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. Join them; it only takes a minute:

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

What factors should be considered when deciding whether to invade a minor country and pay the 3+ IPC's?

share|improve this question
up vote 6 down vote accepted

At a basic level, I weigh the 3 IPC payment and the opportunity cost of the units I used to invade it against the benefit to be gained. That's pretty generic so some examples might help:

  • As Japan, I often find myself invading Panama in the mid- to late-game because my navy has nothing else useful to do. If America doesn't have any tanks in Western US, chooses not to use them, or if I have enough extra transports that I was able to land a blocking infantry in Mexico, then America will be unable to kill any units that landed in Panama. In this case, I'll typically invade Venezuela on the next turn and then take Brazil. The 3 IPCs from Brazil are an equal trade for the 3 I lose for invading a neutral, the value from really throwing a monkey wrench into America's plans is high, and the opportunity cost was low, since the navy wasn't busy anyway.
  • As the Allies I've landed in Spain before just to open up another front for Germany to defend. It can be very difficult to stage a successful amphibious invasion because of the lame attacking power of infantry, the one tank per transport limit, and the ability to lose your entire air force because of the no retreat rule. So to prevent having to attack, I've invaded Spain as the UK and dumped a full load of infantry followed by the US on their turn. Now Germany either has to counter attack (with only the infantry in France and without any tanks in EEU or further East) or give me a foothold in Europe I'll likely never give back.
  • I've also played with a house rule before where land units could cross the Bosporus if Turkey was occupied. So I tried invading Turkey as Germany to help me ferry troops into Africa. This didn't work that well as it's still a long way from the Fatherland.
share|improve this answer

It's always too expensive. Been playing a&a for 20 years and have never paid to invade a neutral.

share|improve this answer
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post - you can always comment on your own posts, and once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post. – Tom Au Aug 28 '12 at 13:40

Never. It is strategically unsound and hideously expensive. You must always factor in the cost of the units invading, and the resultant loss of combat power where it could do some good somewhere else.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.