OK am I the only one who doesn’t see a map in this thread?
Probably… did you try waiting a couple seconds for it to come up? It does not appear instantaneously.
@Frontovik:
i’m quite sure i saw a russian territory called vy_borg_…
We are the borg. Resistance is futile! :lol:
But seriously, it’s very possible that Vyborg is included, because it was so in old AAE41. It was the territory that soviets stolen to Finland in Winter War
I’m betting Rio de Oro is the bottommost West African neutral
So Spain has 3 territories finally? … great :roll: I see 2 neutral territories bordering western side of Sahara. Northern one could be Ifni and southern one could be Spanish Sahara. I’d prefer 2 Spanish european territories but this is better than nothing. I also see Liberia, by the way
@Frontovik:
i’m quite sure i saw a russian territory called vy_borg_…
We are the borg. Resistance is futile! :lol:
But seriously, it’s very possible that Vyborg is included, because it was so in old AAE41. It was the territory that soviets stolen to Finland in Winter War
Ah Ha! Star Trek… I love it!
Yes I do remember the Vyborg territory… it was quite small though, was it not?
Well, now all we need is some of that fancy image fixing programming they have in the movies and on tv.
“Enhance…”
typing
“Enhance…”
typing
“Oh, now I see that tiny poison dart they shot into the neck of that guy way back there in the corner of the picture in the shadows.” :mrgreen: If only we could do that here…
Britain should be divided in two, according to Larry.
Didn’t he say Italy was also going to be two territories? Northern and Southern Italy?
Is it possible to somehow remove all the units and replace them with map?
If we had super computer graphics programs… :wink: Honestly the second image Bob posted is pretty much that, or at least as close as we’ll probably get.
Does Russia really have that many territories?
Does Russia really have that many territories?
Yes it do! … and happy we all are about it! We have ascertained something around 30 Soviet territories including the Pacific 40 Map… correct?.. anyone… anyone?
According to the 2nd map, there are 22 russian tt in Europe, so 31 in total
UK and Italy should be two territories
I assume Morocco is also present
Upon further scrutiny I see now that both Britain and Italy are divided into two territories. I am also 75% sure that morocco is present, unfortunately a green USA infantry may be obstructing the view somewhat. Anyhow i’ll update the map and post a new version later.
thanks again for all the help in finding all those tiny details.
So it appears Switzerland has an infantry spawn symbol, so it will be possible to invade Switzerland? :-o It does not appear to have an IPC symbol though, so unless it’s worth it to open up a direct border between Germany and Northern Italy, there isn’t much point in invading it, huh?
Doesn’t it seem kind of easy to take neutral countries and drink up their IPCs all game long. If this is supposed to be somewhat like the real war, I think that having them as impassable or non-enterable was a better idea than this new ‘infantry spawn’ method. Historically, that is. In Europe/Global 40, I forsee that any and all IPC producing countries will be invaded and taken advantage of by whoever can get them. Not that I am against this, because it is fine by me, but there must have been reasons Hitler did not invade Switzerland, or Spain (or use Spain, if they were neutral pro-axis). I just think the game, as it pertains to neutral territories, will not turn out like the real war did. Anything that can be invaded, will be invaded. I don’t know if this is what the designers intended or not.
A question: Say, for example, Germany were to take Spain or Switzerland, and say they gain IPCs every turn for them. What happens if the Allies “liberate” these territories? Do they revert to neutrality? Do the Allies take control of them and get the per-turn income?
Maybe we can only theorize about the answer right now.
As far as I know, they would move over to Allied control. No “reversion to neutrality” rule has been mentioned.
However, a good number of the neutrals in this version of the game that were neutral territories in previous versions (Spain?, Switzerland, Sweden, Portugal, and most of South America for instance) have no IPC value, and therefore they probably will not be invaded. So long as Spain, Switzerland, and Sweden have no IPC value, there really aren’t many good reasons to invade them, because you can’t build an IC on them (which with Spain might be nice for Germany) and they aren’t really in the way of you getting anywhere you need to go. Spain is on the end of the European continent (only reason might be to get at Gibraltar easier), though it may have an IPC mark covered up by that Italian tank. Portugal is even more of a dead end than Spain. Switzerland (assuming a territory setup similar to AA50) is between Italy and Germany, but tanks and mech would have to blitz through to get from one to the other anyway and should still be able to blitz around through the adjacent territory (which used to be Balkans in AA50), so taking Switzerland shouldn’t really accomplish anything. Norway and Finland are connected without having to go through Sweden. With these considerations plus a (hopefully) large infantry spawn should make invading these neutrals out of the question as it would be a waste of resources. No one is going to want to invade Switzerland and fight a bunch of infantry just to have the territory unless they’re already winning anyway. These neutrals are also going to be “true” neutrals that will not be on either side of the playing field.
Other new neutrals like in the Middle East and Brazil were NOT neutral in AA50 and previous versions, because they WERE invaded/occupied/whatever in the actual war. Most, if not all, of these will be pro-Axis or pro-Allies neutrals which is suggestive anyway. So I don’t think there will be too many problems with historical playout. The cool thing is that it at least gives you the option to invade them if you want to put an airbase or naval base in Sweden for example, which is exactly what A&A is all about. 8-)
Okay… well, if there is no monetary advantage, then, yeah, why even invade. I was under the impression that most of the European neutrals would be WORTH something. If they are not, then my questions don’t matter much. However, good point with the Air/Naval bases… that could be useful, depending on the circumstance.
A naval base on Sweden is just as good as one on Norway. The only advantage is that it’s harder for the allies to invade
A naval base on Sweden is just as good as one on Norway. The only advantage is that it’s harder for the allies to invade
Yeah, I agree that the utility or practicality of usage will be slim. As in, building Naval or Air bases in conquered neutrals will be mostly uncessary. I could see few times when you’d have either the need or the money to do it.
A naval base on Sweden is just as good as one on Norway. The only advantage is that it’s harder for the allies to invade
Precisely, Norway will be equivalent to Sweden as far as positioning goes since it connects to most of the same territories & sea zones, though it looks like it might touch more of the Baltic sea zones than Norway does. It’s kinda hard to see what changes were made to the Baltic. :-( And you’re right about Norway connecting to the Northern sea zones making it easier for the Allies to invade than Sweden being inside the protected Baltic.
@SAS:
No one is going to want to invade Switzerland and fight a bunch of infantry just to have the territory unless they’re already winning anyway.
Let me rephrase this: lots of people (including me) will want to invade Switzerland to put a roundel there, but it will not be strategically smart because you have to fight however many infantry units that otherwise are doing nothing, wasting your units.
One true neutral that will likely be invaded all the time will be Turkey, though if Italy doesn’t want to use their navy to get at the USSR and the Soviets don’t care to do anything with navies, it may stay as it was historically, which is a very good possibility also.
However, I was mostly considering the true neutrals from the Axis perspective, but invading Portugal or Spain as the Allies in order to gain a foothold in Europe might be quite interesting as well. This is why I think it would be really interesting to have an extra repercussion like the other True Neutrals changing to pro-Axis because that would mean that Germany/Italy would get at least the Switzerland infantry for free, though I don’t like the idea of all true neutrals changing as that really doesn’t make sense either. If there isn’t some kind of repercussion though, I can see invading Spain and Portugal as becoming standard (assuming they don’t have a ridiculous number of spawn units) as an extra entrance into Europe for the Allies (one that would be farther from Rome and Berlin than France) and as a defensive measure for the Axis to prevent this same thing.
Anyone else have thoughts on how being able to invade Spain and Portugal will affect European invasion/defense strategies?
I think that ships off EUS can reach Spain, which is 3 SZ’s away. There may even be the possibility that Germany/Italy and US/UK will trade Spain, so they both wait for the other to attack so they don’t have to lose units to the spawn infantry, and thus neither will attack Span. portugal is easier to capture as the allies since it doesn’t have a Med connection, so the only way for the axis to reach it is to invade Spain, or to invade via the Atlantic, which exposes them to attack from the allies
