Hi, I would like to know if I am right or not…
1. You can ground attack Turkey from Greece !
2. You dont need to spend a movement point to cross the Tukish Strait !
(Landbridge from Turkey part in Europe with Istanbul to the rest in Little Asia)
both are right i think.
You mean by attacking that square mile of Turkey and by taking that, taking all of Turkey?. Feels wrong…
Welcome, Arminius Germanicus!
You’re right.
Turkey should have been 2 territories.
Thank you for confirmation & welcoming me Krieghund
Turkey should have been 2 territories.
Mhh why that ?
Like in the advanced AAE version of the map, never played it…
I think like it is now (attack from greece) it is the only NEUTRAL country wich is really worth to get invaded, because of its strategic benefit for the axis (black sea and direct way to caucasus). But that had to deal with the problem that spain (and others) will go Pro allies and can produce much trouble in the west. I think it could be very effective with the right plan.
I have something in mind, but thats more for fun…
Spain and turkey should both have been two territories.
An east west split in turkey to prevent the quick axis move to the south to russia.
Spain shouldnt have coasts touching the atlantic and mediteraninan. Its just weird.
What’s wrong with Turkey is that it should have a border with Bulgaria.
I like Turkey controlling both sides of the straits, this is historically accurate and reflects that it’s but a short ferry ride across the straits from Europe to Asia.
It’s just a pity they didn’t do the same with Egypt and draw Suez correctly, with the canal running through Egypt. The Sinai peninsular appears top have sunk beneath the red sea.
It almost seems that they thought “it’s been wrong on every A&A map so far so why correct it for this version?”
Agree about Spain, however.
You can’t go through that strait because Turkey is netural and won’t allow it. IMO its not worth taking because it turns everything else pro ally which means that you have just made America(in South America and other places like spain) a lot richer then it needs to be. And really America doesn’t need 10 extra IPC each turn it really doesn’t.
You can’t go through that strait because Turkey is netural and won’t allow it.
you missunderstood the question ;)
this point was already clear when I first posted.
Invade Turkey only make sense if its part of a blitzkrieg strategy.
Only if it helps you to bring down Russia fast(er),
it may be worth loosing spain to the allies…
invading turkey seems useless and dumb. why let the allies put all those extra men on the board, and what real advantage do you get from occupying turkey??? it makes no sense
@noon:
invading turkey seems useless and dumb. why let the allies put all those extra men on the board, and what real advantage do you get from occupying turkey??? it makes no sense
The Axis take Turkey so they can move land units from Europe to Africa without using Russia to open a second front to attack the Brits in Cairo and Africa so that the Italians can become a threat the Germans send reinforcements especially with a major in romania.
@The:
@noon:
invading turkey seems useless and dumb. why let the allies put all those extra men on the board, and what real advantage do you get from occupying turkey??? it makes no sense
The Axis take Turkey so they can move land units from Europe to Africa without using Russia to open a second front to attack the Brits in Cairo and Africa so that the Italians can become a threat the Germans send reinforcements especially with a major in romania.
If you want to move land units from Europe to Africa USE TRANSPORTS which are less expensive than taking Turkey and giving the US South America, UK Mozambique, Algeria, Afghanistan, Spain, and Portugal, and Russia Mongolia
It may make sense to violate neutrality if you are grabbing them all.
If you are taking Sweden3, Portugal1, Spain2, and Turkey2 and later Saudi Arabia2 you will get 10 IPCs vs the 8 IPCs you give the allies (6) South America, (2) in Africa.
You also give the allies many infantry, although most require transports to utilize.
The benefit to having an axis controlled Spain, is the fact that air units staged there prevent a small fleet from heading to Europe via Gibraltar.
I’m not advocating violating neutrality is a wise move.
It may make sense to violate neutrality if you are grabbing them all.
If you are taking Sweden3, Portugal1, Spain2, and Turkey2 and later Saudi Arabia2 you will get 10 IPCs vs the 8 IPCs you give the allies (6) South America, (2) in Africa.
You also give the allies many infantry, although most require transports to utilize.
The benefit to having an axis controlled Spain, is the fact that air units staged there prevent a small fleet from heading to Europe via Gibraltar.
I’m not advocating violating neutrality is a wise move.
Yes, but you also will lose infantry killing them all
Yep, you gain 8 free infantry in Finland and Bulgaria…then you lose 1 infantry a zone, 2 for Spain, and maybe 3 for Turkey if you send enough force to end it in 1 round.
Estimate 8-9 infantry lost and allies gain 12 infantry from the zones you don’t take. ( 8 ) require transports to reach you; hard to do with the German air force in Spain.
@The:
@noon:
invading turkey seems useless and dumb. why let the allies put all those extra men on the board, and what real advantage do you get from occupying turkey??? it makes no sense
The Axis take Turkey so they can move land units from Europe to Africa without using Russia to open a second front to attack the Brits in Cairo and Africa so that the Italians can become a threat the Germans send reinforcements especially with a major in romania.
Thats if your playing by the book I play by IL’s neutral rules where the true neutrals are split into blocks so that me invading turkey doesn’t give the US South America
If you want to move land units from Europe to Africa USE TRANSPORTS which are less expensive than taking Turkey and giving the US South America, UK Mozambique, Algeria, Afghanistan, Spain, and Portugal, and Russia Mongolia
@The:
@The:
@noon:
invading turkey seems useless and dumb. why let the allies put all those extra men on the board, and what real advantage do you get from occupying turkey??? it makes no sense
The Axis take Turkey so they can move land units from Europe to Africa without using Russia to open a second front to attack the Brits in Cairo and Africa so that the Italians can become a threat the Germans send reinforcements especially with a major in romania.
Thats if your playing by the book I play by IL’s neutral rules where the true neutrals are split into blocks so that me invading turkey doesn’t give the US South America
If you want to move land units from Europe to Africa USE TRANSPORTS which are less expensive than taking Turkey and giving the US South America, UK Mozambique, Algeria, Afghanistan, Spain, and Portugal, and Russia Mongolia
The allies still get Spain, Portugal, Sweden, and Mongolia
