Would it be decided in a peace conference?
Yes. Read the DD on the peace conferences, it is all written down there.
Would it be decided in a peace conference?
But wasn't Japan annexed almost immediately? I don't recall a conference on Japan.Yes. Read the DD on the peace conferences, it is all writted down there.
How do I get their IC? Do you mean I can collectively IC? Like we all pitch in or do I gain actual IC?It's much more efficient to liberate countries and have them join your faction than it is to directly annex them.
If you directly annex non-core territory, it has only half the factory slots it normally does, and you get a tiny fraction of the manpower from it.
If you liberate the country and have it join your faction, you get all their factories and all their manpower.
But wasn't Japan annexed almost immediately? I don't recall a conference on Japan.
I just didn't quite understand the scenario where the UK occupies parts of Japan but not as much as Japan. When Japan capitulates, to whom do the unoccupied territories go to?Do you read what we are writing?
The peace conference only happens when the last major of a faction capitulates.
Japan wasn't annexed. It was occupied and it capitulated.
Why would it give me IC by trading with it?
So when Japan buys oil from the US, the US gains IC? I was under the impression that the IC was used for making the escorts that were necessary to relocate the resources.There's no conventional currency in the game; no "money" or gold or anything like that.
Th closest thing is civilian factories, which have multiple uses including building new factories and dockyards, and repairing infrastructure and other factories. If you want to say, buy 8 units of oil from the USSR, it will cost you one civilian factory. 16 units will cost two factories and so on (note: this was an example, those numbers aren't accurate I believe).
During the trade, the output of the factories you trade goes to the Soviet Union. In essence, the Soviet's use your factories that you trade for whatever they wish to use them for.
you occupy what you occupy. If the UK would have occupied some land they would controll it, while the rest of the unoccupied territory would be occupied by the USA if they made them capitulate. In the peace conference everyone can demand everything tho, there are no limitations in that. You can also ask for or give controll over the occupation of a state. Occupying doest equals owning the States tho.I meant like, if we say UK the a bit of Japan and the US takes a big chunk, where would the parts which weren't occupied go? Would it be decided in a peace conference?
I just didn't quite understand the scenario where the UK occupies parts of Japan but not as much as Japan. When Japan capitulates, to whom do the unoccupied territories go to?
Does Japan who has capitulated provide any IC or resources to the US? Or are they simply in shut down?See, only the mainland of a nation is given to the occupier (when there are multiple occupiers, we aren't sure what happens). The rest of land that is not apart of the mainland (for instance, Japan's, France's, and Netherland's colonies) is still kept. This is to help simulate that historically both France and Netherland had their colonies loyal to their own respective government rather than the Germans or Vichy France.
Who ever they capitulate to the person with the most warscore, or (usually) who controls the capital since that's a metric tonne of victory points. That's how I understood it.See, only the mainland of a nation is given to the occupier (when there are multiple occupiers, we aren't sure what happens). The rest of land that is not apart of the mainland (for instance, Japan's, France's, and Netherland's colonies) is still kept. This is to help simulate that historically both France and Netherland had their colonies loyal to their own respective government rather than the Germans or Vichy France.
You can enact different occupation laws that provide you different amounts of industry, resources and manpower from occupied states. Harsher policies means more unrest growth, which results in (off-map) resistance movements damaging or destroying factories, lowering supply throughput and giving strategic information to the enemy like troop movement etc.Does Japan who has capitulated provide any IC or resources to the US? Or are they simply in shut down?
How do I get their IC? Do you mean I can collectively IC? Like we all pitch in or do I gain actual IC?
Whilst occupied i think their resourses go to the US or they just don't be used. If Japan is in a faction however, and the faction leader doesn't capitulate then his resources and factories except in his mainland still functure as Japan and he's still in the war. He's just at a massive disadvantage since he probably lost alot of mp, ic and res.Does Japan who has capitulated provide any IC or resources to the US? Or are they simply in shut down?
Harsher laws also mean more IC and less MP whilst less harsh laws do the opposite.You can enact different occupation laws that provide you different amounts of industry, resources and manpower from occupied states. Harsher policies means more unrest growth, which results in (off-map) resistance movements damaging or destroying factories, lowering supply throughput and giving strategic information to the enemy like troop movement etc.
Civilian IC to be specific, its simulating the trade of consumer goods for resources. This CIC can be reallocated to building MIC of courseSo when Japan buys oil from the US, the US gains IC? I was under the impression that the IC was used for making the escorts that were necessary to relocate the resources.
In any case, the US would basically gain IC the more it trades. The more resources the US has, the more it can trade, the more IC.
If Japan had conquered China, it would keep China, and its relevant IC (though it would be non-core for Japan).
I am pretty sure this only counts for oversea core territory. In WWW China and the eastern part of the Soviet union were occupied by the USA aswell for example, while they kept their core-islands. This is there to reflect that the colonies of france and the netherlands for example still were loyal to their rightfull owners. China clearly doesnt see Japan as their rightfull owner if they were annexed just a year ago, which is why they arent core-territories for japan.