Turkey Not Considered Adjacent to USSR?

[Queeg]

I know the rules for this game go back years and have been playtested to death, but I find it odd that Turkey is not considered adjacent to the USSR for scoring purposes. Apart from the fact that they share a lengthy border, Turkey actually was a major battleground for strategic influence during the Cold War. (Anyone remember the resolution of the Cuban Missle Crisis? Or anyone seen From Russia With Love for that matter?) Treating Turkey as adjacent would improve the overall gameplay in Europe, I think. As it is now, Turkey is more or less irrelevant - apart from a couple of cards that would be even more interesting if Turkey actually mattered.

[BockBockChicken]

The whole idea of connections though is based on geopolitical influence, not just geographic location. It's the same reason Turkey is classified as a country in the Western Europe region - Turkey has been an Allied country in WWII and the political leanings reflect that.

Compare that to, say, Cuba, which does share a connection with the US despite later being a Communist country, historically because of close US-Cuba relations around WWII before the revolution.

So for both gameplay and historical reasons it means USSR cannot directly add influence to Turkey, acting as a gateway to the Middle East for either country if they're locked out.

[X_kot]

It is entirely feasible for the Soviet player to remove all US influence from the Middle East early on: a Suez Crisis and a successful coup in Iran would do it. Turkey is likely the best chance the American player has of reentering the area outside of coups. Speaking of the CMC, the corresponding card notes that the US player can end the event by removing 2 influence from Turkey.

[Queeg]

Originally posted by BockBockChicken:

The whole idea of connections though is based on geopolitical influence, not just geographic location. It's the same reason Turkey is classified as a country in the Western Europe region - Turkey has been an Allied country in WWII and the political leanings reflect that.

Compare that to, say, Cuba, which does share a connection with the US despite later being a Communist country, historically because of close US-Cuba relations around WWII before the revolution.

So for both gameplay and historical reasons it means USSR cannot directly add influence to Turkey, acting as a gateway to the Middle East for either country if they're locked out.

Not sure about this. The effect of the adjacent score in the game is to make some countries more strategic than others. In Europe, Turkey played a far more strategic role in the Cold War than Finland, which gets the bonus. I'd rather see Turkey get it than Finland.

I know this goes back to rules that have been in place for years. Just seems an odd choice to me.

[geepope]

To be fair, Turkey is actually a lot more important in the game than Finland. Once France gets locked up one way or the other it's very difficult to flip any European battlegrounds until the late war, so securing Spain/Turkey/Greece is the best way to safeguard against an opponent's European domination. Meanwhile it's almost unheard of for anyone to bother claiming Finland.

[Twelvefield]

The boardgame devs talk about basing TS on the concept of "domino theory" that was considered back in the days of the Cuban Missile Crisis. The thought was that setting up a regime in a particular way ought to influence the countries next to it. Nuclear brinkmanship was to be based on this idea, and it forms the basis of TS. Although there are historical moments in the game and more or less realistic geography, TS isn't a historical game. It's a lot more hypothetical that real, and one of its central conceits is that domino theory is workable.

Of course, domino theory fails. The devs acknowledge that openly. But since TS is a wargame and not a simulator, domino theory makes for an entertaining game mechanic. That's why you end up with certain conections on the map being the way they are. If you have the boardgame, you could mod in your own rules, connections, and even cards, and see how differently the game plays out.

[BockBockChicken]

Originally posted by Queeg:

Originally posted by BockBockChicken:

The whole idea of connections though is based on geopolitical influence, not just geographic location. It's the same reason Turkey is classified as a country in the Western Europe region - Turkey has been an Allied country in WWII and the political leanings reflect that.

Compare that to, say, Cuba, which does share a connection with the US despite later being a Communist country, historically because of close US-Cuba relations around WWII before the revolution.

So for both gameplay and historical reasons it means USSR cannot directly add influence to Turkey, acting as a gateway to the Middle East for either country if they're locked out.

Not sure about this. The effect of the adjacent score in the game is to make some countries more strategic than others. In Europe, Turkey played a far more strategic role in the Cold War than Finland, which gets the bonus. I'd rather see Turkey get it than Finland.

I know this goes back to rules that have been in place for years. Just seems an odd choice to me.

The entirety of my discussion is about having a connection between Turkey and USSR, not scoring. The +1 scoring is more for gameplay reasons, rather than historical reasons - rewarding a player for doing a more difficult task. It's not for any historical strategic reasons.

Originally posted by Twelvefield:

The boardgame devs talk about basing TS on the concept of "domino theory" that was considered back in the days of the Cuban Missile Crisis. The thought was that setting up a regime in a particular way ought to influence the countries next to it.

Exactly this.

[bylandt11]

Originally posted by BockBockChicken:

The whole idea of connections though is based on geopolitical influence, not just geographic location. It's the same reason Turkey is classified as a country in the Western Europe region - Turkey has been an Allied country in WWII and the political leanings reflect that.

I rather think there is some randomness to the connections. Benelux isn't connected to France, for instance. But Belgium and Luxemburg are historicallly, economically, culturally and politically very connected to France.
There is no connection between Syria and Iraq either. But we know how close these countries have always been in ancient history, recent history (Baath party) and even today (ISIS).