There were a few wars fought in South America in the early 30’s. I don’t know who had who’s backing in those conflicts. There was the Guerra del 41 between Equador and Peru. I know the US supported Peru and Japan supported Equador, but I’m pretty sure that support was from the bleachers. The only equipment I can tell you for sure that was used was the Czech LTP (Panzer 38t). These were used by Peru.
Peru had all the gear. They actually prepared for war. This lead to Peru having a 3-4 to 1 advantage in men and equipment. Except for tanks. Equador had none. Peru had around 25. Take a wild guess at who won.
Strict neutrals
-
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.
-
I have a house rule for strict neutrals. We put them in geographical blocks:
European Neutrals: Sweeden, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Ireland
African Neutrals: All strict neutral countries on the African continent.
South American Neutrals: All strict neutral countries on the South American continent
Middle-East Neutrals: Turkey, Saudi-Arabia, Afghanistan
Mongolian Neutrals: All territories in MongoliaMy thinking on this is why would Mongolia or Argentina care if Sweeden was overrun by either Axis or Allied forces. However, Spain or Switzerland might take a lot more notice. So, if a strict neutral is taken over by either side, ONLY the countries in that block will switch to pro-other side. There are some that say certain of the African territories are actually Spanish or Portuguese colonies so they should be included with those countries but I think that just makes it more complex and hard to remember. Also, some say that Turkey should be in the European block, but it is closer to Saudi-Arabia and Afghanistan and I guess I just wanted another country in the Middle-East block.
There is another thread where a guy suggested a “Diplomacy” house rule where you can sway strict neutrals over to your side. It looks pretty interesting and I’m thinking of trying it out in my next game. -
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.
Suggested Topics
