Delta +1

Swedish infantry is of great advantage to Germany against Russia. They are adjacent to 2 areas.

To make the system like OOB Tech makes it easy to remember. The only thing we add is the cost is not 5 IPC but fixed to standing army.

Rolling 2 dice together has a different score, than to just roll one d6. What i mean by this is rolling 7 is easier than 2 or 12 due to the combinations.

The system with 2D6 allows too quick conversion of neutrals, due in part to the modifiers.

Make the rule as smooth as possible. The adjacent area modifier idea might work better with d12, but that requires people buying stuff.

If the final rule is close to tech in how it’s obtained, more people will adopt it because it is easy to remember.

pay cash in the amount equal to the standing army of that chosen territory

This is confusing…

The way I read that, if there are 6 infantry there, you want me to pay $18 for a roll.

It should be clear you are only expecting them to pay $1 per unit.

THE DIPLOMACY PHASE

In the “diplomacy phase” (the final phase of the turn sequence) any nation may negotiate with a strict neutral in order to occupy them.

During the diplomacy phase, you may choose 1 strict neutral to negotiate with, and pay cash in the amount equal to the standing army of that chosen territory. You than roll one 6 sided die for an opportunity to roll a 6. If successful, you immediately occupy that territory, and replace it’s standing army with your own troops. If failed, you may try again next turn with a -1 modifier to your diplomacy roll (only when negotiating with the same neutral). However, the cost of diplomacy rolls will always equal the standing army in every attempt.

Each time an enemy nation negotiates with the same strict neutral you have negotiated with, you will gain a +1 modifier to your diplomacy roll when attempting to negotiate with that neutral (maximum +5). Modifiers are not transferable among allies.

The changes to this concept are minor:

1. If you pay the IPC and fail, you still get to roll the dice trying to score a 6 and this is done each turn.
2. Once you have paid and failed the following turn you also have the option of paying a second time and if you do the die roll gets a +1 ( again it is rolled each turn but a 5-6 for success)

The current rule gives you a modifier each turn, so it is a virtual guarantee that any strict neutral will turn pro. That is not a good idea because some neutrals just never go to your side

What is the Adjacency rule meant to represent?  That sharing a boarder immediately means you are more inclined to seek an alliance?

The pressure of having a major power controlling the area around the neutral also connotates pressure of " either face invasion or fall in line with the new order"

Examples: Germany and the Balkans in 1941

Exactly… Switzerlands -trade- options were rather limited in 1942 wouldn’t you agree?

Hmm do we trade with the guys in the black uniforms? or the brown ones? :S

Being surrounded superimposes all kinds of -pressure- :P

For simplicities sake, and better balance control… wouldn’t it make more sense to only have one bonus for adjacency?  Then you could only ever get a +1 for shared borders.  The rest of the equation could then be dictated by Diplomatic expenditures… thus making it more challenging and costly to the teams rather than giving an advantage in territories that have multiple borders versus those that have 1.  Sweden and Swizterland (though its worthless anyway) being the obvious immediate examples.  Furthermore if you want to make Diplomacy a greater factor in the game wouldn’t it make sense to have all of them worth something?  One of the things that confuses me is that there are all of these neutral nations that are worth nothing… seems like a tremendous waste of time to implement a in-depth diplomacy system for a game that is not really suited for it.

What if you -need- to have atleast 1 territory connecting in order to roll/influence for control?

Germany activating Mongolia doesn’t exactly seem plausible.

THE DIPLOMACY PHASE

In the “diplomacy phase” (the final phase of the turn sequence) any nation may negotiate with a strict neutral in order to occupy them.

During the diplomacy phase, you may choose 1 strict neutral to negotiate with, and pay $1 per infantry represented in that territories standing army (Sweden =$6, Turkey=$8 etc.). That payment allows a diplomacy roll of 1d6, for an opportunity to roll a 6. If successful, you immediately occupy that territory, and replace it’s standing army with your own troops. If failed, you may try again next turn to roll a 6 free of charge, or pay $5 to improve your chances by 1 on your next diplomacy roll (1d6 to succeed on 5-6, and so forth).

Yea yea. Plus the neutral blocks 5 of them, plus Mongolia is treated as one nation 5

I only have 4 blocks, and I’m not sure how they can get trimmed to 5 without effecting the balance of risk vs. reward. I like your idea of treating Mongolia as 1 territory, but how does that work?

Because Mongolia is one country, you can’t make part of it pro japan, and another part pro Russia. That makes no sense. Second, part of the reason why i feel Mongolia should be off limits, is Japan tampering with it has no reality, as Mongolia was a quasi-soviet state. Third, If Japan is successful at swinging Mongolia, it voids the great rules regarding the non-aggression pact. Mongolia should be a special case, along with perhaps Switzerland ( they would never go pro axis), but just allowing Mongolia a special case is fine too.

The 5 groups should look like this IMO. Turkey has less concern for Europe, and more for Middle East.

Europe
Portugal 1/2
Spain 2/6
Switzerland 0/2
Sweden 3/6

South America
Venezuela 2/2
Argentina 2/4
Chile 2/2

Africa
Angola 1/2
Mozambique 1/2

Middle East
Turkey 2/8
Saudi Arabia 2/2
Afghanistan 0/4

Mongolia ( treated at one country- cost is 5)
Olgiy 0/2
Dzavhan 0/1
Tsagaan Olom 0/0
Central Mongolia 0/0
Ulaanbaatar 0/1
Buyant Uhaa 0/2