Neutral ships and hostile ships

@Panther

Thank you!

@krieghund

Thank you Krieghund…

There is no way to hold India if Japan plays a capture Calcutta at all cost opening strategy. It will fall and Japan will get a bit more income. Meanwhile, they will not be able to control China and will be missing out on big income from Pacific islands. Celebrate if they are putting a huge fleet in SZ39 because ANZAC + China will have huge income for the foreseeable future.

@Caesar-Seriona said in Multiple pro allied neutrals:

To simplify the rule for any new players that read this; you cannot blitz through a friendly neutral I.E. they stop once they enter.

Just to avoid confusion:

We are not talking about “blitzing” here, as “blitzing” is a combat move, involving hostile territories.

Moving into a friendly neutral territory takes place during Noncombat Move Phase. This is a noncombat move that is further restricted by the above quoted rule.

Simple answer: Never
Complicated answer: Never

I think attacking a strict neutral may become a late game move in which the other tt on the board are worthless to the outcome of a game that may end in 3-4 turns.

The question was essentially about if we treat the infantry moving in as a combat move, and hence the tt as “captured”, not all that clear as this only happens during non-combat movement.

@Flashman:

If both sides are all killed in the battle, you have to improvise some sort of “pro-Axis” marker for Sweden until it is occupied.

No, you don’t, because all strict neutrals are now pro-Axis.  However, until a power claims the territory, you do need to indicate somehow that the Swedish army has been used up.  An upside down control marker works well.