Question re: Conquered Territory

[Akintude]

I've been avidly following the dev diaries, so forgive me if the topic has been discussed already and I've missed it, but do we have information yet on how HOI4 is going to treat conquered territory? By this, I mean to what extent HOI4 will allow conquering nations to exploit the industry and resources of annexed territory. I remember that in HOI2, the vast majority of IC and resource production was lost by the annexing party. I never really played it much, but I understand that in HOI3 there was a variety of policies, from collaboration to "full occupation" that allowed you to get a larger chunk of the resources/production in exchange for worse rebel activity etc.

Do we have any word on what approach HOI4 will use yet? I don't ask the question to suggest one approach or the other, after EU4/CK2 I have great faith that Paradox will choose an enjoyable approach so I'm not actually worried, just curious

 

[JKComposer]

We don't really know much about it yet, and it will probably be it's own dev diary together with rebels/partisans (occupation dev diary?).

 

[aruon]

chances are HOI 4 will inherit at least some of 3s policy system towards occupied territory. it was simple and each policy choice made sense.

 

[FOARP]

chances are HOI 4 will inherit at least some of 3s policy system towards occupied territory. it was simple and each policy choice made sense.

It definitely needed improving:

1) Annexed and occupied territory would have different levels of insurgency even though nothing had really changed between it being occupied and it being annexed.

2) Core territory couldn't experience insurgency.

3) You could not 'liberate' puppet-states from occupied territory (even though this was historical), but you could from annexed territory. Why do you have to wait until you annex the territory to do this? Why can't you release the kind of puppet-states that the Japanese formed?

4) Almost nobody used the in-between occupation policies - it was always either total exploitation or collaboration government.
​

I'd prefer to return to the HOI2 system - you should be able to release puppets from occupied territory. I'd also like some new classes of territory to be added: claimed territory for territory which you claim but which will experience insurgency if you occupy it (e.g., Germany and Alsace-Lorraine), and colonial territory for territory that is owned by you but not core.

 

[Aries666]

It would be good if they decide to borrow the client state mechanics from EU4. The biggest problem however, is that if you are allowed to create client states mid-war you are gaining effective control of that land without any peace treaty, which could lead to there being nothing to bargain over after a war.

 

[FOARP]

It would be good if they decide to borrow the client state mechanics from EU4. The biggest problem however, is that if you are allowed to create client states mid-war you are gaining effective control of that land without any peace treaty, which could lead to there being nothing to bargain over after a war.

Historically overlord states could (and did) make deals over the heads of their puppets about their territory - why not implement something like this?

Which reminds me that people have long be asking for user-defined puppet territory.

 

[Kovax]

In my opinion, the series really needs at least a touch of the ethnic details of EU or Vicky, but definitely not to the same depth. If the conquered territory is of the same basic ethnic and political background (think "pops" in Vicky 2, but only divided by ethnicity, not religion, class, or occupation), it should transition fairly easily into becoming an integral part of your country. If it's got major cultural or political differences (different majority culture or opposed ideology), then the transition is going to be harder and longer. So far, Paradox has not really distinguished between those extremes except via scripted events like Anschluss, Munich, and First Vienna. On average, the 50 years to fully integrate in most Paradox games is "adequate" as a game mechanic, yet again doesn't take the local situation into consideration.

Having the initial Revolt Risk and "cultural disunity" depend on the nature of the ethnic and political differences between the countries (same culture, similar culture, dissimilar culture, opposed culture) and degree of ideological/political difference at the time of occupation or annexation would mean that it would be easier to "swallow" similar states, and harder to absorb those with fundamental differences. The current 50% automatic "non-core" penalty which continues absolutely rigidly and then suddenly vanishes overnight could be replaced by a variable figure which decays from some initial "cultural disunity" value by an annual percentage, so the ability to utilize captured industry and resources would also depend on how well you get along with the locals, as well as how long you controlled it.

The less instantaneous "0/1" effects, and the more of them that can be replaced with variable or gradual effects controlled by multiple factors, the more realistic it becomes.

 

[Aries666]

On a similar note something needs to be done about members of the same faction occupying each others land like currently happens if the UK does a Normandy landing. I think it would be good if as above rather than having collaboration gov etc, the resources garnered from a province were linked to culture and ideology, so the Germans would get decent gains from Polish territory but ever diminishing gains as they push deeper into the Soviet Union.

 

[Kovax]

, so the Germans would get decent gains from Polish territory but ever diminishing gains as they push deeper into the Soviet Union.

....decent gains from the Polish territory with a significant German population, but less gain by taking the mainly Polish or other ethnicity provinces there and in the SU. "Cores" could indicate an easier assimilation, but actual figures to indicate relative ethnic makeup would be better. I just hate to see where province A provides 50% output because it's only 49% German and/or is not considered a core, but province B provides 100% output because it's 51% German and/or is given as a core, or else has been annexed for 50 years and suddenly jumps from 50% to 100% output overnight.

 

[Aries666]

....decent gains from the Polish territory with a significant German population, but less gain by taking the mainly Polish or other ethnicity provinces there and in the SU. "Cores" could indicate an easier assimilation, but actual figures to indicate relative ethnic makeup would be better. I just hate to see where province A provides 50% output because it's only 49% German and/or is not considered a core, but province B provides 100% output because it's 51% German and/or is given as a core, or else has been annexed for 50 years and suddenly jumps from 50% to 100% output overnight.

This could also be expanded such that the UK gains less from it's oversea territories if owned directly but if released or granted more autonomy like India for example could overall make a greater contribution to the war effort.

 

[Peter Wass]

It would be good if they decide to borrow the client state mechanics from EU4. The biggest problem however, is that if you are allowed to create client states mid-war you are gaining effective control of that land without any peace treaty, which could lead to there being nothing to bargain over after a war.

You could always have the option to create the client states during the war but then need to expend your victory points (whatever they're called) at the peace conference to maintain that after the war.

 

[BBBD316]

Well I think that you should be able to set up puppets/administration areas within occupied areas, these would not be permenant unless you are able to have them accepted via peace treaty.

Put Fascist/Communist leaders in charge of ethnic or national areas was fairly common place during the war.

 

[Nicolas I]

...4) Almost nobody used the in-between occupation policies - it was always either total exploitation or collaboration government...

How do you know ? Did you made a poll ? Are you looking over the shoulder of thousand of players à la Big Brother ?