Awesome, thanks Krieghund… while you’re here, any chance we can get a brief explanation why this and the London NO for Germany were dropped in 2nd Edition?
Thanks again.
Question about Russian Spread of Communism NO
-
I was under the assumption that if the allies were to declare war on the true neutrals, then all of the now pro-axis neutrals located on the European side of the board are subject to this NO. I am specifically referring to the neutral countries off the coast of west Africa.
Can someone clarify for me whether or not I am correct in my assumption?
-
All neutrals are the same– west Africa or anywhere. The rule for the NO States that to very Axis or Pro-Axis territory and if the Allies attacked a neutral all neutrals are now Pro-Axis thus implying that it would be eligible. Interesting.
-
I’m pretty sure the Allies can’t deliberately trigger all strict neutrals and make them pro Axis for the sake of Russia capturing them and claiming NO income. I think it’s worded in the rule book along the lines of original pro axis territories (or something like that).
-
YG is correct. The rules say:
3 IPCs for each original German, Italian, or pro-Axis neutral territory that the Soviet Union controls. Theme:
Propaganda value and spread of communism.So even an original Japanese territory doesn’t count - for example, capturing Korea doesn’t give the USSR any additional IPC’s besides what the territory itself is worth.
-
Good to know. I was just about to come up with a strategy to invade the neutrals with Russia lol
-
Thanks for the input. I guess it seems i was mistaken. I was really hoping i stumbled onto something here. Those easy neutrals would be a nice addition to the USSR.
-
if you want to work the cheese with that Russian NO, get a couple of tanks into Africa and it can be a gold mine.
In the realm of “stupid G40 rulebook tricks”, Russians getting NO income off Italian Somaliland and Tobruk is totally legit.
-
Indeed. One player was even crazy enough to load Russian units on UK transports and take Sardinia and Sicily.
-
@Charles:
Indeed. One player was even crazy enough to load Russian units on UK transports and take Sardinia and Sicily.
My god, I’ve never even thought of that. That’s hilarious. I can’t imagine a game where that would be both tactically useful and not in a game that was already basically won by the Allies, but still, I’m keeping this in the back of my mind, just case.
-
Logical assumptions can be tricky things. Is it logical to assume that Russian NO income off Italian Somaliland is the intent of the game designer? Given how specific the rules are in other cases, the lack of an exception for this case makes it logical to assume it was intended, no matter how silly the idea of Russian control over that territory might be.
-
As i play this game more and more it seems to me as if the game is designed for the allies to declare war on the true neutrals. That is why i thought the spread of Communism NO was intended to apply to all of these territories.
I am also convinced the game designer set it up so Russia should take advantage of this NO in Africa and the middle east. Putting these two facts together i was thinking this is a great way to level the playing field and give Russia some hope.
-
Neutrals as YG and Herr KaLeun stated do not add to the Russian NO period. Whether or not you want to include Africa middle East and Sicily is allowed by the rules however I can understand if you don’t want to play that way.
-
In the games I play ,we only count original axis or pro axis neutrals that have an ipc value.So Ethiopia ,Iraq,Libya yes.Sardinia ,tobruk,It Somaliland etc no.
-
To me the rules are clear, and they prevent any cheese like triggering true neutrals into pro axis neutrals for the sake of claiming 3 IPCs per territory for Russia. However, the rules say nothing that prevents Russia from controlling Itallian Somoliland and claim 3 IPCs for the spread of communism. Therefore, denying this situation just because Italian Somoliland has zero territorial value would be a house rule IMO, and not a loophole in the rules that needs closing. Besides, this game is not in the position to take away advantages the Allies need desperately in order to compete.
Suggested Topics
