.
Nothing to worry about then, you're thus exempt from "war weariness".
not quite occupying metz yet... ...besieging... with 2 missed siege rolls already
Then you are not controlling, but definitely occupying. The War Weariness card refers to occupation.
Ah interesting, so what is the definition of occupying? It's not part of the glossary of terms in PoG rules.