Maintaining Neutrality

[ZEvans96]

I am playing as the USA, is there any way to maintain neutrality or are the Japanese going to attack every time and drag me in?

[Aragos]

They will attack every time. Same with Germany, Italy, etc.

However...if you don't do anything, most Axis countries will offer peace. Usually I try to grab the Japanese island colonies first

[ZEvans96]

Thank you for your response. I decided to join the war early anyways lol.

[Legend]

If you think there are conditions that should cause a nation to attack early, later or not at all... let us know. We'll consider adding in some additional variety if we get some feedback.

- Daxon

[ZEvans96]

I think it should be influenced by relations. Say I am the USA and have gotten friendly relations with Japan through trade and other means, they shouldn't declare war on me.

[Aragos]

Legend--
As it is now, especially on Sandbox high volatility games, WWII in Europe may not actually start. The USSR tends to hit Finland and Poland in 1936-37. No Poland in 1939, no Germany vs. UK/France.

I'd recommend this:

1. If two nations have a 'green' (five box) relationship, then war should not occur. I've played the USA, happily trading with Japan, until they declare war. The result is that Japan usually offers peace fairly quickly, thanks to the good relations. It would make more sense to not have had the war at all.

2. The League of Nations was powerless in the 1930s/40s. I propose getting rid of the system entirely (it worked fine for SR2020 and CW, but just doesn't fit anymore). Instead, replace it with a global aggression/relations, aka 'bad boy', rating. The more warlike a country is, the less others will trade with them, and the more likely you'll see them declare war. I've played the USA, and overran both Canada and Mexico by 1938. Result? A slight ping to my relations. As soon as the Axis declares war in Dec 1941, I can again make deals with everyone thanks to the relations boost. I'd also make it an optional setting for the game if players want a Risk-type world conquest game.

3. Alliances. Alliances (and mutual defense pacts) should result in war--always--or a broken alliance and a major hit to global relations.. The US attacks Canada...and the UK does nothing. Even still has Good relations with the USA. And this was a member of the Commonwealth. It honestly just doesn't make sense. In SRCW, it made sense--you could effectively have 'proxy' wars against the other side by sending troops in to support your allies, but without actually going to war. It doesn't work in SR36.

Bottom line:
--Strengthen alliances and make them lead to war (or terrible relations if broken)
--Remove League of Nations entirely
--High relations should override automatic war...and low relations could lead to war.

[Zuikaku]

If you think there are conditions that should cause a nation to attack early, later or not at all... let us know. We'll consider adding in some additional variety if we get some feedback.

- Daxon

It shoul'd also be influenced by player's decisions. Let's take Japan and US as example. If player (US) supports Japanese actions (boxes that are not very functional at the time) or at least not condemn them, if it trades with Japan and tries to improve and maintain relations, than Japanese AI should cancel DoW event. It doesn't make any sense to attack "cooperative" USA.
Same way with Germany. If US tries to stay neutral (by not condemning Axis actions and not supporting allied), Axis should not consider US as a threat.

It woul'd also be good to have possibility for some "random" DoW. Like US capturing French spies and closing to the Axis spheres (and maybe, DoWing France). That woul'd be very good for replayability and post WW2 gameplay (where wars are limited to only well known scripted events).