Great Powers and Big Countries

[anomanderus]

The current GP system only makes sense if every non-GP is a little OPM with 100k pops. This leads to absolutely wacky nonsense like the USA sphereing Asia. The problem is that Sphereing as a concept basically means you get dibs on their resources and kind of control their economies- in real life this would be a source of major tension, in game it's just "haha map is blue color now". My opinion- sphereing large countries should work functionally differently than sphereing small ones, if a country has at least 1 million pops then it should trigger an event where the GP sends an ultimatum/"black ships" to demand major concessions (sphereing) from the large minor country in question. This creates a situation where the USA can no longer just go "lol" and sphere all of china, the Russians can't just sphere the Ottomans, the French can't just sphere the Brazilians or whatever and instead provoke a war.

I suppose a secondary criticism would be if a country has a large population it should be able to move people around/recruit pops across province lines in order to concentrate soldiery in one place, so large but expansive countries like Brazil don't end up badly lagging behind and getting beaten up by countries with more concentrated populations. Especially since in real life soldiers aren't deployed to their local town but sent to a base on the other side of the country by central command.

 

[johnthegerman]

I'm pretty sure there is an in-game effect that adds a penalty when sphereing large countries like China. Might just be an HPM thing so IDK.

 

[deanwebb]

Most mods I've tried have that buff for large non-GP nations. Basically, the only way to sphere them is as part of a peace deal.

 

[anomanderus]

I'm pretty sure there is an in-game effect that adds a penalty when sphereing large countries like China. Might just be an HPM thing so IDK.

I'm not sure vanilla has that, all I know is that it's offputting to see Sweden put Spain in its sphere.

Also there should be a focus for increasing birthrates, since immigration focus is useless. And for uncivs an option to research a reform that gives you medicine, since the current system is "you're behind and you remain behind forever". Too much in this game just allows existing GPs to snowball and everyone else gets left in the dust.

 

[deanwebb]

May be time to get a mod, I prefer Blood & Iron...

But do try Japan, it can go GP very well.

 

[anomanderus]

May be time to get a mod, I prefer Blood & Iron...

But do try Japan, it can go GP very well.

It's not necessarily "GP rule everything" I'm after but the ability to merely play smaller countries and make them somewhat successful. The problem is that since 2011 the game's design direction seems to have been nuking advantages you get from teching past the ai to compensate for the AI being stupid, which I dislike immensely since the 19th century was all about countries like Ethiopia or Thailand building stockpiles of weapons to make themselves formidable enough that the GPs would leave them alone, but in game it's like "haha britain with a million legions right up ur bum" and you can't pull off a tech win because the waves of men will drown your ability to reinforce and pop growth is so slow and the pops just never move to the correct provinces that it annoys me. The entire new world is always depopulated compared to where it should be, for example. I feel like there isn't enough player control- I should be able to just pass healthcare reforms if I want it, build hospitals and manually force the liferating upwards even if it costs extra monies. And the 5% population cap/malus on pops promoting to soldiers really bites you hard if you're a small country. The game is just heavily balanced towards the big countries so you're forced to blob quickly and early just to get the benefit of it.

 

[Woifee]

I’m sure PI will fix that with the next major content patch.

 

[WJS]

HFM has a "Small but Efficient" bonus so that one-state countries have a bonus to their production and moneymaking? Would that be the sort of thing you're looking for? That said, I'm far more easily successful with Saxony in Vanilla instead of HFM, because a landlocked OSM can't attack to control land they aren't adjacent to, and get less support.

There is my old Seventeen playthrough (see my signature) where I change every four years to whichever country is ranked #17. I did a few interesting things like spoil Prussia as Nassau, expand Luxembourg, and defend Italy by shattering it.

 

[Guedes]

The penalty for population on SoI influence do exist in Vanilla (last HoI patch anyways) and it makes basically impossible to any non-human nation to sphere China or any of its populous substates, for example.

However seeing from your Sweden-Spain example you seem to expect a much more radical approach which i do not agree upon.

The whole concept of SoI is whacky and feels hushed on Vic2 anyways. I can agree with that. The fact that SoI markets are also completely bugged doesnt help either.

Also, yeah, its basically impossible to succeed as a small non-aggressive nation, the maximum you can get is a small passive nation with huge colonies like, say, netherlands.

As for the rest of the complains; i suggest going for the proposals for Vic3 thread.

 

[El Jojo]

I'd disagree on a few points. It all depends of what sphereing means, the concept is too fuzzy right now. I do not see why sweden gaining economic influence over Spain is that shocking. Influence is not always force, it's just that you're so prevalent and "influential" that you get better economic treaties. By the way it's already impossible to sphere China and Russia.
Concerning reforms like healthcare and player control, I completely disagree, that's the whole specificity of the game, you do not have complete control, you have to do with the politics of your nation. Getting great healthcare in 1840 is rightly impossible, it's not a question of money.
Finally, what would be success for a small passive nation ? Surviving ? Not being sphered ? You can reject sphereing and if you win a few good battles you have the possibility to win wars against great powers. As Panjab you can win against the UK and take bits of India, just through battle warscore.

 

[anomanderus]

I'd disagree on a few points. It all depends of what sphereing means, the concept is too fuzzy right now. I do not see why sweden gaining economic influence over Spain is that shocking. Influence is not always force, it's just that you're so prevalent and "influential" that you get better economic treaties. By the way it's already impossible to sphere China and Russia.
Concerning reforms like healthcare and player control, I completely disagree, that's the whole specificity of the game, you do not have complete control, you have to do with the politics of your nation. Getting great healthcare in 1840 is rightly impossible, it's not a question of money.
Finally, what would be success for a small passive nation ? Surviving ? Not being sphered ? You can reject sphereing and if you win a few good battles you have the possibility to win wars against great powers. As Panjab you can win against the UK and take bits of India, just through battle warscore.

A country as large and powerful as Spain would never allow Sweden to just sphere them like that. Ideally all sphereing would come with a 50% chance of sparking a war against foreign influence but in the case of large countries should always lead to counterattack.