It is weird that to be recognised you need to declare war on a recognised country.

[Werther]

Spent a lot of time on the Russo-Japanese War back in my college days, and I have to disagree with you there. It's reasonable to imagine that there can also be *other* ways of achieving Recognized status, but the war had a much bigger impact on European impressions of Japan's status than the exploitation of China did.

Mee too, it is even one of the reason why I live in Japan. And I have to insist, the 1895 war had a profound impact on Europeans (at least for diplomats or military experts) and you can't ignore it when you study the Russo-Japanese War. Oh, and the Chinese-Japanese War is still a war, so it was not an argument against violent ways to be recognized. But only beating GP is kind of weird (I had a game with Afghanistan where I had the 1st GDP in the World, won against important non GP countries, controlled most of the Middle East, Central Asia, West Africa and Indonesia but was unrecognized because I forgot to cheese the USA).

 

[IanReSc]

While I agree with the OP doesn't this question just boil down to the fact that diplomacy doesn't really exist in this game? Other than to check on the duration of a truce and declare war, what diplomatic actions are there? Defense pacts, alliances and what not all mean nothing, because you get to sway countries as much as you like, only for them to abandon you directly after and worsening your relationship.

Forcing recognition through war makes sense, but it shouldn't be the only way of achieving it. Sadly, it doesn't even make much of a difference other than you suddenly get to make puppets and dominions instead of vassals.

 

[BPZ1941]

Spent a lot of time on the Russo-Japanese War back in my college days, and I have to disagree with you there. It's reasonable to imagine that there can also be *other* ways of achieving Recognized status, but the war had a much bigger impact on European impressions of Japan's status than the exploitation of China did.

I'm sure it did. But their impressions aren't strictly speaking what recognition is about, although it's partly up to that. Being recognized does not automatically mean you're a great power, and being unrecognized does not automatically mean you're the weakest blob around.

In game terms, you can take part in diplomatic plays without being Recognized. But having the European major powers think you're "one of them" (my best guess as to what "Recognized" means) should require either a clear military victory or an extended period of economic dominance.

Well, see that's the problem. When Commodore Perry came to Japan, they were treated as unrecognized. They were considered weak, and countries that barely had navies in the first place still sent a set of demands, like Prussia. The same situation happens with the Qing - fighting the Opium War wasn't to prevent or contain China, it was business. When the Boxer Rebellion occurred, the participants intervened such as they would have in any other colony - exemplifying how China, despite its size and power, wasn't considered much of a "real country" by any of the involved.

But that doesn't really apply to Japan of the period. The country that was actively undermining and repudiating treaties of that sort, such as with the Maria Luz incident. Albeit I wouldn't say 1870s Japan is necessarily recognized, the treatment is markedly different from the usual by the time the Sino-Japanese war is concluded. But there is a point where I agree with you - that is, Japan would probably not be considered a real great power until defeating Russia. But being unrecognized and being acknowledged as an equal to the likes of France and the UK are starkly different things.

After all, Imperial China was at some pre-Victoria points big and successful enough that we might think they were a no-brainer for Recognition. but would Europeans have treated them that way?

The Treaty of Nerchinsk and the McCartney Mission says yes. The Ottoman Empire was also the premier power of their half of the continent for almost a century, but were considered irrelevant by the timeframe of the game. Even established powers like Imperial Russia were at points regarded as less civilized for falling behind. Although I don't really agree with the categorization of the Ottomans as unrecognized, it certainly fits with how they ended up regarded in the buildup to and after the Crimean War (esp. the Treaty of Berlin).

 

[Vernichtere]

Just for your attention. The level of development did not always have much to say. Some countries in Latin America, or even the Balkans, were not in much better shape than Thailand or Madagascar, but were recognized nonetheless.

It's difficult to find a consistent line. Madagascar, for example, almost managed to survive. Thailand didn't have to fight a major war to be recognized. Vietnam was eaten.

It's not about becoming a great power.

 

[Kyoumen]

Nah you're just wrong bro, Paradox said you can do anything without warfare if you want.

Jokes about the state of the game aside, it would make sense that there are peaceful options to become recognized, perhaps overtime / slowly. I think if you start being the provider of a lot of non-raw resources to the major powers then that should slowly accumulate in a recognized status as an industrial power.


I'm sure that will not be locked behind a $30 DLC.

Nope, it wouldn't, because central gameplay mechanics never are.

It'd be nice if people complaining about Paradox DLC were ever intellectually honest about it.

 

[Fawr]

Just for your attention. The level of development did not always have much to say. Some countries in Latin America, or even the Balkans, were not in much better shape than Thailand or Madagascar, but were recognized nonetheless.

It's difficult to find a consistent line. Madagascar, for example, almost managed to survive. Thailand didn't have to fight a major war to be recognized. Vietnam was eaten.

It's not about becoming a great power.

I think this shows that it's not about gaining wealth or being close to the survival line.

 

[ShaTiK]

My main issue is mostly gameplay one. The reality of it is that when you want recognition - you declare on some GP and just wait 2 years for warscore to tick. Since AI rarely invades and even if he does - 95% it would fail even when it's irregulars vs skirmish (because the way defense works). SO you just sit there for a few years and AI gives you recognition. Even better if you have an ability to occupy treaty port, again AI usually not putting troops there (at the very least he usually won't mobilize until you do and troops take 50-60 days to travel).
But on the whole it really should be possible to be recognized peacefully if you have good non-dominated relationship with GP. Or as an alternative - certain economical threshold. I mean, if half of the world is buying my ironclads, arms, engines and steel, this country is hardly an 'unrecognized' one. China, India and Japan being the prime examples

 

[Kyoumen]

If it was an economic threshold, than China becomes recognised on January 1st, 1836.

I'm sympathetic to wanting a more diplomatic way to do this but there are real reasons to argue only force would make Europeans take a non-white power as a peer competitor (and even then, Japan not without justification got resentful at being treated as a lesser in subsequent treaties).

 

[MachopPower69]

Another suggestion is passing certain laws like Free Trade or Multiculturalism.

Oh, and to the person who said Japan was recognised after the Russo-Japanese war, it was only recognised for authority over Korea. It just confirmed Japan's emergence as the pre-eminent power in East Asia.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Portsmouth

 

[Aloraand]

I think there's a deeper issue, being recognised by European powers should influence your relations with European powers. This should still be important, as those are the major players, but it should not influence your great power status as that tries to extract an objective value and has direct gameplay implications. If this is fixed, then having a recognised status could probably stay as is, since winning a war is indisputably a good way to show them that you are their equal.

 

[Varren]

GP status is explicitly subjective. I mean, it’s objective in game because everything is objective in game, but what it represents is subjective. That’s why the Ottomans start with an arbitrary prestige penalty, for instance.

As for recognition, I feel it should be possible for recognized nations to “informally” recognize others, with that translating into actual recognition once enough nations do so (based on their rank or perhaps prestige share).

Ultimately, though, recognition must come from existing recognized powers.

 

[MachopPower69]

Imagine if they re-implemented the crisis system where great powers vote on the status of rising unrecognised powers like Japan or China.

 

[yurcick]

That's a good point that with the poor state of in-game diplomacy and lack of complementary mechanics the whole recognized/unrecognized thing is vague.

But maybe there's more to it.
What is "being unrecognized", in essence? Not being treated as equal to the recognized.
Maybe the solution to this could be mechanics that would adequately represent unequal treaties, to which most unrecognized countries of any worth were subjected (because it was in Western countries' business interests, and the victims could hardly resist).
Getting rid of those could count towards recognition.

 

[GrounchoVilla]

The US was taken much more seriously as a global power after thrashing the Spanish. It's not just Japan, but people have a hard time with the idea that the US should start unrecognized, so one of the two prime cases for it in-game isn't even able to use it since they start recognized.

also when Mexico beat France. But then Afghanistan's victories against the UK didn't really leave it "recognized" in any meaningful sense

But Persia never won against a European power but was for all intents and purposes a globally recognized power by 1936. Same could be said for China, even though it was a total basket case by 1936 (one might argue their limited contribution to WWI was a de facto "war of recognition"). Perhaps an unrecognized nation pulling off a recognition-by-force unlocks a diplomatic path?

 

[Skales]

I am pretty sure this particular mechanic was created entirely around the meme understanding of the Russo-Japanese war everyone got from high school. There's not much more to it, and yes, it's a bad mechanic.

 

[thedarkendstar]

The US is a pretty bad example I think the US seems to be the only nation outside of Europe that Europeans give any consideration for as a power for quite a long time France only intervenes in Mexico during the civil war.

The Brits only ever compromise with the Americans despite being the only European power with the ability to seriously threaten the US and formally recognize its sphere over the America's by letting it arbitrate its dispute with Venezuela.

This about every other country in the world outside of Europe including other American nations were any of them treated with the same consideration as the US from the start of the game I would say no. The Europeans tried to interject themselves in nations like Mexico and colonized much of the world as well as setting up spheres of influence in China.

This is all to say I don't think we should be really bring up the US in this conversation because it is like THE exception.

As for recognition its difficult to say recognition for Japan in one way or another did come largely at the barrel of a gun but that doesn't mean in real life it couldn't be achieved through other means just that it didn't. Its also worth noting recognition seems to have multiple tiers Japan and China were treated far differently then African states or even south east asia.

 

[MachopPower69]

That's a good point that with the poor state of in-game diplomacy and lack of complementary mechanics the whole recognized/unrecognized thing is vague.

But maybe there's more to it.
What is "being unrecognized", in essence? Not being treated as equal to the recognized.
Maybe the solution to this could be mechanics that would adequately represent unequal treaties, to which most unrecognized countries of any worth were subjected (because it was in Western countries' business interests, and the victims could hardly resist).
Getting rid of those could count towards recognition.

It kind of feels like Recognition is bias as well. There is an event for the Ottomans where they fail to recover from being the sick man where they become unrecognised because they declined.

 

[MachopPower69]

The US is a pretty bad example I think the US seems to be the only nation outside of Europe that Europeans give any consideration for as a power for quite a long time France only intervenes in Mexico during the civil war.

The Brits only ever compromise with the Americans despite being the only European power with the ability to seriously threaten the US and formally recognize its sphere over the America's by letting it arbitrate its dispute with Venezuela.

This about every other country in the world outside of Europe including other American nations were any of them treated with the same consideration as the US from the start of the game I would say no. The Europeans tried to interject themselves in nations like Mexico and colonized much of the world as well as setting up spheres of influence in China.

This is all to say I don't think we should be really bring up the US in this conversation because it is like THE exception.

As for recognition its difficult to say recognition for Japan in one way or another did come largely at the barrel of a gun but that doesn't mean in real life it couldn't be achieved through other means just that it didn't. Its also worth noting recognition seems to have multiple tiers Japan and China were treated far differently then African states or even south east asia.

What about the former Spanish and Portuguese colonies? Spanish America revolted and won their independence, right? And Brazil is semi-unrecognised since they seceded from Portugal. Does that mean if you release Scotland as Great Britain Scotland is unrecognised? Or winning a war for independence makes you unrecognised?

If memory serves, the first country to recognise the US was an unrecognised country according to the game; Morocco. And what about the CSA? Not many countries recognised it.

A good idea is for countries in certain regions asking countries that have interests in that region to ask for recognition.

 

[thedarkendstar]

What about the former Spanish and Portuguese colonies? Spanish America revolted and won their independence, right? And Brazil is semi-unrecognised since they seceded from Portugal. Does that mean if you release Scotland as Great Britain Scotland is unrecognised? Or winning a war for independence makes you unrecognised?

If memory serves, the first country to recognise the US was an unrecognised country according to the game; Morocco. And what about the CSA? Not many countries recognised it.

A good idea is for countries in certain regions asking countries that have interests in that region to ask for recognition.

You seem to misunderstand what im saying here is saying the Nations of Europe treated the US different then the rest of the new world nations.

It treated the US as a nation that projected influence and had a sphere the rest of the New world nations it didnt to the same degree. Out of the new world nations the Largest were the US Mexico and Brazil I know little of the latter but Mexico despite it size was seen as a target by European intervention specifically the French.

I didn't say this makes them unrecognized my point was the US was an exception and the game mechanics should probably not be based on it as an example.

People kept mentioning the US in this threat so my point was that it was such an exception to the rules that making your game rules work around it I don't think would work well.

 

[Ttrgw]

To make it more historical, there should be several levels of recognition.
And you have to go to war (something close to total war) with one of GP in order to get them to recognise you as equal to them.
Great Powers of this period, such as Great Britain, were really arrogant. They had the military superiority to be arrogant. And they imposed that arrogance on the rest of the world through their military power and became even more arrogant.
Proof of military equality is absolutely necessary as a condition of recognition.

I don't think it is appropriate in the age of imperialism to portray Great Powers as good guys who will treat you as equals if you have an advanced economy and laws.