True Neutrals

For a neutral Italy rule (which would then allow AH a mine free move) putting UK SZ19 forces at risk, one of the following 3 should be done…

change UK setup to move 1 CA from SZ29 to SZ19; move UK CA/TR from SZ19 to SZ28; create new SZ31 by splitting SZ17 in half at a point on border between SZ16 and SZ17 below Sicily and extending to point where Albania borders Greece.

Played our first game of 1914 tonight and had a blast. Afterwards, we brainstormed some additional house rules (because gamers, I suppose), and one stuck out. Before I say this, let me note this is a very casual crowd.

Rule: A neutral minor power when attacked by one faction or the other sides with the one that did not attack it. If it is able to repel the invasion, it becomes a fully functioning member of the alliance it joined. It has IPCs, builds units, deploys them, and attacks.

Cause: Almost no reason not to attack some of these nations. Defeat means nothing- the scale of units involved means a small handful of units lost is not a true blow. The potential IPC gain outweighs the risk in all but a few instances. By making neutral powers a bigger threat, hopefully players will only attack those they deem important to a war winning strategy and not just as random acts of violence for IPC gain. This can lead to silliness with Switzerland and the Nordic countries along with Spain among others.

Mechanics: New factions get 6/8 IPCs plus whatever IPC total is on their territories. From this point we had some disagreement:
1- They are a fully active faction with no restrictions.
2- They can only attack the faction that attacked them and their territories.
3- They can only counter attack into the territories that the attack against them was launched

––
I posted this in the 1914 forum, then I saw the House Rules forum.  I believe that is the forum suited for the idea. I would message the mods to move this thread but their profiles indicate they’ve been gone for a while. I apologize for my faux paus.

Good points, General Veers.  Thanks for your insights.

Your right it was. Thanks for the heads up. I wish I got that in a pm from the mod who moved it but oh well. Strange how discussions of rail, the board itself, bids, reductions of navy or any other tweak to the game didn’t end up there as well.

IDK, maybe you treat all true neutrals as independent nations (no blocks, or alliances w/other powers or neutrals). Mongolian tt aren’t included, they remain part of the NAP.

Pay 5 IPCs to roll a diplo dice. You can buy as many as you want (or maybe limit it to 1-2 per turn), but each one is dedicated to only one true neutral tt per turn, and you must be able to invade. State what true neutral nation you are trying to sway/invade (must have units dedicated to the invasion, and can’t make changes after dice is rolled). Once you start the process there is no turning back, you must follow through that turn.

Roll your diplo dice.

Roll 1 tt becomes pro your side (don’t have to fight), and the standing army joins you (immediately becomes your color) because you negotiated them to join your cause (you get to include any tt IPCs in your income).

Roll 2 tt becomes pro your side (don’t have to fight), but the standing army doesn’t join you (it is dissolved) because you negotiated a peaceful occupation, and they laid down their arms (you get to include any tt IPCs in your income).

Roll 3-4 tt becomes pro your enemy. You have to fight the standing army at least one round of battle and if you retreat any surviving units immediately become the color of your enemy (enemies choice of controlling power). Whom ever controls the tt will get the IPC value in their collect income phase.

Roll 5 and the standing army is doubled, you must again fight at least one round of battle, but then can retreat. You under estimated the resolve of the country and their will to fight. Any survivors from the standing army would immediately become the color of your enemy (enemies choice).

Roll 6 failed attempt. You lost your investment, and it was deemed not in the best interest to continue negotiations or attempt an invasion. This was a diplomatic process, so nothing changes, and the standing army stays intact.

As note #1 I also think that any neutral tt w/o standing army, or IPC value should be awarded 1 inf (maybe 2) so the US can’t just waltz down through say Columbia w/o resistance to get to the more valuable S American nations.  All the above would apply.

*As note#2 you could beef up the 3 major true neutrals to include better units in the standing army.

I’m not too keen on changing the troop values for the various countries.  I think having their ipcs go to the controlling nation is enough.

You bring up a good point about the allies attacking neutrals, but these rules are really about bringing more options to both sides rather than taking them away.  I have no problem making Historical Sacrifices provided it results in improved  game play and fun.  I’m just looking for simple, perhaps a short paragraph, to give the rules for various Neutrals.

Back to Sweden.  I maintain the greatest fear the Swede’s had was Communism.  When Stalin attacked Finland they sent support to them.  They allowed transit rights to the Germans so they could fight the Russians.  I am sure they were entertaining thoughts about joining the allies in order to keep the Russians out of invading Scandinavia.  Even if these things are not true, I am leaning towards rules that follow the ‘evil communism’ spirit.

Perhaps giving Germany the option to activate Sweden when the time comes is best?  Germany can then look at the on board situation and decide if Sweden being activated is wise, or if it is just giving that territory to Russia.  I am thinking this would not be a round after round decision though, Germany gets 1 shot at Sweden.

@Warplayer12:

My house rule is simple: if someone invades a strict neutral, then the other strict neutrals are not pro-allies or axis. BTW: sweden is in the game strict neutral, but they give iron ore to the germans.

Sweden sold Iron Ore to the Germans, Ball Bearings to both sides, licensed the Bofors gun to the US and the UK, supplied the Allies with a V-2 that landed in Swedish territory, and sold spare aircraft engine parts to Finland for US and UK aircraft that were operated by Finland with the tacit approval of the US and UK.  In my house rules for the original Europe game, Sweden has 3 IPC that go to whoever controls Norway, while remaining neutral.

I am working on a set of rules using the Political Action Cards of the first Attack Expansion to influence neutrals one way or the other, with Turkey being the main neutral that I was thinking of, along with Thailand, and possibly Spain.

I do like the idea of grouping the neutrals into geographic blocks, as they would be most interested in intervention by one side or the other near them.  However, Brazil entered the war in August of 1942 on the side of the Allies, and the US was using Brazilian air fields for Trans-Atlantic aircraft delivery to the UK in the Middle East prior to 1942, so I am putting that in the Allied camp as soon as the US is in the war.

@The:

In AAR you couldn’t attack neutrals

Yes, and there’s a good reason for that. There’s no simple way to do the neutral situation without it being abused, so the OOB version tends towards making attacking true neutrals a rare option