Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

During World War II, the Soviet Union and Japan had a five year mutual non-aggression pact that was kept until the very end. Could a similar thing happen in Allies and Axis?

In some versions of the game, this policy is "enforced" by the fact that it costs 5 or even 10 IPCs for one side to attack the other's territories. Would you play such a game variation?

In other games, there are understandings between the two countries, derived during table talk. This may include not reinforcing territories that the other is likely to attack. For instance, Russia can reinforce British forces that have captured Norway, but not British forces in India.

Would you try to conclude such an agreement with the other party if you were playing Japan? Russia?

share|improve this question
up vote 5 down vote accepted

Would you try to conclude such an agreement with the other party if you were playing Japan? Russia?

If I was playing Japan, no, I'd not want such an agreement. If I was Russia, then yes.

Russia's sole aim in the early game is to build up a wall of infantry in Karelia to stop Germany from expanding her borders and to buy time until her allies can start sending in wave after wave of troops support. (By the midgame the US should be depositing 10-12 infantry into Finland each and every turn.)

Having a "hands off" policy with Japan allows Russia two distinct advantages:

  1. It inflates their economic base. The Soviet Far East and Yakut are two territories that usually fall under Japanese control relatively early in the game. That's 4 IPC per turn Russia gets to keep until later with this agreement.
  2. It let's them focus on reinforcing Karelia without having to worry about staffing troops in Russia.

I can see how such a deal might sound ideal to Japan at first blush - namely, Japan gets to focus 100% on China, Sinkiang, and India, but I don't think it's worth it in the long run.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.
{"cc_re__cc_re__cc_by_sa_3_0": ["                    <li><a href=\"//area51.stackexchange.com\" title=\"proposing new sites in the Stack Exchange network\">Area 51</a></li>\r\n                        <li><a href=\"//careers.stackoverflow.com\">Stack Overflow Careers</a></li>\r\n                    \r\n                </ol>\r\n            </td>\r\n    </tr>\r\n</table>\r\n                </div>\r\n            </div>\r\n            <div id=\"copyright\">\r\n                site design / logo &#169; 2016 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions licensed under <a href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/\" rel=\"license\">cc by-sa 3.0</a> \r\n                with <a href=\"http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/\" rel=\"license\">attribution required</a>\r\n            </div>\r\n            <div id=\"svnrev\">\r\n                rev 2016.5.3.3534\r\n            </div>\r\n        </div>\r\n    </div>\r\n    <noscript>\r\n        <div id=\"noscript-warning\">Board &amp; Card Games Stack Exchange works best with JavaScript enabled<img src=\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-c1rF4kxgLUzNc.gif\" alt=\"\" class=\"dno\"></div>\r\n "], "copyright__copyright__copyright": ["t's them focus on reinforcing Karelia without having to worry about staffing troops in Russia.\n\nI can see how such a deal might sound ideal to Japan at first blush - namely, Japan gets to focus 100% on China, Sinkiang, and India, but I don't think it's worth it in the long run.\n\nshare|improve this answer\n\nYour Answer\n\n\u00a0\ndiscard\n\nBy posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.\n\nNot the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question."]}