Posts made by Buckles75

How about you roll a d6 at the beginning of the game?

1, 2, or 3: Germany opens (standard game)
4: ANZAC opens
5 or 6: France opens

In any event, turn order is maintained just as it is in the standard rules.

I think coming up with a custom setup for Italy to be able to open would be a worthwhile endeavor, but I believe allowing Italy to open using the existing 2nd ed. setup would change the game too much.

I also think a UK start would be too much of an advantage of the UK and the Allies. German fighters in S. Italy would have no chance to help Italy fend off a UK Taranto raid, and consolidating the Royal Navy in the Atlantic is way too strong of a move. I don’t see how Germany or Italy has a legit chance to succeed enough to win the game.

You may ask “how is a France opener not similarly injurious to German/Italian chances as a UK opener?” A France opener can definitely make Paris a harder nut to crack for Germany, depending on what the France player does on his turn. Germany would obviously need to devote more resources to conquer France, and it might even need an assist from Italy. Furthermore, a tougher France might mean the Germans will have to devote air power to this conquest, thus taking pressure off the Royal Navy. Looking at the setup, two German planes in Eastern Europe are in range of attacking France but are not in range of hitting the Royal Navy, so Germany’s Royal Navy attacks wouldn’t necessarily hamper their efforts in this regard if they threw only those two planes at France. However, it would limit the ability of those planes to help scramble in Italy against Taranto. Additionally, Germany’s opening move in the Balkans could also be hampered if Germany went after both the Royal Navy and France on Round 1. The reason I like this and why I think it’s not a game-breaker is that it forces Germany into some different decisions and forces a change in pre-ordained openers, but it doesn’t dramatically limit what Germany can accomplish in Round 1.

Also, because there’s a 50% chance that France opens before Germany, I think it would be fair to dispense with any bids.

I agree with everything General Veers has said regarding historically accurate house rules for true neutrals, and I like the flavor too. But I have a few concerns over how this would affect game balance.

1. If South America were a block, then it’s just easy income all game for the US without any global repercussions.

2. If Mozambique, Angola, Rio do Oro, etc. were tied to the fate of Portugal/Spain, then this seems one-sided in favor of the Allies. If Axis invades Spain or Portugal, the Brits get fee inf and easy income in southern Africa from Ang and Moz. If Allies invade Spain and/or Portugal, the Brits still get easy income by invading Moz and Ang with little effort.

Here’s another suggestion that could work on its own or maybe even with Veers’ house rules. What if violating true neutrality didn’t cause the other true neutrals to become pro the other side? Instead, what if the other true neutrals simply became suspicious of the other side and worried about maintaining their own sovereignty and staying out of war if possible? We’ll call them “distressed neutrals.” This would play out by allowing limited access to the side that didn’t violate true neutrality according to the following rules:

1. Free passage by land units in non-combat movement only. Entry on non-combat movement does not change control of the territory; it remains neutral. No land units may remain in these neutrals UNLESS the number of land units from opposing forces (i.e. neutrality violators) in excess of one half the size of the neutral’s standing army are within theoretical striking distance (including by transport). For simplicity sake, planes in range are not factored in regarding this calculation and neither are battleships and cruisers that could support an amphibious assault. This means tanks and mechs could rumble through in non-com so long as they immediately exited the other side. Anything else (including tanks and mech that couldn’t get out or didn’t want to leave) could only remain if the neutrality violators posed a credible attack threat (i.e. the at least one-half rule).

2. Ability to land planes in non-combat movement if and only if a credible threat exists, as explained above. If landing is allowed, planes may land after conducting combat, if they are defending on a neighboring carrier that is damaged or destroyed or need a place to land, after scrambling into a neighboring sea zone from a territory that winds up being captured, or after intercepting a strategic or tactical bombing raid in an adjacent territory that was just captured.

3. Planes can fly over these neutrals in non-combat movement only whether or not they participated in combat movement earlier in the turn.

4. Combat movement of any kind by land units beginning their turn or passing through (if fast) these neutrals is strictly prohibited (this includes loading onto transports during combat movement). Combat movement by any planes beginning their turn in one of these neutrals is similarly prohibited.

5. Movement of naval units opposed to the neutrality violators are allowed through narrow waterways during either combat or non-combat movement. This would obviously only apply to the Turkish straits.

6. Any attack on a neutral territory with enemy units legally in it would face the combined force of those units and the neutral standing army. In the combat phase, any hits applied to this combined defensive force are applied to the neutral standing army first until it is depleted. If the attacker fails to capture the territory, this neutral (and only this neutral) will become pro the other side (and will still need to be activated or captured to be added to anyone’s control per normal rules).

7. For friendly neutrals, all of the land and air unit movement rules that apply to distressed true neutrals under a credible threat would also apply to friendly neutrals. For example, a British fighter could land in pro-Allied Greece on Britain’s first turn of the game if it were threatened by at least 3 Axis land units at the start of Britain’s turn, but that fighter could not participate in combat movement on its subsequent turn. Furthermore, if a friendly neutral has been attacked but not captured, it feels threatened for the rest of the game, so movement and landing privileges are in effect until the friendly neutral is either annexed by you or an ally or captured by an enemy.

Here’s an example.

1. USA is at war and captures Colombia. All true neutrals in the game are now suspicious of the Allies and will allow the Axis to help protect their sovereignty. China makes it’s move, which is inconsequential to this situation, and then it’s Britain’s turn.

2. At the end of Britain’s move, they have an inf in Syria, two tanks in Eastern Persia, a transport in the Red Sea, and several land units in Sudan. The French have one inf in Trans-Jordan. The Soviets (also at war) have an inf in Caucasus, a mech and 2 inf in Volgograd, and a tank and an inf in Kazakhstan. ANZAC has 2 inf and 2 art in India and two transports in SZ 39. The Axis controls Egypt with a combination of German and Italian land units, so the British transport cannot enter the Med. Iraq is British-controlled but contains no units. NW Persia has not been activated or attacked as of yet. Gibraltar is stacked with American and British land units.

3. At the start of Italy’s turn, the situation is as follows:

• Turkey is potentially threatened by a total of 4 Allied land units in range (Soviet inf in Caucasus, mech in Volgo, and tank in Kazakh along with Brit inf in Syria), but it’s not enough of a threat to allow Axis units any access. The threshold is 5 land units in range because it must be in excess of half the size of Turkey’s standing army. Italy would love to launch a surprise amphibious assault through the Turkish straits on an unsuspecting Ukraine, but access to the straits is denied for now.

• Saudi Arabia is potentially threatened by a total of 7 land units (the French inf in Jordan, two Brit units that could transport over from Sudan, and 4 ANZAC units that could transport over from India). The threat threshold is 2 (1/2 of Saudi’s standing army + 1), so Saudi Arabia allows access to the Axis for now.

• Afghanistan is similarly threatened by the Allies (3 Soviet units and 2 Brit units in range), thus breaking its threshold of 3 (1/2 of 4 + 1).

• Finally, Spain is threatened as well by all the Allied land units in Gibraltar.

4. Italy can now perform the following legal moves:

• A bomber takes off from the airbase in Southern Italy and moves 5 spaces to strategically bomb the Russian factory in Volgograd. This is possible because it can land in Afghanistan in non-combat movement. There are no other possible legal landing spots.

• A bomber takes off from the airbase in Axis-controlled France, flies over S. France, SZ 93, SZ 92, and then attempts to tactically bomb the naval base in Gibraltar. After avoiding the AA fire and bombing the naval base, the bomber may now fly over Spain and make it back to France (7 spaces total) because flying over threatened neutrals in non-com is allowed. The reverse route would have been illegal.

• An Italian inf and art, supported by a fighter taking off from Tobruk, attack the French inf in Trans-Jordan and succeed in capturing the territory with no casualties. Two Italian tanks then non-com through Jordan into Saudi Arabia, and the Italian fighter that attacked Jordan non-coms in as well. This is legal because Saudi Arabia was sufficiently threatened at the beginning of Italy’s turn, so Axis units are welcome to stay for now. Furthermore, if ANZAC, for instance, attacks Saudi Arabia after Italy’s turn ends, they would be facing the two Italian tanks and the Italian fighter in addition to the two Saudi standing infantry as a combined defensive force.

5. It’s now ANZAC’s turn. ANZAC follows through with an amphibious assault on Saudi Arabia, bringing 2 inf and 2 art from India, supported by a cruiser bombardment and two fighters taking off from the airbase in India. After two rounds of fighting, the attackers have scored three hits and the defenders have scored four hits. The defenders mandatorily lost both Saudi inf, and the Italian player took one of his tanks as the third casualty. The ANZAC player takes his four land units as casualties, thus ending the amphibious assault, and he retreats from the battle. His two surviving fighters, with one movement space remaining, may only legally land in British-controlled Iraq. Saudi Arabia is now officially a pro-Axis neutral, but it is not controlled by anyone yet.

6. Skipping to Germany’s turn, a German mech from Egypt non-coms into Saudi Arabia through Italian-controlled Jordan. In doing so, it activates Saudi Arabia and takes control of it. No Saudi infantry remain (they were killed by ANZAC), but Germany puts a control marker on Saudi Arabia and adds 2 to its IPC total. Mussolini files a vociferous complaint with Hitler, but it falls on deaf ears. Germany would also like to fly a tac bomber from Greece into Saudi Arabia during non-combat movement, and normally this would not be allowed because you cannot land in territories not controlled at the beginning of your turn. However, landing planes in a friendly neutral, which was Saudi Arabia’s status at the beginning of Germany’s turn, is allowed because it’s under a credible threat. Friendly neutrals or true neutrals that have been attacked but not captured feel sufficiently threatened for the remainder of the game until they’re either annexed or captured (i.e. not neutral anymore). So Germany can in fact land its tac bomber in there.