Attacking True Neutrals



  • Has anyone ever done it and how has it turned out?



  • I never attack true neutrals because I don’t want all of the other neutrals to become pro the other team.



  • I’ve been wanting to ask this question myself.  I could see if there was very little chance the other side could activate the neutrals, but then it seems you would most likely be on the verge of winning anyway.  and if you attack several at once to make sure the other side doesn’t get them then your investing alot of resources into them.  I just don’t understand the purpose or when they are a good option



  • Germany takes Spain and now threatens to keep the Allies from using the NB in Gibraltar.  The Axis can blitz up to 6 Armor from S.France / Normandy into Gibraltar.

    It forces the Allies to fight for Spain to prevent this and protect their valuable NB in Gib.  Now, there are 3 minors within range of Spain (France, S.France, Normandy) allowing Germany to continually pump units into a new battleground instead of trying to defend the multitude of locations if the Allies have an invasion force stationed off of Gib.

    That is why taking a true neutral becomes important.  Its not the perfect option, but its important from the perspective of keeping the Allies off of Gib and threatening Rome, which in effect forces the Allies into the North Atlantic or into fighting over Spain instead of Normandy and West Germany.

    Turkey is another good option as it allows the Axis quick access to the more valuable southern territories.  Actually the best option is to strike at both Spain and Turkey at the same time, creating all sorts of havoc in places the Allies most likely did not prepare for.



  • @Spendo02:

    Germany takes Spain and now threatens to keep the Allies from using the NB in Gibraltar.  The Axis can blitz up to 6 Armor from S.France / Normandy into Gibraltar.

    It forces the Allies to fight for Spain to prevent this and protect their valuable NB in Gib.  Now, there are 3 minors within range of Spain (France, S.France, Normandy) allowing Germany to continually pump units into a new battleground instead of trying to defend the multitude of locations if the Allies have an invasion force stationed off of Gib.

    That is why taking a true neutral becomes important.  Its not the perfect option, but its important from the perspective of keeping the Allies off of Gib and threatening Rome, which in effect forces the Allies into the North Atlantic or into fighting over Spain instead of Normandy and West Germany.

    Turkey is another good option as it allows the Axis quick access to the more valuable southern territories.  Actually the best option is to strike at both Spain and Turkey at the same time, creating all sorts of havoc in places the Allies most likely did not prepare for.

    Interesting take, however, it does open up all the resources in South America, to the US.


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 '12

    Here is the scoop on taking neutrals, which is generally known as the “Neutral Crush”:

    1.  It’s mostly an allied thing, believe it or not, and usually involves the allies taking Spain for the express purpose of allowing the US to shuck units into Europe.  This is successful only if it’s done early in the game, before the USSR falls.  However, the obvious downside is Turkey will open a corridor to Axis invasion of the middle east.  Being able to take Spain and Turkey is usually a prerequisite for the allied Neutral Crush.

    2. The Axis will invoke the Neutral Crush only if Russia falls and taking out Turkey will expedite their advance on Cairo.



  • Attacking Spain as the axis losses you the Sweedish Ore bonus though, unless you take it too.



  • Attacks on the Neutrals by the Axis generally don’t occur until you’ve secured a front which generally means Moscow has fallen and you’re driving for Cairo.

    Taking Spain assists in this as if you eliminate the NB in Gib (or at least force a fight in Spain/Gib), the Allies cannot advance into the Med without controlling it.  This neuters the Allied 1-2 punch to some extent because you won’t have both British and American units shucking through on the same turn.  In some cases you can even “trap” Allied ships in the Med if they attempt to shuck through by snagging Gib after they have moved in.

    As stated, once you’ve made the move on the neutrals, Germany loses that Swedish Ore NO - but at that point you’ve more than made up for it in IPC resources by securing Russia - making it a semi moot point.

    All in all for the Axis, the neutral move appears to me to be a late game move to hinder Allied support towards Cairo.

    Granted, Italy can simply fly SBR missions from S.France to keep the NB inactive for American use - but ultimately as the Axis you want to control Gib in order to protect Rome from Allied invasions.  The neutral move is basically the most efficient way to accomplish both objectives of denying the NB and protecting Rome.


  • '16 '15 '10

    The only scenario where I would consider attacking neutrals is if I had a big army (either Axis or Allies) that needs to go through Turkey and isn’t mobile enough to go around Turkey.  I’ve never actually seen that scenario though.

    In general the downside to attacking neutrals is way more significant than any perceived upside.  It’s hard to justify a move that is going to gift 15+ infantry to your opponent.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 33
  • 9
  • 7
  • 3
  • 32
  • 10
  • 13
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

69
Online

14.9k
Users

35.7k
Topics

1.5m
Posts