Diplomacy



  • O.k. I’m still confused, so let me make the following statement:

    Once a country is converted (+/- 3) it gives the income to the “full ally” regardless of whether it is controlled or occupied by the enemy.

    Is that true or false?


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Once a country is converted (+/- 3) it gives the income to the “full ally” regardless of whether it is controlled or occupied by the enemy.

    Is that true or false?

    once you got it in +3/-3 status the OTHER side cannot try to sway it back to a more neutral status… the nation is said to be in your camp or the enemies camp… its not a full ally until you got it to ±5… the only thing is the enemy cannot move it back to -+2 or anything.

    So the nations that are 2 either way should be immediate targets to get them in your camp.



  • @Imperious:

    Once a country is converted (+/- 3) it gives the income to the “full ally” regardless of whether it is controlled or occupied by the enemy.

    Is that true or false?

    once you got it in +3/-3 status the OTHER side cannot try to sway it back to a more neutral status… the nation is said to be in your camp or the enemies camp… its not a full ally until you got it to ±5… the only thing is the enemy cannot move it back to -+2 or anything.

    So the nations that are 2 either way should be immediate targets to get them in your camp.

    Understood.  There is no way to sway it once it reaches +/-3.

    That is not the question.

    The question is what options do the other team have?

    I want to know what happens once a neutral becomes “sympathetic” to the opposing team .  Is there any option to deny the extra income to the enemy other than to SBR, Rocket Attack, or A-Bomb it?


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    -3 Pro-Axis, income goes to axis
    -4 Pro-Axis, Axis units can enter
    -5 Fully committed to Axis

    so lets say you got Spain and your germany… Spain is at -3 and with a few more rolls you will be able to enter with German units , and at -5 you can send her units and fight in foreign lands for Germany.

    The allies have all the standard options:

    Invasion and capture: spainish units outside spain are converted to German units and USA can get the income by conquest and even begin building new spainish units according to all the other rules.

    SBR/ A- Bomb: USA can blow the hell out of spain and take its income from Germany by SBR or reduce it permanently with A-bomb.

    other than that for income will always flow to Germany and Italy. This is important rule. The income can go to either European player on these allies… they can be assigned as German or Italian. Their is no other way to deny income from a  converted ally neutral.



  • @Imperious:

    Invasion and capture: spainish units outside spain are converted to German units and USA can get the income by conquest and even begin building new spainish units according to

    “USA can get the income by conquest” is the problem I was looking for.

    Can UK then invade Saudi Arabia and “get the income by conquest” with no resistance.

    If this true I don’t see the point of it being neutral.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Yes they have no army, so you can just invade it and its yours with its 2 IPC, but i think that would be fought over by UK because its close to her own oil centers.



  • “USA can get the income by conquest” is the problem I was looking for.

    Can UK then invade Saudi Arabia and “get the income by conquest” with no resistance.

    If this true I don’t see the point of it being neutral.

    Under AARHE rules, UK/US can not be aggressive and invade neutral countries.  But a -3 to -5 country is NO LONGER neutral.  They are friendly to the enemy.

    The way I finely understood all of this was to think of it this way:  I can take over a country by military force or diplomatically.  If I’m right in my assessment, then maybe we need to add a country marker to all neutrals at a +/- 3 to avoid confusion.

    let me also add one more senerio:  If the US/UK took a -3 neutral from Germany and it was then liberated by either italy or Japan, would it go back to Germany or stay with the latest country to conquer it?



  • @Imperious:

    Yes they have no army, so you can just invade it and its yours with its 2 IPC, but i think that would be fought over by UK because its close to her own oil centers.

    IL:

    Yes they have no army, so you can just invade it and its yours with its 2 IPC

    is correct.

    but i think that would be fought over by UK because its close to her own oil centers.[/[/quote]

    Only in the 1939 version.  The 1942 version does not have oil centers. BTW, why were the oil centers not added to 1942.  They add a extra level oof strategy to the game.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    yes my comments were under the context of 1939, because i prefer that version and map.  but of course your right



  • Man – I’ve got to get this 1939 thing rolling here!  The resistance however is quite strong.

    I’ll build a map once I get back from vacation and try to introduce it during our Sep meeting.

    OldSalty:  I’ve never seen anything about US/UK not being aggressive vs. Neutrals.  Can you point that one out for me?

    I do like the idea of not being allowed to attack until it is -/+ 3.  You should also have to occupy the territory in order to keep it from sending money or reverting back.  Once they are sympathizers, you can’t convert them back, you can only oppress/dominate them.

    I could have sworn that I read something a while back that said the US should always open by invading S. America for the income.

    Thanks.



  • Bierwagan:

    Thats something that’s heavily stuck in my mind, but don’t know where it came from  :oops:

    I looked through the long edition of AARHE 4.0 2008-02-09 but it wasn’t there either.  I swear I saw it because I was basing the whole concept of the game and diplomacy on it???  And it makes sense as the US or UK were not aggressors in WWII.  They would not have sent troops into S. America and forceably taken them over.  (That is allowed in other versions of AA).  I thought that was part of the reason diplomacy was added.

    That’s got to be a question for IL or tekkyy.  Who knows, I’ve been ready so many posts, it could have come from another version.



  • Gah!  I’m going MAD!

    If the US converts Peru to +3 (e.g., like colony status) and claims the income of Peru does this country now count as:

    “Control of each territory
    not originally controlled &
    adjacent to neutral
    increase hit value by +1”

    Or do Neutrals not count that way? 
    What if it were at +5?

    I question my sanity…



  • BTW:

    I bounced some of the chars off one of our ring leaders at work today, and he thought the graphing might be confusing for some people.

    He was the one that originally asked me to develop some checklists for the gang here and was hoping for more of a generic outline by Turn Sequence.

    Perhaps we should revert to something more simple – like a checklist and see if it highlights any more issues or is enough.  I think I went overboard with the flowcharting concept.

    Thoughts?

    • Bierwagen

  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    If the US converts Peru to +3 (e.g., like colony status) and claims the income of Peru does this country now count as:

    “Control of each territory
    not originally controlled &
    adjacent to neutral
    increase hit value by +1”

    NO! it needs to be a FULL +5 ally for you to get the bonus. Its not a full ally, so you cant claim it to influence other neutrals… The idea is like Monolithic communism, where one nation goes commie, and influences its neighbor eventually to do the same like a domino.

    Or do Neutrals not count that way?
    What if it were at +5?

    yes +or -5

    Perhaps we should revert to something more simple – like a checklist and see if it highlights any more issues or is enough. 
    I think I went overboard with the flowcharting concept.

    If they thinks its confusing, then make it in outline mode with all the various exceptions for each step of the turn sequence, so you will have a page for each turn sequence.

    The other idea is to provide a sample turn explaining how things work. Take one step at a time and don’t try to finish this in a weekend. It will take time. And stop worrying about neutrals… your looking at things way too complicated… its really simple ideas and their are no loopholes to discover. Perhaps at worse a bit more clarifications are in order.



  • IL:

    BW brought up a good Q a couple of posts back.  In AARHE can the US or UK attack neutrals that are not under enemy control?  I’m thinking that I read somewhere that they could not (as they were not the aggressors in WWII) but I can’t find the reference.

    For example, can the US attack S American countries just to get more IPCs?


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    IL:

    BW brought up a good Q a couple of posts back.  In AARHE can the US or UK attack neutrals that are not under enemy control?  I’m thinking that I read somewhere that they could not (as they were not the aggressors in WWII) but I can’t find the reference.

    For example, can the US attack S American countries just to get more IPCs?

    Yes they can. You saw that on an old discussion and was a rule at one point, but the allies are just as guilty of “invading neutrals for their protection” as the axis.

    Greenland
    Azores
    Madagascar
    Levant States
    Iran
    Iraq
    Iceland
    Finland
    Romania
    Baltic States
    Poland
    Norway

    The US player can attack south America, but they will turn German allies and Germany gets the money and controls them. This may bite you and not be worth the effort, when Germany is pressing against the Soviets and you got Marines fighting in Argentina….not good strategy.



  • @Imperious:

    The US player can attack south America, but they will turn German allies and Germany gets the money and controls them. This may bite you and not be worth the effort, when Germany is pressing against the Soviets and you got Marines fighting in Argentina….not good strategy.

    But if America is attacking a South American country (e.g., instead of trying to woo it with Diplomacy over 3 VERY lucky turns)
    …and destroys the newly converted German units
    …and successfully invades the territory with an occupying force
    …then Germany wouldn’t get the money - right?

    From the discussions we’ve been having the country would get an American flag and start generating money for US.

    Please correct me if I’m wrong.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    But if America is attacking a South American country (e.g., instead of trying to woo it with Diplomacy over 3 VERY lucky turns)
    …and destroys the newly converted German units
    …and successfully invades the territory with an occupying force
    …then Germany wouldn’t get the money - right?

    Yes of course. But if they survive the first turn of attacks, Germany will get to control its pieces and collect income. And also since they are full German allies , they get the +1 modifier on adjacent neutrals. So if its that important to send all kinds of forces to crush 5 neutrals, while Germany gets to have more time than fine.  Also remember USA cannot do any turn functions until activated under 1939 rules. The only thing they can do is send lend lease. They cant even change or move pieces or build.

    From the discussions we’ve been having the country would get an American flag and start generating money for US.

    Yes once they take the nation, its a puppet US state.  If you do this in the 1939 game you will certainly lose. America cant afford to waste time sending all sorts of stuff to S America. Trust me on this. its not worth it. I got at least one guy who always tries these things thinking he found some secret to win the game. He has never won when he was allowed to do this because its a time waster.

    Please correct me if I’m wrong.



  • I believe ya – and I can’t wait to try 1939.  Does it use AARHE 4.0 combat rules, or LHTR 2.0?  I didn’t see anything on that.

    I’ve seen our AARHE Lite+ games go on for 19 turns.  I hope this is an anomoly because we were mixing and matching rules and this shortens when we go only AARHE 4.0.  They are always very tight games.  Very balanced.

    So, I worry that if US invades these neutrals in the opening game that over such longs periods it could have quite an impact.  Or at least counter the German U-boat “Convoy Raid” costs on Lend-Lease programs.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    I believe ya – and I can’t wait to try 1939.  Does it use AARHE 4.0 combat rules, or LHTR 2.0?  I didn’t see anything on that.

    Their is a rule file containing only 1939 rules look under tekkyys files. 1939 is our “overture”

    I’ve seen our AARHE Lite+ games go on for 19 turns.  I hope this is an anomoly because we were mixing and matching rules and this shortens when we go only AARHE 4.0.  They are always very tight games.  Very balanced.

    Id like you to make a ruleset using cut/copy/paste so i can see what your leaving out or adding. That can help shorten the game if i know how your playing it. Our goal was quick play, but apparently some of the rules your using may be making the game longer.

    So, I worry that if US invades these neutrals in the opening game that over such longs periods it could have quite an impact.  Or at least counter the German U-boat “Convoy Raid” costs on Lend-Lease programs.

    You will eventually learn new ideas to counter that, and when strategy gets better the games will be shorter.



  • We’ve decided to stop using our AARHE Lite+ (modified) rules and either play Lite or 4.0 straight up as written.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    what was the vital factor in this decision?

    not enough “juice”?



  • well it was probably hard (confusing) to play a hybrid

    if there are anything full AARHE you and your friend felt is too complex
    we can work on simplifying the rule while modelling the same idea
    (naval combat has been simplified…looking back older version of AARHE is a bit unplayable lol)

    or tell us if you find an idea just not worth
    ARRHE had rules in the past that didn’t make a difference to gameplay and we removed it (like capturing enemy soldiers)


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 8
  • 1
  • 5
  • 1
  • 69
  • 60
  • 8
  • 13
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

37
Online

13.7k
Users

34.0k
Topics

1.3m
Posts