Current Peace Conference system is just broken and unbalanced..

[TheDerpyBeagle]

Except they aren't, that's the whole point of a puppet. They run themselves except ultimately they take orders, especially foreign policy, from Estonia.

Puppets still have to be governed and enforced upon in order to keep them in check and loyal, which is physically impossible to do from Estonia. I don't understand how you are defending this.

 

[Dominico]

Guys breath. The games not out yet!!! Start giving constructive criticism in 44 hours!

You sound like me when i heard ben affleck was going to be batman. "Noooooo he can't be batman its going to be terrible, he looks so bad, he doesn'tsuit batman ohh meehh god..."
And batfleck turned out to be arguably the best and definitely the most badass batman we have ever had.

Moral of the story. Play the game a bit before commenting on it!

 

[Evan05]

Except they aren't, that's the whole point of a puppet. They run themselves except ultimately they take orders, especially foreign policy, from Estonia.

A puppet regime requires oversight, or else they're not a puppet.

Even then, it's silly to try and deny little Estonia would have the capacity to maintain something so far away with no real access to it. Estonia simply doesn't have the industrial base, military strength, nor political clout to do so.

 

[francis_morin]

Estonia puppeting Afghanistan is not historical, or even realistic.

From a single city-state to first world power in the western world, Rome will beg your pardon and tell you that ’’ realistic ‘‘ in a historical context does not exist per see.

Deal with it.

 

[TheDerpyBeagle]

From a single city-state to first world power in the western world, Rome will beg your pardon and tell you that ’’ realistic ‘‘ in a historical context does not exist per see.

Deal with it.

That is a horrible comparison. Rome grew over the course of centuries of growth and expansion. AI Estonia taking Afghanistan in a WWII setting is unrealistic and should not be in the game.

Deal with it.

 

[uglyduckling81]

USA joined in on a European war which is on the other side of the world. It's almost like this weird stuff really does happen. Australia joined a war in Europe twice and fought in Africa. Real life is even weirder than your example.
The game doesn't simulate lots of political stuff and doesn't make up a background story for you to explain why stuff happened.
If you didn't know Australia was a commonwealth country it would bewilder anyone looking back as to why Australia was fighting in Africa at all or anywhere in Europe for that matter.

As for the game you just need to invent some reason for your self why Estonia had some interest in Afghanistan. I'll give you one to get you going.

'Years before the war the Estonian Princess fell in love and married the King of Afghan. They had many children together and loved each other. (Something about an uncle in Afghan seizing power). When the war broke out and Afghan was defeated the Estonian royalty saw an opportunity to give the King back at least a small part of his former country.'

Now when you look back at your game it all makes sense. Jobs done. You can heap some praise on me if you want.

 

[Cheesecakeczar]

From a single city-state to first world power in the western world, Rome will beg your pardon and tell you that ’’ realistic ‘‘ in a historical context does not exist per see.

Pretty sure Rome started with Italy first, not Central Asia.

 

[MouseKing]

A puppet government is just a regime that is friendly too the the puppetmaster. If Estonia joined the winning side, and is doled out by their Faction the spoils of victory, vis a vis a regime installed in Afghanistan that is friendly to Estonia, how is that unrealistic? War ends, faction installs pro-Faction, pro-Estonia government in Afghanistan. Budda boom budda bing!

There is no guarantee that the puppet government will last, or remain friendly to Estonia, and this isn't a conquest of a colony. So, I don't see the problem with this. It's not just Estonia enforcing this, it's the entire faction, it is a peace conference of the winning faction and the losing faction.

 

[Cheesecakeczar]

A few people seem to be missing this: Estonia does not become closer to becoming a world power by puppeting half of Afghanistan. They receive nothing. It's too far away to serve as a buffer or provide military support. They don't have any resources of value. I'm talking about game mechanics here, not whether it's "historical." They only did it because the game told them they had war contribution left. For whatever reason they didn't spend it on Latvia or anything useful. Meanwhile, the player was effectively screwed. His country was divided in half.

 

[Dominico]

Personally i find it pretty crazy that any regime would install a puppet government in Afghanistan. It just wouldn't happen!!

 

[TheCzarMan]

I would support Democratic governments not being able to take any states they didn't have a claim on prior to the war.

 

[tom_jones]

Puppets still have to be governed and enforced upon in order to keep them in check and loyal, which is physically impossible to do from Estonia. I don't understand how you are defending this.

You're making it sound like it's somehow physically impossible for people to travel from Estonia to their puppet country if there's no waterway access. The game happens in 20th century, trains, cars and planes has been around for a few decades.

 

[TheDerpyBeagle]

I'll be clearer : You cannot ask for both a historical and a realistic game at the same time. First and foremost, what is "realistic" or " makes sense" for us is not always the outcome of history, no matter how you want to spin it. Thus, Rome, when it became the first world power in Europe, was utterly unrealistic by all standards : it did happen nonetheless. We can study the growth of Rome influence, we can infer why it became what it became, but it does not dissolve the utterly nonesense of its power by as soon as a few centuries later after the Punic Wars. History is full of those surprises.

Deal with it.

And I will even add : You cannot ask for a historical game because then you will have no game left at all depending on your definition of "historical". If you mean historical in the sense of having a historical setting, displayed by symbols, languages, numbers of unites in 1936 and whatnot, then the game is historical by all means even when Estonia gets to puppet whatever it wants. If you want it to be historical in the sense to follow the exact same path than history, then you are not really playing ; at best, it would be some kind of book. Of course, in that regard, Estonia does not get to do what it wants. No one does. The Allies win each time. But if you are meaning historical in the sense of what should or could have possibily happen in your own, singular opinion, then you are facing the same problem that we have with Rome - a.k.a. there were no signs it will happen and it did nonetheless.

History will surprise. If the game can surprise me, the better.

How was Rome's rise to power unrealistic? It was perfectly possible as proven by history. Now, if that city state Rome were to suddenly invade land-locked Tibet and set up a client state there, then that is unrealistic and generally impossible, which is what we have here with Estonian Afghanistan. What is considered historically plausible is not based on my opinion, but in cases like this, it is based on common sense. The only countries that could benefit from or have any interest in puppeting Afghanistan are the Soviet Union or the UK (or even Iran.) But Estonia is thousands of miles away with no possible way of getting there and with no possible benefit from taking Afghanistan whatsoever, and unlike the Roman Empire, there is legitimately a 0% chance of it happening ever in any time period of history you can name.

Now if Estonia were to conquer or puppet the other Baltic states, that is something that is actually possible within the realm of common sense. I don't want 100% historical accuracy, but I also don't want complete sandbox nonsense that makes no reasonable measure of sense.

You're making it sound like it's somehow physically impossible for people to travel from Estonia to their puppet country if there's no waterway access. The game happens in 20th century, trains, cars and planes has been around for a few decades.

And what happens when Afghanistan decides it doesn't want to be a puppet to a weak nation half a continent away? Will Estonia ship supplies to occupying troops from across the world to keep the Afghani's in check?

 

[Cheesecakeczar]

You're making it sound like it's somehow physically impossible for people to travel from Estonia to their puppet country if there's no waterway access. The game happens in 20th century, trains, cars and planes has been around for a few decades.

Puppeting isn't like waving your hand and saying, "You're my slave." You need the political power and the military to back it up. In the game, Turkey was right there with the intent to conquer it. They could actually make use of the territory. Therefore, Estonia should have let them have it.

 

[tom_jones]

Puppeting isn't like waving your hand and saying, "You're my slave." You need the political power and the military to back it up. In the game, Turkey was right there with the intent to conquer it. They could actually make use of the territory. Therefore, Estonia should have let them have it.

"if you like it put a ring on it".

If Turkey had enough war contribution to make puppet out of Afghanistan themselves, they should've done it. If they hadn't, then what intent they could have hardly matters.

Am pretty sure Estonia can make use of that territory, too. And their military power doesn't seem to shabby if they contributed enough to the war to get enough score to afford that puppet.

 

[HamHamJ]

And what happens when Afghanistan decides it doesn't want to be a puppet to a weak nation half a continent away? Will Estonia ship supplies to occupying troops from across the world to keep the Afghani's in check?

They will call in the rest of their faction and ship troops through them and then their combined forces will roflstomp the rebels.

 

[Cheesecakeczar]

"if you like it put a ring on it".

If Turkey had enough war contribution to make puppet out of Afghanistan themselves, they should've done it. If they hadn't, then what intent they could have hardly matters.

Am pretty sure Estonia can make use of that territory, too. And their military power doesn't seem to shabby if they contributed enough to the war to get enough score to afford that puppet.

There wasn't an Estonian division within 5,000 km of Afghanistan. They only "contributed" in the Baltic. Imagine if Germany decided to puppet a chunk of China because they later joined the war. Not a good part of China, mind you, but an inland desert area. The AI shouldn't do things just because a game mechanic lets them do it. They should only puppet if a nation is sufficiently large and near them. It's not the player's fault they didn't have enough war contribution. They did all the battles and occupation in Afghanistan and Iraq. There was nothing they could do in Poland or the Baltic.

 

[Scutatus]

Something has to be done with current Peace Conference system because currently it is just broken and unbalanced. How is it that when you conquer both Iraq and Afghanistan (both of them for some stupid reason joined with Baltic.. BALTIC Alliance) you can't conquer them fully and instead Afghanistan is puppeted by Estonia and Iraq puppeted by Italy (both Estonia and Italy are pretty much on the other side of the earth from Iraq and Afghanistan).* How does it even make sense?? Estonia puppeting Afghanistan is just ridiculous.. some would even say stupid.

If you fully conquer country or territory and other allies have 0 change to access those areas then it would be logical that they would have 0 change to demand those things. Also why and how was Afganistan and Iraq even able to join with Baltic Alliance. Did they had before even a hint of diplomatic relations between each other? I have seen similar thing with random South American country joining with Chinese United Front in someone's Brazil playthrough.. What?? Why??

I hope that peace conference system is fixed because currently I imagine that it is in first playthrough ridiculous and hilarious but after that frustrating and simply game breaking..

*Based on Daniel's stream

It's no more ridiculous than Europe carving up China for themselves, or the USA getting a claim to garrison part of Berlin. Both of which happened (albeit not in WWII - although Berlin came just after).

 

[margustoo]

This system could be fixed relatively easily. Have it be dependable on who took part in individual countries conquest.. If there was no Italian nor Estonian troops anywhere close to Iraq or Afghanistan then they should have 0 saying in who gets that territory..

I think the main problem is that everything becomes a single war and because of that countries can demand stuff that they should have 0 right for..

 

[TheDerpyBeagle]

There wasn't an Estonian division within 5,000 km of Afghanistan. They only "contributed" in the Baltic. Imagine if Germany decided to puppet a chunk of China because they later joined the war. Not a good part of China, mind you, but an inland desert area. The AI shouldn't do things just because a game mechanic lets them do it. They should only puppet if a nation is sufficiently large and near them. It's not the player's fault they didn't have enough war contribution. They did all the battles and occupation in Afghanistan and Iraq. There was nothing they could do in Poland or the Baltic.

^ This. The situation here is the equivalent of the USSR winning the war against Germany, and then giving East Germany as a puppet to Mongolia for their contributions in the Eastern front against the Japanese.