6 Jun 2023 2:15 pm
You can't even answer the question with out being butt hurt. It is a hypothetical that eliminates trying to take over land in Russia or the US. It is mean to show power against power and the neutral land is unimportant but you are so flipping obtuse it's silly.Cannonpointer » 06 Jun 2023, 1:13 pm » wrote: ↑ The neutrals do not like their soil being fought upon, you dumb ***.
The loser would likely be whoever was the first to invade the neutrals, as the neutral (no LONGER neutral) would see the second army to invade as their rescuers, and would align with them, showing them all of the various terrain advantages their soil offers and assisting them in exploiting those.
The original invader would have supply issues right away - the rescuers, not so much.
I need more information about your retar ted hypo-hysterical. In this retarded scenario, who invades the neutrals first?
Also, eho has the smallest number of generals and top advisors in dresses? There is simply more to war than game pieces on a board, dummy.
