Peaceful Annexation

[unmerged(2907)]

It should maybe be based along national lines. After all, the majority of the peaceful annexations were the nation states consolidating in Europe, so maybe a rule that you can only diplo-annexe countries with the same nationality.

And you should be able to buy/swap land. Imagine giant games of Top Trumps with African nations...

 

[unmerged(15751)]

Originally posted by Mosschops
And you should be able to buy/swap land. Imagine giant games of Top Trumps with African nations...

But certainly only colonial or different culture land. It might be nice for the collapsing Multiculturals to be able to cede fringe areas of their empire which are untenable, in exchange for improved relations and a lump of cash.

 

[Zagys]

If the historical instances of peaceful annexations are modeled by events, it might not make any sense to allow them to happen at all outside of that. Otherwise, the frequency with which they happen in the game will always vastly exceed the frequency with which they happened in history.

 

[unmerged(8913)]

Originally posted by Zagys
If the historical instances of peaceful annexations are modeled by events, it might not make any sense to allow them to happen at all outside of that. Otherwise, the frequency with which they happen in the game will always vastly exceed the frequency with which they happened in history.

But this would lock you into playing a historical game. What if you wanted to deviate from history? There are certainly other ways of reducing the frequency of a peaceful annexation than by forbidding it altogether. Perhaps a good compromise would be to allow for the historical ones via events, and make it possible, but very difficult, to peacefully annex a country on your own.

 

[Zagys]

Originally posted by Marcus Valerius
But this would lock you into playing a historical game. What if you wanted to deviate from history? There are certainly other ways of reducing the frequency of a peaceful annexation than by forbidding it altogether. Perhaps a good compromise would be to allow for the historical ones via events, and make it possible, but very difficult, to peacefully annex a country on your own.

If the game is capable of handling peaceful annexation in a realistic manner, then I'd rather the historical ones not happen due to events.

 

[Morpheus506]

I don't think the historical ones should be event based either. What happens when someone has invaded America and conquered all things up to the Ohio River. America gets Texas? Not much sense there.

 

[Grosshaus]

Originally posted by Mosschops
It should maybe be based along national lines. After all, the majority of the peaceful annexations were the nation states consolidating in Europe, so maybe a rule that you can only diplo-annexe countries with the same nationality.

Most of colonization in Africa and also India was, at least was said to be, peaceful annexations. Of course behind the decisions were colonial troops ready to invade, but the threat of conquest was there to some of the German and Italian states also.

Perhaps one couldn't peacefully annex a nation of the same continent unless they have the same ethnicity. I don't know how well this fits to extra-European issues, though.

I'd like there to be a small chance of peacefull annexations, but not the same frenzy as in EU2. And of course, the more events the better...

 

[unmerged(15764)]

how about the possibility to threaten with invasion a la ww2 checkoslovakia?

 

[Moltke]

Diplomatic threats via show of force are a must for any diplomatic model! I really hope the diplomatic aspect of Victoria exceeds everyone's expectations tremendously

 

[unmerged(18345)]

An Expensive Anexiation

Anexiations should be expensive. For example Bavaria refused to join a prussian lead Germany. But then Prussa paid a lot of money to the bavarian King, so he still could still build his loved "Märchenschloesser" like Neuschwanstein. I dont know how much of a years income prussia had to pay, but it was surely more then 10%... All the barons, kings and lords have been paid to agree the anexiation.

 

[unmerged(18249)]

Re: An Expensive Anexiation

Originally posted by Robert Soyka
Anexiations should be expensive. For example Bavaria refused to join a prussian lead Germany. But then Prussa paid a lot of money to the bavarian King, so he still could still build his loved "Märchenschloesser" like Neuschwanstein. I dont know how much of a years income prussia had to pay, but it was surely more then 10%... All the barons, kings and lords have been paid to agree the anexiation.

a) The Summ paid to the baverian King was afordable.

b) Bavaria was not "annexed". They just joined something like a "Union". The baverian Kings ruled Baveria untill 1918.

 

[unmerged(10945)]

Originally posted by Morpheus506
I don't think the historical ones should be event based either. What happens when someone has invaded America and conquered all things up to the Ohio River. America gets Texas? Not much sense there.

There should just be some common sense, realistic triggers for any major events firing off. I think this could be the one thing that would make a major improvment over EU2, to get rid of the "One province austria inheriting 18 province hungary that kept kicking its ass" effect.

 

[unmerged(2036)]

Originally posted by PriestOfDiscord
There should just be some common sense, realistic triggers for any major events firing off. I think this could be the one thing that would make a major improvment over EU2, to get rid of the "One province austria inheriting 18 province hungary that kept kicking its ass" effect.

Aye

Here is cross my fingers for triggers depending on the actual situation

 

[Zagys]

Re: Re: An Expensive Anexiation

Originally posted by Wilhelm II
b) Bavaria was not "annexed". They just joined something like a "Union". The baverian Kings ruled Baveria untill 1918.

In game terms, it would be annexed.