Neutral Blocks Discussion - Delta+1

[Jennifer]

Confused, Jim.

Only the territory attacked gets extra units - and only if it is actually attacked…if it is annexed, you get nothing.  So why does, for instance, Argentina get an extra 20-24 units when Chile is attacked again?

[JimmyHat]

Your confused because we are no longer talking about James idea, due to the reasons I gave earlier.

[Jennifer]

@JimmyHat:

Your confused because we are no longer talking about James idea, due to the reasons I gave earlier.

Okay, not sure what your reasons were - I was dealing with some ugly business and really did not want to read through the whole page. (That makes me a bad person by my own definition, I know.)

Here’s what I was under the impression was on the table:

If you attack a true neutral or one that is pro-your enemy, then the closest enemy nation - that is at war, adds (territory-value)(number of rounds) worth of units to that specific territory or territories that are currently under attack.

That does not say anything about other nations in the block.  The other nations - per the voted on rule - become pro-the other side.  However, annexed territories do not get effected by that rule, so it really does not reward the other annexing nations…I thought your issue was that you thought America would suddenly get like 20 or 24 Infantry in Germany happened to attack Argentina…

---

If I am incorrect, please enlighten me as to what the issue is.  I might agree with you.  It could rip assunder the space time continuum and destroy all life as we know it - but I’m willing to take that risk!

[JimmyHat]

@JimmyHat:

@Cmdr:

There was a lot of talk about adding defensive firepower to neutrals.  JamesAmeman’s idea was a really good and well thought out idea on how to do that.

Ok, well its cool you like his idea.  I thought it was rather prohibitive because it did not specify neutral blocks, and therefore would punish an attack on neutrals even more than it is now by adding various units.

The only thing I did like about it was the availability to change the neutral force pool by deciding what units you wanted to add based on the incoming attack force.  However this was pointed out to be a failing because people could build aa guns if being attacked by air for example.

SO, lets see what we have here.  If we add James idea to Vances proposal we can see that SAmerica will probably never be attacked.  If US attacks Venezuela on US 4, then the SAmerican block would get what…20ipcs of units added?  24?  And so america will never attack SAmerica.

If German decides they want to invade neutrals, and head for Turkey G2 or G3, they are going to be facing 6 more ipcs of units to defend Turkey?  Scary.   At least UK gets an additional…6 ipcs of units to help defend from Arabia.

Oh and Sweden?  In James incantation (married with blocks) no one would be foolish enough to ever threaten it.

Its a bad plan.  It doesn’t go with the neutral blocks we have already ironed out, and its complicated.  Now you sell me on why its sooo hot.

here it is again why James idea doesn’t work.  I’ll break it down further.

US on Samerican block:
  US cannot declare war on these countries until it is at war, the Axis get to decide when US is at war.  Lets say the are at war US3.  That means if US intends to invade Samerica(the block) they will have to fight 6 ipcs X3(Samerica is worth 6 ipcs, over 3 rounds)  That means the Us needs to beat 6 additional infantry to the one’s already in the target zone.

Germany on Turkey:
  Germ declares war on Turkey G3 and hits it heavy.  Turkey is now reinforced with 12ipcs worth of additional units, lets say 1 aa gun 2 inf?  Either way it is nothing compared to the hurt Germany puts on Turkey in preperation for an attack on the Caucusus G4.

Russia on Sweden:
  If Russia ever got close to sweden it will be too late.  3ipcs over x rounds is going to make it impregnable.

The other option is by territory, in which case Turkey is now a breeze for Germany and SAmerica is a quagmire.  I didn’t even get to Iberia and the fact that after Turn 5 or 6 it is undefeatable.

[Young Grasshopper]

Jimmy,

You are extremely invested in this rule and your opinion in this discussion is valuable, using all the info in this thread and without thinking about what others want, please tell me how you envision neutral blocks. forget everyone else a please write a neutral blocks rule that you think is good. use as many different ideas that you have heard here, just tell me your favorite neutral blocks suggestions…… no explanation required… we will use what you write as a framework for future discussion, so try to be a specific as possible. Thank you.

[JimmyHat]

Ok, haven’t gotten input from Mantlefan yet but I hear he’s banned again so not sure when/if he’ll be able to contribute.

I have an idea of where it will go but Special forces keeps poking holes in it!  Darn him!

[Young Grasshopper]

@JimmyHat:

Ok, haven’t gotten input from Mantlefan yet but I hear he’s banned again so not sure when/if he’ll be able to contribute.

I have an idea of where it will go but Special forces keeps poking holes in it!  Darn him!

I’m not looking for anyones input but yours, and don’t worry about perfection, just lay it on us.

[Jennifer]

Wait, we’re locked into 1C still, right?  It won the vote and I believe that was determined as done and over.  We’re just talking about added units and whether or not there should be any and if so, how those added units are, right?

Jim, you raise a good point on Sweeden.

However, keep in mind that America’s not going to be attacking S. America.  Why?  1)  They lose their 10 IPC sovereignty NO negating any benefit of attacking S. American territories income wise.  2)  They allow the Axis to land in S. America and annex territories.  3)  There is no utility for America by taking Chile, Venezuela or Argentina (and defeinitly not the no ipc, no army territories!)

Lastly, Germany can already attack Turkey and crush the 8 Infantry there.  Why is adding 2 Infantry and an AA Gun to Turkey going to make that bad - is it not enough?

[Young Grasshopper]

@Cmdr:

Wait, we’re locked into 1C still, right?  It won the vote and I believe that was determined as done and over.  We’re just talking about added units and whether or not there should be any and if so, how those added units are, right?

Jim, you raise a good point on Sweeden.

However, keep in mind that America’s not going to be attacking S. America.  Why?  1)  They lose their 10 IPC sovereignty NO negating any benefit of attacking S. American territories income wise.  2)  They allow the Axis to land in S. America and annex territories.  3)  There is no utility for America by taking Chile, Venezuela or Argentina (and defeinitly not the no ipc, no army territories!)

Lastly, Germany can already attack Turkey and crush the 8 Infantry there.  Why is adding 2 Infantry and an AA Gun to Turkey going to make that bad - is it not enough?

I just want to know jimmyhats opinion, we can talk about it afterwards.

[Guest]

The forces that might be added to Neutrals is a separate issue from the Neutral Blocks rule itself, and figuring out the best additions to neutrals (if any) should come after everyone has played the game with Delta rules a few times.

Having said that, here is one scenario involving Turkey:
Round 1: Germany builds an IC in Romania; Italy takes Greece
Round 2: Germany build transports in z100; Bulgarian inf, yugo armor & 3 planes to Greece; Italy builds Greece airbase, attacks Turkey from land, sea and air
Round 3: Germany reinforces Turkey (or takes it if Italy had bad dice)

You will need like 50 inf on Turkey to stop that.

[Jennifer]

@Vance:

The forces that might be added to Neutrals is a separate issue from the Neutral Blocks rule itself, and figuring out the best additions to neutrals (if any) should come after everyone has played the game with Delta rules a few times.

Having said that, here is one scenario involving Turkey:
Round 1: Germany builds an IC in Romania; Italy takes Greece
Round 2: Germany build transports in z100; Bulgarian inf, yugo armor & 3 planes to Greece; Italy builds Greece airbase, attacks Turkey from land, sea and air
Round 3: Germany reinforces Turkey (or takes it if Italy had bad dice)

You will need like 50 inf on Turkey to stop that.

We don’t really want to STOP the attack on Turkey.  We want the other side to be compensated for being unable to defend Turkey from attack.

Honestly, for Germany I see no reason to attack turkey.  2 Minors in Greece/Romania allows you to get fleet units there and reinforcements for the front lines pretty quickly.  If Russia wants to kill those transports, they’re going to end up needing more than the 3 planes they have. (3 Fighters scrambling, 2 transports and a destroyer along with an Airbase opens up Caucasus, S. Ukraine, Rostov).  I am more worried about Russia attacking Turkey to get an end run into the juicy Balkan States.

[Guest]

I guess I should not have said “stop” it, but maybe make it costly for the axis.  If they take Turkey, they get easy access to the middle east oil, Africa, and if Japan goes hard on India they can tag team up through to Stalingrad later.  I don’t think it’s a game breaker, but it allows a very different strategy (which is good).

[Jennifer]

@Vance:

I guess I should not have said “stop” it, but maybe make it costly for the axis.  If they take Turkey, they get easy access to the middle east oil, Africa, and if Japan goes hard on India they can tag team up through to Stalingrad later.  I don’t think it’s a game breaker, but it allows a very different strategy (which is good).

Plowing through 8 infantry and giving the allies freebies is not my definition of easy…I’d rather have America attack Spain, then go annex Turkey!  Else, I can just sit there with a complex or two on the Black Sea and get almost as easy access to the Middle East.

[Guest]

That’s very true, and there is also the possibility that Saudi Arabia can fall to US control.  If UK can reinforce it long enough for them to build an IC and start pumping out units on that side of the world, that’s potentially a bad deal for the axis.

By the way, I see that a certain someone has started another self-persecution thread on the Harris site.  I for one would encourage everyone to please refrain from stating the obvious and fanning the fire.  Please don’t provoke him.  Maybe if he is permanently down to one site, he will value not being banned there enough to curb his enthusiasm and make good thoughtful contributions without all the histrionics.

[special forces]

How about letting neutrals defend their country on 3 instead of 2?

edit: so basically a ‘new’ unit: True Neutral Inf: attack 0, defense 3 movement 0. When annexed turns into regular INF.
but that only works when turned true neutrals become instantly activated, of course.

[JimmyHat]

@Cmdr:

Wait, we’re locked into 1C still, right?  It won the vote and I believe that was determined as done and over.  We’re just talking about added units and whether or not there should be any and if so, how those added units are, right?

Jim, you raise a good point on Sweeden.

However, keep in mind that America’s not going to be attacking S. America.  Why?  1)  They lose their 10 IPC sovereignty NO negating any benefit of attacking S. American territories income wise.  2)  They allow the Axis to land in S. America and annex territories.  3)  There is no utility for America by taking Chile, Venezuela or Argentina (and defeinitly not the no ipc, no army territories!)

Lastly, Germany can already attack Turkey and crush the 8 Infantry there.  Why is adding 2 Infantry and an AA Gun to Turkey going to make that bad - is it not enough?

It sounds like you think US won’t attack any true neutrals because of the loss of a 10 ipc NO.  I don’t like that but it can be adjusted after play testing if it turns out the US is out of the picture.

I have Turkey with an aa gun, a ftr and an atry I think, perhaps a tank.  I also added Turkish fleet units so that if Germany takes Turkey, Russia gets a fleet to help defend the Black Sea.  IF Russia attacks Turkey Germany gets some ships in the Black sea to compensate.

Also don’t get confused by how this works, you attack a neutral, and the rest of the block turns immediatly.  No ‘pro-axis’ or ‘pro-allied’.  That is because as you point out US can attack Colombia and if the rest turns pro-axis…well Axis won’t be ever getting near SAmerica again.

[JimmyHat]

Current Neutral Blocks Proposal.

Neutral Blocks
SAmerica- all territories in Samerica minus Brazil.
Middle East-Turkey, Arabia, Afghanistan
Iberia and Colonies-Portugal, Spain,switzerland and all African neutral territories including Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Mongolia is removed from the ‘strict neutral’ camp and is added to the Japanese/Russia non-aggression pact.  If Russia attacks Japan, Mongolia remains neutral all game.  If Japan attacks Russia Mongolia immediately joins Russia, replace Mongolian troops with Russians and place control markers on Mongolian territories.

Sweden is removed from the ‘strict neutral’ camp.  It is now tied to the German NO for Swedish iron ore.  So long as Denmark and the Baltic Sea is free of allied units or control Germany collects a 5 ipc NO.  While Germany and Russia are neutral they do not block this convoy route, however once at war it can be blockaded by any ship, including subs or trns.  If Russia controls both Finland and Norway then Sweden will join the Axis at the beginning of Germany’s next turn.  Replace units with Germans.

Amended Force Pools for Neutrals
these units are in addition to the printed on infantry numbers located on the gameboard
Argentina) 1 aa gun, 1 artillery
Venezuela)1 artillery
Chile)1 artillery
sz65)1 dd
sz66)1 dd 1 CA
Turkey)2 artillery 1 armor 1 fighter
Arabia)1 fighter
sz100)1 dd 1 CA
Spain)1 aa gun, 1 fighter, 1 armor 1 artillery
Liberia)1 dd 1 sub
Mozambique)-1 artillery
Angola)- 1artillery 1 armor
sz91)1 dd
sz92)1 dd 1 CA 1 sub
Sweden)1 artillery 1 armor 1 fighter
sz114)1 dd 1 CA

Miscellaneous
When a neutral block is attacked, all other territories within that block immediately join the opposing side.  Players choose which power the entire block will join.  All units and territories are replaced with the new controlling power and they will collect ipcs for remaining territories in their next collect income phase.

Added Switz to Iberian block, added units to Safrican Neutrals, switched Liberian inf to dd/sub to represent interned Vichy ships.  Added units to Turkey and Arabia.

12/4 edited Swedish Iron Ore NO.
12/5 finalizing
Adding this to 1C we get additional rules;

US loses its 10ipc NO for controlling the US if it violates neutrality, this represents costs incurred by the US for setting up banana republics.

An attack by an Axis power on any strict neutral territory while the USA and/or USSR are not yet at war will result in USA and USSR given the option to declare war on any or all Axis powers.  This constitutes a provoked declaration of war and therefore would have no other ramifications in regards to other theatres.

If an axis power attacks Turkey when it is a strict neutral and Caucasus is not axis controlled, the Soviet Union preemptively destroys oil production facilities in Azerbaijan as part of its scorched earth policy. Germany may never again collect the 5IPC Caucasus oil NO, even if it controls Caucasus.

[Young Grasshopper]

@JimmyHat:

Current Neutral Blocks Proposal.

Neutral Blocks
SAmerica- all territories in Samerica minus Brazil.
Middle East-Turkey, Arabia, Afghanistan
Iberia and Colonies-Portugal, Spain,switzerland and all African neutral territories including Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Mongolia is removed from the ‘strict neutral’ camp and is added to the Japanese/Russia non-aggression pact.  If Russia attacks Japan, Mongolia remains neutral all game.  If Japan attacks Russia Mongolia immediately joins Russia, replace Mongolian troops with Russians and place control markers on Mongolian territories.

Because we are using Alpha+2 rules as our foundation for Delta+1, the Mongolian rule must be voted in during a future poll for this to be included.

Sweden is removed from the ‘strict neutral’ camp.  It is now tied to the German NO for Swedish iron ore.  So long as Denmark is not controlled by the Allies Germany collects a 5 ipc NO.  If Russia controls both Finland and Norway then Sweden will join the Axis at the beginning of Germany’s next turn.  Replace units with Germans.

I like the idea of Sweden being on its own separate from other blocks, but if Russia uses valuable resources to take Finland and Germany, why reward Germanys failure by automatically giving them Sweden and $3 extra dollars?

My suggestion is, who ever controls both Norway and Finland, controls Sweden and receives the $3 income. That would give Germany a small boost to begin the game after they take Finland. However, It’s up for the taking if the allies want to invest units to take Norway and Finland.

The 6 infantry should only be activated if Sweden is attacked out right by a side that does not control both Norway and Finland already.

BTW…. My rule suggestions only seem complicated because I cover all angles with detail.

Amended Force Pools for Neutrals
Argentina) 1 aa gun, 1 art
Venezuela)1 art
Chile)1 art
sz65)1dd
sz66)1 dd 1 CA
Turkey)2 art 1 arm 1 ftr
Arabia)1 ftr
sz100)1 dd 1 CA
Spain)1 aa gun, 1 ftr, 1 arm 1 art
Liberia)1 dd 1 sub
Mozambique)-1 art
Angola)- 1art 1 arm.
sz91)1 dd
sz92)1 dd 1 CA 1 sub
Sweden)1 art 1 arm 1 ftr
sz114)1 dd 1 CA

You all know how I feel about force pools, but if you all agree to them, than so be it.

Miscellaneous
When a neutral block is attacked, all other territories within that block immediately join the opposing side.  Players choose which power the entire block will join.  All units and territories are replaced with the new controlling power and they will collect ipcs for remaining territories in their next collect income phase.

Added Switz to Iberian block, added units to Safrican Neutrals, switched Liberian inf to dd/sub to represent interned Vichy ships.  Added units to Turkey and Arabia.

Adding this to 1C we get additional rules;

1. US pays 10 ipcs the first time it violates neutrality as a penalty paid to League of Nations.

2. IF any axis country attacks any neutral country, US and Rus immediately declare war on them.(or whole axis?)

3. If Germ takes Turkey, Russia destroys the Caucasus oil fields, remove that NO.  (I don’t like this addition, too many little rules and its very circumstantial.)

I agree with all of the 3 points above, if the Axis take Turkey its only $2, but it allows them to transport troops through the black sea, so I’m OK with taking away their oil NO. However, only as long as there is at least 1 Russian land unit in the Caucasus, to take away the oil NO for the round of and every round after Turkey falls.

Good work Jimmy, we will all discuss your recommendations and try to find a good frame work, my comments are in red.

[Young Grasshopper]

ATTENTION*

Lets all please use JimmyHats amended Neutral Blocks suggestion (posted above) as a starting point for future discussions about this rule. We should also consider version 1C, which I have copied here in a post below. What do you like and what don’t you like about the suggestions posted on this page?

[Young Grasshopper]

NEUTRAL BLOCKS - Version 1c.

A. An attack by any Axis power upon any strict neutral territory within a Neutral Block will result in all strict neutral territories and armies within that Block immediately joining whichever Allied power the Allied side chooses.  An attack by any Allied power upon any strict neutral territory within a Neutral Block will result in all strict neutral territories and armies within that Block immediately joining whichever Axis power the Axis side chooses.
  An attack by an Axis power on any strict neutral territory while the USA and/or USSR are not yet at war will result in USA and USSR immediately joining the Allies.
  So long as Sweden is not controlled by the Allies Germany collects the 5 ipc NO for Swedish iron.  If Russia controls both Finland and Norway then Sweden will join the Axis at the beginning of Germany’s next turn.
  The Neutral Blocks are:

1. South America (VEN, COL, ECU, PER, BOL, PAR, CHI, ARG, URG)
2. Iberia & Africa (SPA, POR, ANG, MOZ, RDO, PRG, SIE, LIB)
3. Islamic (TURK, SAUD, AFG)

B. If the United States attacks any strict neutral territory, trade sanctions are imposed by the League of Nations for this reckless act of aggression against a neutral nation. USA  may never again collect the 10IPC national sovereignty NO, even if it controls Western US, Central US and Eastern US.

C. If an axis power attacks Turkey when it is a strict neutral and Caucasus is not axis controlled, the Soviet Union preemptively destroys oil production facilities in Azerbaijan as part of its scorched earth policy. Germany may never again collect the 5IPC Caucasus oil NO, even if it controls Caucasus.