Neutrals

[finnman]

I am aware how normal neutrals work but I’m am a bit confused on the pro-allied and pro-axis neutrals
I think they will work a bit like the dutch territories in pacific. But if the apposing faction invades them then they will have to fight the garrisoned infantry.
Like if Russia invades Romania then they will have to fight the three infantry there. But if germany moves in to Romania they will get control of the infantry and the territory. This could just be a house rule but what do you think.

[WILD BILL]

I believe Larry said something along those line a few weeks ago if memory serves me right.

[Guest]

@finnman:

I am aware how normal neutrals work but I’m am a bit confused on the pro-allied and pro-axis neutrals
I think they will work a bit like the dutch territories in pacific. But if the apposing faction invades them then they will have to fight the garrisoned infantry.
Like if Russia invades Romania then they will have to fight the three infantry there. But if germany moves in to Romania they will get control of the infantry and the territory. This could just be a house rule but what do you think.

If it was just as easy as moving in, what would stop players from doing this?

[finnman]

@Brain:

@finnman:

I am aware how normal neutrals work but I’m am a bit confused on the pro-allied and pro-axis neutrals
I think they will work a bit like the dutch territories in pacific. But if the apposing faction invades them then they will have to fight the garrisoned infantry.
Like if Russia invades Romania then they will have to fight the three infantry there. But if germany moves in to Romania they will get control of the infantry and the territory. This could just be a house rule but what do you think.

If it was just as easy as moving in, what would stop players from doing this?

Maybe the other team could shift a neutrals political stand point for 5 ipc’s like Britain did changed Yugoslavia’s mind in the real war

[Flashman]

If it was just as easy as moving in, what would stop players from doing this?

Well, exactly.  Why not move one infantry in immediately and make those neutral units active and mobile?  There has to be some kind of catch.

Thread on LH:

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2006

[Guest]

Okay so Larry said this:

You can invade Sweden or any neutral country frankly. There will be three types of neutrals… True neutrals, Pro-Axis and Pro-Allies. Their standing armies will be listed on the map and appear should they be attacked. Invade Sweden, a true neutral, and perhaps all the other True neutrals become pro-something else. Get my drift?

And what does being pro-something mean? What benefit is it to have a neutral Pro-Axis if you are Axis?

[SilverAngelSurfer]

@Brain:

Okay so Larry said this:

You can invade Sweden or any neutral country frankly. There will be three types of neutrals… True neutrals, Pro-Axis and Pro-Allies. Their standing armies will be listed on the map and appear should they be attacked. Invade Sweden, a true neutral, and perhaps all the other True neutrals become pro-something else. Get my drift?

And what does being pro-something mean? What benefit is it to have a neutral Pro-Axis if you are Axis?

Putting all this together I’m guessing the benefit will be that you can just move 1 infantry into that territory and the pieces become yours, just as you stated.

I’m guessing that some territories, such as Romania (which I’m pretty sure I heard somewhere will start as pro-Axis neutral), will start pro-one-side or the other, but that most (like Sweden and Switzerland) will be “true neutral”.  The purpose of having territories like Bulgaria start as pro-Axis neutral when all Germany or Italy has to do is move 1 infantry in is that Bulgaria is a border territory on Russia, so Germany will not be able to attack Russia first turn because first it will have to secure pro-Axis neutrals like Romania before it can attack, see the picture?

However, if Germany were to attack a true neutral like Switzerland, other true neutrals like Sweden would become pro-Allies and all UK or USSR would have to do is drop 1 infantry into Sweden and they get more pieces for free too.  I think it’s actually quite an interesting concept.  8-)

[Guest]

I’m guessing that this is not the official answer because in your answer you said that you were guessing.
Did I guess correctly?

[SilverAngelSurfer]

I’m guessing that most of us are guessing about most of the rules about this game since it hasn’t come out yet and all Larry said that I know about ends in “Get my drift?”, but other than that, you’re right. :roll:  It only seems logical, but I’m not claiming that my logic will be followed.  If you have a better idea, be my guest to share it; or if you want an “official” answer, try Larry’s own board (Flashman provided the link) or just wait for the game to come out, since most of the stuff on Larry’s board seems to be speculation as well. :-P

[WILD BILL]

This came from Larry in a Q&A Feb 4th, I thought that’s what this topic started with.

[Q1]: What is the ‘pro-axis’ and ‘pro-ally’ mechanic for neutrals and how does it work?
Let me say this… rules related to Pro this or pro that will be consistent with AAP40. However, neutrals will play a MUCH greater role in Europe than Pacific.

[Q3]: Will there be any nation-specific ‘boosts’ in Europe (like Kamikazes are for the Japanese in Pacific '40)? No. I did not see the need.
I probably should point out that when a power enters a friendly neutral during a NCM the neutrals standing army converts and the actual units are placed on the board. This can make for some interesting developments in Greece and Finland as just two examples.

The true neutrals being linked together (or some of them) and all going pro the other side if one is attacked was mentioned by Larry very early on, but he didn’t confirm it to be the case for sure. I think they were still working it out back then. He hasn’t said anything more about true neutrals as far as I know

[Guest]

@SilverAngelSurfer:

I’m guessing that most of us are guessing about most of the rules about this game since it hasn’t come out yet and all Larry said that I know about ends in “Get my drift?”, but other than that, you’re right. :roll:  It only seems logical, but I’m not claiming that my logic will be followed.  If you have a better idea, be my guest to share it; or if you want an “official” answer, try Larry’s own board (Flashman provided the link) or just wait for the game to come out, since most of the stuff on Larry’s board seems to be speculation as well. :-P

Okay, your guess is a good as mine, in fact it’s better cause I didn’t even hazard a guess. I guess we will all find out soon enough.

@WILD:

This came from Larry in a Q&A Feb 4th, I thought that’s what this topic started with.

[Q1]: What is the ‘pro-axis’ and ‘pro-ally’ mechanic for neutrals and how does it work?
Let me say this… rules related to Pro this or pro that will be consistent with AAP40. However, neutrals will play a MUCH greater role in Europe than Pacific.

[Q3]: Will there be any nation-specific ‘boosts’ in Europe (like Kamikazes are for the Japanese in Pacific '40)? No. I did not see the need.
I probably should point out that when a power enters a friendly neutral during a NCM the neutrals standing army converts and the actual units are placed on the board. This can make for some interesting developments in Greece and Finland as just two examples.

The true neutrals being linked together (or some of them) and all going pro the other side if one is attacked was mentioned by Larry very early on, but he didn’t confirm it to be the case for sure. I think they were still working it out back then. He hasn’t said anything more about true neutrals as far as I know

I still don’t like the idea of simply moving in and gaining allegiance.