This is what we do in game. Each neutral has a territory value and some kind of army and a few ships. You can attack them if you want. But u need to capture each neutral territory to get icp income.
If you lose battle then just that lone neutral joins other side.
But we also have a cost to try and influence a strict neutral to your side and you receive the territory value towards income and what is there for the ground troops and a possible ship. Nothing stronger than a Destroyer.
Not all countries can influence the same neutrals. We roll a d20 and a 4 or less u get neutral.
This is just an idea u may look at.
Spain and Turkey have the biggest Amy but cost more for those 2 to try and get.
True Neutrals
-
In my play groups for Global 1940 we have been playing where if you attack a true neutral only the true neutrals in the same continent as the one invaded will turn pro-axis/allies
It doesn’t really make sense that if America attacks Colombia. Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Turkey, Saudi Arabia etc. become pro-axis. It also makes the game more interesting in that players are bolder and won’t feel so bad about taking a far away Neutral.
I realize that the original rule is so that you play more historically accurate games and won’t be attacking any neutrals but those guys are just so tempting sometimes!
I Also think that with this rule the fate of African true neutrals and MIddle east true neutrals are shared so that if the british attack Angola. Mozambique, saudi arabia and afghanistan will turn against you.
-
Then the US can take over all of South America without consequence
-
But it would take time and units diverted from other fronts to do it. Also U.S. probably wont be able to make a move down there until turn 3 or 4 if Japan waits, and seeing as how the U.S. needs to do something ASAP, a good axis player can be marching on Moscow before those extra 6 IPC’s can amount to anything.