Neutral Blocks Discussion - Delta+1

[JimmyHat]

?  Sweden is never under Nazi rule.  They are neutral and providing Hitler with Iron Ore.  If Germany DOW’s sweden, they will have to defeat sweden’s decently large army and small fleet.  Plus considering the chance that Sweden may join Germany if it remains neutral, I think most Axis players are going to leave it be.

Historically Sweden remained Neutral throughout the war, but the SS recruited there and they freely traded with Germany.

EDIT***I also like how sweden is separated from the strict neutrals.  Its position in Scandinavia means it is already in the periphery, and like Mongolia the fact that it is surrounded by belligerents means it does not have the freedom to DOW other countries like SAmerica for example.  Taking it out of the ‘strict neutral’ camp and any blocks does mean it is vulnerable.  Beefing up its military is one solution, but this proposal also adds another solution which gives a ‘bonus’ to the surrounding powerhouses.  Germany wants to keep Sweden neutral in the hopes of gaining the Swedish military if the war starts to go against them.  Russia wants Scandinavia because it ‘potentially’ receives additional NO money from it.  UK/US are also vested in Scandinavia, if they can capture Norway before the Reds, Sweden will remain Neutral.

[JimmyHat]

@Vance:

I would also like to see the Emergency Conscripts idea in poll 5 to resolve the Mongolia/nonagg pact issue, but wait and see how that vote goes (Emergency Conscripts is currently leading).

I didn’t vote for this because I don’t really understand it.  It seems to be similar to the 12ipc rule from A2 in that either side can receive troops.  This is different because in my version only Russia can receive Mongolia.  Not sure Japan needs the troops, I feel the Axis win by pressing Russia, and that will mean either attacking through Siberia or through the back of China, but either way Japan will be the aggressor.  That being said, I realize my strategy might not be best for everyone and having multiple options is FANTASTIC.  If my Mongolia idea isn’t used, a solution will have to be made for Mongolia in the neutral blocks.

I also will add that having Mongolia as a deciding factor between Russia/Japan aggression is historical, uses the ‘on game board’ information, and is very similar to A3’s Mongolia rule just less cluttered.

[special forces]

Something about the whole Sweden solution still feels very wrong to me.

Isn’t it better to make Sweden an absolute neutral? (not invadable) and change the NO to (for example) an Allies-free Baltic Sea? (abit like the italian Med NO), or possibly that + Axis ownership of Norway.

By the way, Sweden didn’t have that much of an army, i think…

Edit: or just add it to the Iberian block? I don’t see a problem when that would be the case (at least not right away)

Edit 2: abit insane idea: let Sweden chose the side of the richest side: count Allied and Axis combined income and once it goes over a certain amount, Sweden (and Switzerland?) will join that side. Economic opportunism!

[special forces]

just thinking out loud ;)

[Young Grasshopper]

@special:

Something about the whole Sweden solution still feels very wrong to me.

Isn’t it better to make Sweden an absolute neutral? (not invadable) and change the NO to (for example) an Allies-free Baltic Sea? (abit like the italian Med NO), or possibly that + Axis ownership of Norway.

By the way, Sweden didn’t have that much of an army, i think…

Edit: or just add it to the Iberian block? I don’t see a problem when that would be the case (at least not right away)

Edit 2: abit insane idea: let Sweden chose the side of the richest side: count Allied and Axis combined income and once it goes over a certain amount, Sweden (and Switzerland?) will join that side. Economic opportunism!

I like this a lot, but I would change the NO to $5 for control of the Denmark straight. If it were for no allied ships in the Baltic, Germany wouldn’t be able to collect it until they have dealt with the Russian cruiser and sub (not fair IMO). I would (like SF said) make Sweden a special Neutral that is uninvadvable as well as Switzerland.

[special forces]

@Young:

@special:

Something about the whole Sweden solution still feels very wrong to me.

Isn’t it better to make Sweden an absolute neutral? (not invadable) and change the NO to (for example) an Allies-free Baltic Sea? (abit like the italian Med NO), or possibly that + Axis ownership of Norway.

By the way, Sweden didn’t have that much of an army, i think…

Edit: or just add it to the Iberian block? I don’t see a problem when that would be the case (at least not right away)

Edit 2: abit insane idea: let Sweden chose the side of the richest side: count Allied and Axis combined income and once it goes over a certain amount, Sweden (and Switzerland?) will join that side. Economic opportunism!

I like this a lot, but I would change the NO to $5 for control of the Denmark straight. If it were for no allied ships in the Baltic, Germany wouldn’t be able to collect it until they have dealt with the Russian cruiser and sub (not fair IMO). I would (like SF said) make Sweden a special Neutral that is uninvadvable as well as Switzerland.

Well… as long as they are not at war, Russia isn’t an Ally and doesn’t disturb that NO, i think.

Still, control of Denmark straight sounds good as well.

(possible option in case Denmark sounds too easy: control over Denmark + no enemy ships in SZ112 and 113. Dunno… better keep it simple, i guess)

[Young Grasshopper]

You are right about the Russian boats (tu-shay). I really like your idea about the NO for control of the straight + no allied boats in the Baltic… and here’s why…

I had a game yesterday where Germany and Russia were beating the hell out of each other and the Russian ships were ignored (very unrealistic). Germany could be forced to purchase a destroyer in order to get rid of the sub… I’m going to suggest it and call it both of ours (look for it in the Delta thread).

[special forces]

@Young:

You are right about the Russian boats (tu-shay). I really like your idea about the NO for control of the straight + no allied boats in the Baltic… and here’s why…

I had a game yesterday where Germany and Russia were beating the hell out of each other and the Russian ships were ignored (very unrealistic). Germany could be forced to purchase a destroyer in order to get rid of the sub… I’m going to suggest it and call it both of ours (look for it in the Delta thread).

Great :)

[JimmyHat]

true, I also have seen a game like that.  Germany had their fleet run to the Med and they left the BB alone.  This ship wouldn’t just sit by, he’d convoy raid!

I’ve thought alot about which territory to link to the NO.  Norway I don’t like.  It already has a convoy zone, and isn’t where the resources are from.  It is the port where the iron is shipped out in the winter months, but that is because there is a rail line that facilitates this, however the ore could have also been transported directly to Stockholm.

Sweden was another option, it being where the ore is coming from originally.  This proves rather hard for the allies to disrupt, and here I agree with Jenn that NO’s should be able to be disrupted.

Denmark seems the most logical because the islands provide a choke point for shipping, control of this area will negate any ore shipments along the entire North Sea and Skaggerat.  If you hold Denmark then shipping from Norway cannot even reach Germany.

I like this addition of no allied ships in the baltic plus German control of Denmark.  This allows Rus to place a ship if possible to disrupt it.  I would say  all ships, included subs must be clear of the baltic.

[Jennifer]

I’m just worried about requiring Germany to buy a destroyer to get the NO.  Germany does not start with a destroyer, this would be a unit they must purchase and that seems a bit harsh.

We could, of course, fix both Sea Lion AND the destroyer problem by turning a Tactical Bomber into an Infantry in W. Germany and a Destroyer in SZ 113 and now, Germany does not have to purchase any specific units to accomplish it’s NO.

Also, the Russian ships should not prevent the NO if Russia and Germany are at peace.

[JimmyHat]

@special:

Something about the whole Sweden solution still feels very wrong to me.

Isn’t it better to make Sweden an absolute neutral? (not invadable) and change the NO to (for example) an Allies-free Baltic Sea? (abit like the italian Med NO), or possibly that + Axis ownership of Norway.
well its important to get it right.  Can you nail down an area that makes you feel odd?  
By the way, Sweden didn’t have that much of an army, i think…
perhaps not as big as Spains but it was large enough, plus the terrain is horrible.  Hard to represent their and other neutral’s force pools correctly, game balance is better than historical accuracy.

Edit: or just add it to the Iberian block? I don’t see a problem when that would be the case (at least not right away)

As for making Sweden a strict neutral, do you mean just forbid countries from attacking it?  I don’t like that, the game is Global after all.  I thought my proposal would essentially end up with a neutral Sweden.  Allies in Norway and USSR in Finland or Germany preeminent.  It is a bit complex I  will admit however the end result is what’s important.

[special forces]

@JimmyHat:

@special:

Something about the whole Sweden solution still feels very wrong to me.

Isn’t it better to make Sweden an absolute neutral? (not invadable) and change the NO to (for example) an Allies-free Baltic Sea? (abit like the italian Med NO), or possibly that + Axis ownership of Norway.
well its important to get it right.  Can you nail down an area that makes you feel odd? 
By the way, Sweden didn’t have that much of an army, i think…
perhaps not as big as Spains but it was large enough, plus the terrain is horrible.  Hard to represent their and other neutral’s force pools correctly, game balance is better than historical accuracy.

Edit: or just add it to the Iberian block? I don’t see a problem when that would be the case (at least not right away)

As for making Sweden a strict neutral, do you mean just forbid countries from attacking it?  I don’t like that, the game is Global after all.  I thought my proposal would essentially end up with a neutral Sweden.  Allies in Norway and USSR in Finland or Germany preeminent.  It is a bit complex I  will admit however the end result is what’s important.

I’m not saying it is ideal too, but i was trying to find a simple solution and this could be something on the path to that.

And after a bit of reading about Sweden, the economy score idea is not even that crazy (i mean Sweden turning the side pro-neutral to the richest side, once they exceed a certain nr of total IPC’s) since they were doing business with the germans, but kinda stopping to do so when the allies became stronger and germany weaker. The problems here are 1. what amount of IPC’s? And 2. having to count all the time.

Edit: how about the idea to let Sweden join up with the Iberian block?

@Cmdr:

Also, the Russian ships should not prevent the NO if Russia and Germany are at peace.

Yes, that was the idea.

[Young Grasshopper]

I just feel that eliminating Sweden and Switzerland from the neutral blocks rule would solve a lot of problems, and get it rolling a bit.

[Jennifer]

I think it harms the axis a LOT if we remove 20 IPC from the play because they cannot attack the Russian ships in the Baltic until at war with them (which is when they lose their Peacetime Bonus.)    Add to that the realism aspect:  Why would Russia stop the nation that helped them take Poland from shipping materials between Sweeden, Germany and ostensibly selling those materials to Russia?

I’m good with the Russian ships stopping the NO, but I think we need to look at the impact.  All impacts cascade so that the earlier one occurs, the more drastic it is later.  Not as extreme as, this but similarly if you are off by 1 degree on your aim, trying to shoot at the star Alpha Centari - you won’t just miss, you’ll miss the whole solar system.  But 1 degree is such a tiny thing now…

---

Segway

---

Switzerland and Sweeden could be their own Neutral Block, perhaps.  So they stay in the game.  Honestly, I don’t think anyone is attacking Switzerland for any reason, it serves little to no tactical or strategic utility - at least none I can see.

[special forces]

Jen, I think you misunderstood. The idea is that when Russia is not at war, their ships don’t disrupt the german NO, as they are not an enemy at that time.

So while at peace, Germany can get this bonus without problems.

[Young Grasshopper]

@special:

Jen, I think you misunderstood. The idea is that when Russia is not at war, their ships don’t disrupt the german NO, as they are not an enemy at that time.

So while at peace, Germany can get this bonus without problems.

But must do something about them eventually…… it’s easy, either buy a destroyer or give up $5. its not a big deal to Germany + they could use one anyway.

[special forces]

@Young:

@special:

Jen, I think you misunderstood. The idea is that when Russia is not at war, their ships don’t disrupt the german NO, as they are not an enemy at that time.

So while at peace, Germany can get this bonus without problems.

But must do something about them eventually…… it’s easy, either buy a destroyer or give up $5. its not a big deal to Germany + they could use one anyway.

Exactly

[JimmyHat]

@Cmdr:

Switzerland and Sweeden could be their own Neutral Block, perhaps.  So they stay in the game.  Honestly, I don’t think anyone is attacking Switzerland for any reason, it serves little to no tactical or strategic utility - at least none I can see.

Trust me I’ve thought of this.  SF pointed out that adding Switzerland to the Iberian block would help assuage Germany if US attacks Spain.  I suppose putting Sweden in this camp might work, however do you suppose US would hit Spain if Sweden turned German as well?  Also lets look at the end game.  If Germany is contained by Russia, then the US could hit Spain, turn Sweden and then on the following turn Russia attacks Sweden. (or vice versa, capture of Sweden followed by landing in Spain before Axis had a chance to coalesce these forces.

To reiterate Switz is already in the Iberian camp.

Further Sweden is far more concerned politically with Germ/Rus/Uk than Spain.

[JimmyHat]

I have amended my post to include the addition of allied naval units in baltic sea.  Looking back over it I remember an issue that came up with 1C.

It says if an axis power attacks a neutral block while either US or RUS is neutral, that they then can declare war on the Axis.  This might cause an issue.  If Italy attacks Spain prior to war with US, can Russia then declare war on Japan?  And if so, what would happen to Mongolia/instant conscripts/12ipcs?  Is the intention that US/Rus declare war on the offending axis nation, or all axis?  If only the specific nation how are we going to do that in terms of the rules?

Another issue is the wording of the loss of the US 10ipc NO.  I don’t think we should mention anything about league of nations sanctions because that never happened in history when US made aggressive moves.

[Jennifer]

But in history the US didn’t attack nations that were neutral - it wanted to be neutral!

As for Switzerland, I’m good with whatever.  Honestly, it should just be a no-pass, no control zone but allowing it to be taken doesn’t bother me either.