17028 said:
Exactly less complex game - easier to spot bugs, possible exploits and set AI.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Exactly less complex game - easier to spot bugs, possible exploits and set AI.
Darkrenown said:
italy and Japan demanded territory from Vichy - they did not give anything in return.. thats what we got the event for - or maybe demand cores after vichy is created..
F
Tambourmajor said:Even then, public beta phase for chess lasted what, 100 years?
100? :rofl:
no little bit longer eventhough that the chess are so simple.
Trading large territories is scince fiction, it would lead to collapsing the government, coup, or assasination the leader like Stalin or others.
I hope this option will be wipe.
Well, I hope this option doesn't lead to exploits. But trading Diego Garcia for destroyers/ressources *should* be possible, IMO.Orthank said:
Van der Gent said:
Code:
Japan flOW demanded of the Vichy French government that it he allowed to
set up bases within Indo-China using the threat of possible British or Chinese
incursions as a reason. The Vichy government was in no position to resist. Britain,
USA, and the Netherlands East Indies reponded by freezing Japanese
assets and abrogating trade treaties, measures which the Japanese reciprocated.
By moving into Indo-China (on 28 July 1941) Japan acquired access to valuable tin,
rubber, oil, and other resources while denying them to other nations,
such as the United States, who had traded with Indo-China.http://www.socc.ie/~smurray1/Interesting/Prelude_to_War/prelude_to_war.html
Code:
On 1 August 1940 the Japanese government presented Vichy with further demands:
"...right of transit for Japanese forces through Indo-China; construction of
airfields in the colony; and agreement in principle to an economic arrangement
which would bind Indo-China securely to the Japanese sphere." Again Vichy turned
to the US for support; again it was not forthcoming. Nevertheless, General
Weygand, Vichy Minister of Defense, initially favored military resistance, but
the Cabinet eventually concluded that resistance would be doomed to failure and
Indo-China would be permanently lost. On 29 August a preliminary political
agreement recognizing Japanese interests in the area was signed. Next day the
Japanese Army presented additional military demands which amounted to virtual
occupation.http://history.acusd.edu/gen/WW2Text/wwt0041
Japan basically moved into those terrains and controled them. So it was *not* only getting bases.
Need I post more?
F
Last edited:
Raczynski said:But you woudn't give Warsow in enchange for some techs. And AI will probably do it
Not if province trade is restriced to non-cores.
Unless you're talking about Stalin trading Warsaw to Hitler for some reason.
But I certainly would be upset if I caught the US selling Hawaii to Japan - but would not be if Japan transferred Chinese conquests to puppet states. Of if I, as the US, transfered some of my Pacific island conquests to Australia, Canada, or the UK in exchange for some N. Af. provinces I need logistically. Or even giving conquered / liberated Vichi French provinces to the Free French in exchange for something nice - such as Lebanon and the Beirut harbor, or some Rubber rich African provinces.
Way I figure it, these are wartime transfers of administration, with an assuption that we'll give them back when we're done (something the US and UK did, but the USSR didn't). Or long term basing /defence rights that are more accurately modeled as land transfers (US taking over defence of UK posessions in the Americas) than military access - after all, the bases for destroyers deal didn't give the US military access to the entire British Empire, just the American part. And military access doesn't model the Cesus Belli the US would have had if someone had attacked English interests in Latin America.
If it makes you feel any better, think of it as "owned by UK, Controlled by US" instead of "Owned by US."
As for the rest, that's a human exploit / AI weakness issue, more than a "the world is going to end! head for the hills!" gameplay destroyer.
Fiendix said:
I did say they demanded airfields and military bases!! You said they demanded territory! They did demand bases. That has nothing too do with taking it!!
boromir said:
Maybe i'm wrong and am getting confused with something else but I am almost totally sure for some reason that the Soviet Union gave large parts of eastern Poland to Germany sometime between Barbarossa & Sept 1939.
I even think that there was an event for it in HOI.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Anyhow in regards to land trading in the game, I want the option only if it is implemented correctly.
I agree with what Copper Nicus said earlier. The main use of it would to reajust borders and give land to your allies.
National provinces should not be traded, even humans should not be able to give away national provinces, it simply should not be an option.
Trades should only occur between friendly nations, maybe allies only.
Finnaly the AI should never exept deals where it gives away land for tech or money, land for land only.
thats my opinion anywhy.
Oops, I think I know what I was getting confused with.
In HOI the SU only gets eastern Poland some time after Germany annexes Poland.
Thats what i must have been thinking off.
Man, I have a bad memory.
In HOI the SU only gets eastern Poland some time after Germany annexes Poland.
Thats what i must have been thinking off.
Man, I have a bad memory.
Has anyone considered that maybe the exchange province option is there to allow players to divide territory not yet conquered? For example, if Germany and Italy were to attack Yugoslavia, Germany could arrange before hand to get the ports while allowing Italy to get the resource provinces?
Or perhaps that feature has been implemented so that the UK or the other allies could give the US a logistics base somewhere near Europe so that when they send troops thay don't attack and defend at 1% efficiency like in the original 1.06 patch?
Also there is an instance of countries in WWII trading territory. In William Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Thrid Reich it states:
"The Soviet dictator summoned Schulenburg to the Kremlin at 8 P.M. on September 25 (1939) and the ambassador's dispatch later that evening warned Berlin of some stern realities and of some chickens that were coming home to roost.
'Stalin stated... he considered it wrong to leave an independent residula Poland. He proposed that from the territory to the east of the demarcation line, all the Province of Warsaw which extends to the Bug should be added to our share. In return we (the Germans) should waive our claim to Lithuania.
Stalin... added that if we consented, the Soviet Union would immediately take up the solution to the problem of the Baltic countries in accordance with the [secret] Protocol of August 23, and expected in this matter the unstinting support of the German Government. Stalin expressly indicated Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, but did not mention Finland.'
This was a shrewd and hard bargain. Stalin was offering to trade two Polish provinces, which the Germans had already captured, for the Baltic States. He was taking advantage of the great service he had rendered Hitler-making it possible for him to attack Poland- to get everything he could for Russia while the getting was good."
Or perhaps that feature has been implemented so that the UK or the other allies could give the US a logistics base somewhere near Europe so that when they send troops thay don't attack and defend at 1% efficiency like in the original 1.06 patch?
Also there is an instance of countries in WWII trading territory. In William Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Thrid Reich it states:
"The Soviet dictator summoned Schulenburg to the Kremlin at 8 P.M. on September 25 (1939) and the ambassador's dispatch later that evening warned Berlin of some stern realities and of some chickens that were coming home to roost.
'Stalin stated... he considered it wrong to leave an independent residula Poland. He proposed that from the territory to the east of the demarcation line, all the Province of Warsaw which extends to the Bug should be added to our share. In return we (the Germans) should waive our claim to Lithuania.
Stalin... added that if we consented, the Soviet Union would immediately take up the solution to the problem of the Baltic countries in accordance with the [secret] Protocol of August 23, and expected in this matter the unstinting support of the German Government. Stalin expressly indicated Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, but did not mention Finland.'
This was a shrewd and hard bargain. Stalin was offering to trade two Polish provinces, which the Germans had already captured, for the Baltic States. He was taking advantage of the great service he had rendered Hitler-making it possible for him to attack Poland- to get everything he could for Russia while the getting was good."
Orthank said:
So I take it you want a chess game with WW2 pieces?
It is funny how people overreact time and again over some screenshots, making huge assumptions and claiming they know how it will really be. I could think everyone here had the game in their hands.
Anway, I think the thing missing there is units. there was a lot of examples of military equipment traded in this period and I would have loved to have that in.
Fistandantilus said:
Yes sure we can negliect the possibility to trade for provinces but who can guarantee that the AI wont trade with AI for all kind of weird deals including provinces, if this is not regulated hard in Vic2 oops sorry HOI2 then we will have a very strange map after a while.
Im buying this game to play a ww2 game not to play a game that just using the timeperiod for anything to happen, except time-machines apparently
Agree completely. Actually, that whole problem is the main reason I will not play MP over the 'net, preferring face-to-face.Darkrenown said:
(That's not a watertight rule so much as a statement of opening position, but you see what I mean.)
Steve.
All it takes is some weighting of the provinces: I can't see France trading Paris for techs, for example, but I could see Italy trading in some colonies for a mixture of trade deal, tech and equipment, under the right circumstances. Im sure there are other ways of regulating it as well - like "You can't trade national provinces" - so don't fret just yet.eye-switcher said:Yes sure we can negliect the possibility to trade for provinces but who can guarantee that the AI wont trade with AI for all kind of weird deals including provinces, if this is not regulated hard in Vic2 oops sorry HOI2 then we will have a very strange map after a while.
Im buying this game to play a ww2 game not to play a game that just using the timeperiod for anything to happen, except time-machines apparently
In Sim City there used to be a newspaper headline that came up as often as not, which seems appropriate here:
"Naysayers say Nay!"
Steve.
P.S. I'm going to buy the game to play it. If I want to see WW2 as it happened, I'll watch "A Bridge Too Far" and other similar films.
(I won't watch "U-571", or "Pearl Harbour",obviously :rofl: )
steveh11 said:All it takes is some weighting of the provinces: I can't see France trading Paris for techs, for example, but I could see Italy trading in some colonies for a mixture of trade deal, tech and equipment, under the right circumstances. Im sure there are other ways of regulating it as well - like "You can't trade national provinces" - so don't fret just yet.
In Sim City there used to be a newspaper headline that came up as often as not, which seems appropriate here:
"Naysayers say Nay!"
Steve.
P.S. I'm going to buy the game to play it. If I want to see WW2 as it happened, I'll watch "A Bridge Too Far" and other similar films.
(I won't watch "U-571", or "Pearl Harbour",obviously :rofl: )
Well i dont know but the more who ventilates their concern for this the better..
Great, seems like there are alot of people like you then and some people like me, thats buy it to play close to history and just try to change parts of it.