After reading the posts in this thread and giving it some thought, I think this is the route we’re going to go in the future regarding the points I brought up.
Minor countries will be considered to be in supply until conquered as long as their units are within their own border. Subsequent liberation will require that they be in supply per the normal supply rules.
For Spain and Turkey, the two territories that allow an infantry build for them (Madrid and Ankara, respectfully) will be considered a supply point for the entire country. Any units within the national border of these two nations will be considered to be in supply as long as they can trace supply to this supply point (or normally, of course).
If Russia declares war on Turkey prior to Turkey joining the Axis, the following will apply to US and Soviet Event-driven Entry:
Declaration of war on Turkey – US and USSR each discard two cards.
Russia occupies Ankara – US discards one card.
Russia occupies Istanbul or any territory bordering the Mediterranean – US discards two cards AND may not lend lease to USSR for the remainder of the game.
If any of these events occur and the US or USSR do not have enough cards to satisfy the discard requirement, these cards will be deducted from subsequent turns until the required card discards have been satisfied. Example – USSR declares war on Turkey on turn 2, and makes a successful amphibious invasion of Ankara. The US is holding two cards. Both will be discarded due to the declaration of war, and the US will draw one less card the next turn than would be normal due to the Soviets taking Ankara.
RATIONALE
My rationale here is fairly straight-forward. Holding to the regular supply rules lends itself too easily to the opportunity for abuse, as we’ve seen. It can be argued that although a minor country couldn’t become an offensive juggernaut, they could produce enough bullets, artillery shells, food, etc. to keep their armies supplied (though in most cases it isn’t going to make any real difference) to be able to defend themselves.
In the case of Spain and Turkey, they were both large industrialized countries at the outbreak of WWII. Though certainly not at the level of the major combatants, again, they could keep forces supplied with bullets, shells, bombs, food, etc.
Either way, I don’t see this as game-breaking, since these rules would be largely defensive in nature; if units move outside of the respective national border, they have to trace supply normally.
Regarding the card draws (discards) for a Soviet declaration of war on Turkey, there is real-world justification for this. In the game it’s easy to see the Soviets as an ally against the Axis; in real life, prior to Barbarossa much of the West didn’t see any real difference between Hitler and Stalin. There was considerable outrage in the West due to the Soviets joining in on the carving up of Poland; a Soviet declaration of war on Turkey would have fed the isolationists in the US and made the case for gearing up for war overseas more difficult. The reason for the harsh penalty for the Soviets taking a Turkish territory bordering the Med is also logical. Russia has wanted a warm water port for the last two centuries, and if they did attack Turkey they would certainly have done everything they could to drive to the Med. However, this would have been seen by England as a direct threat to their interests in that part of the world by a regime that, prior to Barbarossa, they considered to be just as bad as Hitler, and like Hitler was hostile to Britain and the US. And, again, it would have been more ammunition for the isolationists in America.
