Naw. We have a rule for strict neutrals where you must roll a die and get the territories value or less on die roll. If you don’t u have to retreat and pay the bank up to the territories value.
That seems way too easy to turn a strict neutral. Nations should be focusing more on fighting each other and not so much on strict neutrals during a world war.
What I’m thinking is that;
-You have to control an adjacent territory to attempt to turn a strict neutral
-You can only make one attempt per nation to turn it (in reality if you fail they would probably be p!ssed off at you and hang your spies)
-You have to roll a 6 to turn it. I like your idea of having to pay the number of IPC’s the territory is worth for failing, SS.
-You wouldn’t move into the territory, you would simply make it a pro-axis or pro-aliies neutral. After that anyone could move into it without violating Starfleet’s Prime Directive (or strict neutrality).
-You don’t have to be at war to do turn a strict neutral. Like all actions of “The Spy”, this would all be done covertly of course and denied vehemently.
As far as Research and Development goes, I would reason this by saying that your espionage activities have accumulated enough intel from both friends and foes and combined with your own research that you have a 50-50 chance of developing a weapon. How this would work;
-You roll 3 dice for free. A roll of 6 means you are successful. You only count one 6.
-If successful you roll the die for a weapon. You then CHOOSE which table to apply that roll to. That’s the way the rule should have been written in the first place. Why on earth would you ever spend your resources in the real world to develop a weapon that does you no good? Oops, we developed rockets, what were we thinking? It started out as a good idea to have Research and Development but then it turned into a really bad idea because the whole thing was left to chance instead of strategy.
The only way you to use a spy logically is if you do a Fog of War game which would be a nightmare to do on a board game or the spy steals tech.
I did add the spy steals tech ( defender keeps tech ) card ( 1 only ) to each of the 6 countries event cards. Each countries deck of cards has 20 to 22 cards in each deck. So the spy steals tech card may never get turned over during the game.
You could set up something that a spy could damage factories, airfields, or ports by dice roll.
That’s been discussed by me and Sean already. Was told that is not what the spy did.
A Spy in theory could do it. I can easily see a spy blowing something up if it covered his job for him to get out. The problem is that a spy “someone who watches” basically has no use in a game like this. However, according to wikipedia, a general term of the word “spy” also involves them destroying stuff too. So for the sake of logic, you should be able to let a spy destroy factories, ports, or airfields. However, it’s your unit so do what you wish.
I went with 3 options;
1. Move into or out of a combat zone after opponents combat movement.
2. Turn a strict neutral.
3. Research and Development.
This keeps it simple and leaves less to chance and requires more strategy. I made a video which also includes Railways and Hospitals. You can view it here;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSz5Il0CRyE&t=3s
Turn a strict neutral would have to most use for a spy in this case but at that point, it’s not a spy, just a political officer with a motive.
“The Spy” doesn’t represent a singular spy, it represents the whole espionage network and all of their political operatives. The spy refers to the player sitting at the table playing the nation who was lucky enough to win the roll for that round of play. They would be trying to turn a nation in their favour any number of ways including political influence, trade sanctions or incentives, staging coups, sowing the seeds of discontent amongst a nation’s population, etc. You have to use your imagination a bit to think of ways that you could turn any strict neutral and those ways would probably be different for each strict neutral nation.
Yeah, I get a spy isn’t a single unit. I don’t think an infantry is one soldier.
