Oh, good. Do they automatically end up Friendly and in your SoI as well?
You got no infamy for annexing China? °-°
They are not in your SOI nor allied but that's quite easy with them being friendly and at +200 relation.
I got 20 infamy when I DOW-ed.
Does this infamy decay while the war is still going on? Personally, I think infamy shouldn't decay as long as you're still in that war.
You can't sell provinces? That's a strange omission from V1....
I always thought it was a nice work around to some of the clunkier aspects of the war/peace and puppet systems. As long as it was hard to initiate purchases of provinces, I thought it was a great system.
ALSO
Can you only release preset satellites? I don't understand why that would be so. It's not like countries didn't have the power to set the terms for a satellites release...
As a sidenote, what all bonuses do you have over these released states? What are the differences between satellites, dominions, and spheres of influence? I read the whole manual, and I still don't know...
Edit: It seems that Dominions are overseas Satellites. However, why would Korea be a Satellite and the others Dominions? It also says that you maintain direct control over Dominion militaries, which implies that you do not do so with Satellites. Why would that be? Why would overseas Satellites (Dominions) offer bonuses over land-connected Satellites?
Yes, little stuff like that would be yet another game mechanic rewarding the player for using a blitzkrieg style of warfare that is utterly inappropriate for the era. There are already enough incentives to play in that way simply due to the nature of strategic movement and the provinces, no reason to reward it even further.If anything, infamy should grow as the war continues. This could represent the latest news from China: did you hear they slaughtered blah blah blah? Did you hear about the Rape of blah blah blah? Oh they're horrifying!
Maybe it should be tied to warscore in a sense or something. I feel like this game is GREAT as is, but little stuff like this could make a big difference.
Yes, little stuff like that would be yet another game mechanic rewarding the player for using a blitzkrieg style of warfare that is utterly inappropriate for the era. There are already enough incentives to play in that way simply due to the nature of strategic movement and the provinces, no reason to reward it even further.
Besides, your argument suffers from the significant problem that it can just as easily be reversed. Latest news from China: "Did you hear they slaughtered blah blah blah last week? Shocking, of course, but it is old hat. That's what they always do. There's a war going on, you know. Terrible, naturally, but let's talk about something important: the races!".
You can see this reaction all the time nowadays with reporting from war zones or catastrophy's where one's own nation is not involved. There are always things to be outraged about but the outrage does not particularly increase because time goes on and the practices continue. Rather, the outrage tends to decline because, hey, we all know that that's what's happening and (most of us) come to accept it as the order of the day. Not a particular nice thought, perhaps, but it is probably a survival trait. Keeping outrage burning generally brings little direct benefit to oneself.
No, for gameplay reasons there really are only two sensible options, when players are not given the option to enact particularly infamous actions during wartime (which would warrant a separate infamy boost): Give infamy when peace is declared based on the results achieved (in a war system without goals or one in which goals are determined at the outset of hostilities) or give it when goals are announced.
Everyone should pile on Japan and destroy them, just like the UK was destroyed for bringing India into their empire!