Stronger minors?

[Celdur]

South America is one of the easier continent to do this on since it's full of secondary powers and lacks any major power.

Europe, not counting Russia, is only 6 million km2 (10 mil with European Russia), SA is 21 million km2, anyone here tell me if that is even remotely represented in game? not to mention the different terrain features it has?


South America is massively underrepresented in PDX games both in EU and HoI, the continent is huge, has incredibly difficult terrain and massive natural resources, both in the 40's and now. At the time, it was not that much different than many western European countries in regards to per capita wealth (there was little industry of course, except in Argentina and some in Brazil, still much less then the major powers) that's why, at the time, there was massive immigration from Europe and the Middle East and even Japan and China to South America (with the exceptions of Britain and France which sent few immigrants) the rest of the continent sent millions to Venezuela, Brasil, Argentina, Chile, Perú, Colombia, etc.


The only reason that SA was "quiet" during the 19th and early 20th century was because we had little population and huge amounts of land, the exact opposite of Europe, there was no need to expand and have colonies or even industrialize the economy, its a crude thing to say but we had our own colonies here, in our own country, we exploited the natives, the blacks, or both only in the second half of the century with the expansion of real citizenship and a population boom did the wealth gap increased dramatically between Western Europe and SA and we paid the price for not investing in education and I+D.



In any case, if we don't want minors taking over whole continents, PDX has to implement the geographical and logistical difficulties that existed at the time all over the world, not just the Russian winter.

 

[Cybvep]

In the case of minors, with a few exceptions (like Swedish ore), their capitals will frequently hold all of their resource production, which is kept to a minimum (so they can sustain their also minimal IC).

Yeah, I noticed that, too. That decreases value of these non-capital provinces, which is bad, especially since the capital already contains resource and supply stockpiles. BTW I hope that they will get rid of that nonsense in HOI4. Even the old HOI2 system was better, when the nation lost one half of its stockpiles when the capital was taken and the second half when it was annexed. Still "meh", but at least it was more balanced. Another problem is that convoys can transport 99999 resources in ONE DAY. Ridiculous.

Another problem is the population. Minors will get very small manpower, which would never let you simulate cases such as the Chaco War, which you just described..

Yeah, I think that many minors are under-represented MP-wise and I don't know why, because giving them a bit more MP would be good for gameplay, too. Their IC and LP already makes their situation hard, so...
I agree that the MP system is too simplistic and I hope that HOI4 improved it. HOI3-style running-out-of-MP shouldn't be so common, but on average the quality of recruits during the late-war period should be much lower. Hopefully the days of "Specialist Training" in 1945 will be gone .

In any case, if we don't want minors taking over whole continents, PDX has to implement the geographical and logistical difficulties that existed at the time all over the world, not just the Russian winter.

+1

 

[RuskiVolkov]

So what? Sweden was a highly literate rich country with industry. It wasn´t Yugoslavia or a South American country.

I'm getting tired of hearing quotes like this (nothing against Beaga directly). Just why can't certain things be possible? Brazil producing a gigantic tank army and crushing the world underneath it: impossible, tanks are useless in jungle with no/little infrastructure, and no matter how much planning and work Brazil did they couldn't pump out enough tanks to challenge the world.

However, let's say in a slightly ahistorical 1936 the president/leader of Brazil died due to unforeseen circumstances and the person who takes over is as charismatic and goal driven as Hitler and using these abilities he assembles a grand counsel of clever people and unites the people, using these two aspects to grow industry, technology, and military. A few years down the line the big watch dog of the Americas is pulled away to fight wars over the world, and just like that there's an opening.

A few years later all of South America up to the Panama Canal is taken and the president of Brazil (now President of South America I guess) shifts his plan. With conquest complete now it's time to deal with the dog that should be coming home soon. He shifts his forces to all major ports and cities in the country and digs in like crazy on his side of the canal. USA just nuked Japan because a land invasion was terrifying. What're they gonna do to United South America? Nuke all the major cities? Pull it's people into another conflict which doesn't have much to do with the ones it just finished? I can see Brazil walking away with it's victories.

 

[Deathmachinept]

I agree that some minors need to have a buff, I remember DiDays Ice had light infantry this an interesting way of giving some more power to minor while still being realistic.

But I think it's essential to have more tradeable resources and give more importance to delegating some aspects of majors industry or logistic to minors and allies but also make this a very important thing to do, there were many small countries that produce food, ammunition, sold industry resources, trucks, trains, produced licensed weapons and vehicles, constructed freighters...

Minors should then receive money that is produce in large quantities by majors and this money could be reinvested in many features that would increase this minor power and developed it into a more powerful minor.

 

[Celdur]

I'm getting tired of hearing quotes like this (nothing against Beaga directly). Just why can't certain things be possible? Brazil producing a gigantic tank army and crushing the world underneath it: impossible, tanks are useless in jungle with no/little infrastructure, and no matter how much planning and work Brazil did they couldn't pump out enough tanks to challenge the world.

However, let's say in a slightly ahistorical 1936 the president/leader of Brazil died due to unforeseen circumstances and the person who takes over is as charismatic and goal driven as Hitler and using these abilities he assembles a grand counsel of clever people and unites the people, using these two aspects to grow industry, technology, and military. A few years down the line the big watch dog of the Americas is pulled away to fight wars over the world, and just like that there's an opening.

A few years later all of South America up to the Panama Canal is taken and the president of Brazil (now President of South America I guess) shifts his plan. With conquest complete now it's time to deal with the dog that should be coming home soon. He shifts his forces to all major ports and cities in the country and digs in like crazy on his side of the canal. USA just nuked Japan because a land invasion was terrifying. What're they gonna do to United South America? Nuke all the major cities? Pull it's people into another conflict which doesn't have much to do with the ones it just finished? I can see Brazil walking away with it's victories.

Interesting idea, but it stands to reason that the other countries in SA would arm form alliances and entrench themselves if they see any other country being too militaristic (as it happens from time to time in RL)


The unification of ALL of SA should be a massive undertaking by any and all that try it, sure, you have Brazil (at the time less industrialized than Argentina) with a massive army ready to go and steamroll the La Plata countries, even built infrastructure through the massive amazon rainforest and has experienced jungle troops, then they hit the Andes Wall all over the western part of the continent, with already massive supply lines good luck trying to go through there, maybe they can go south through the strait of magellan all the way to the pacific coast of SA, problem is, no refueling bases and both the Chilean, Peruvian and what's left of the (hypothetical) Argentinian armadas bottle-necking them in the strait.


It would be cool to be able to do stuff like this, with all minors, all over the world.



If your country has the natural resources, since we (the players) have the foresight, and in the game "perfect" control of the nation, we should be able to industrialize our country relatively quickly, not have the best Tech in the world but really increase our importance not be gimped our of our minds.

 

[Celdur]

You cannot really compare the two . The Americas were considered the US sphere of influence. It was their backyard, while Europe was a land far far away which most Americans didn't want to be bothered with. It wouldn't be hard to convince the Congress and the public to intervene in the South America, but intervening in Europe was a different matter entirely. Also, considering the power base of SA nations, there would be no need for total war. Anyway, waiting until country X conquers the whole SA would be out of question, even if any SA country was capable of achieving this.

Please don't confuse US interventionism in the Caribbean and Central America with SA nations, SA countries are several orders of magnitude more difficult to invade, if only for the geography and size, average Central American/Caribbean nation size is 40 thousand km2 (those are the ones that the US invaded), average SA country 1 million km2 (with Brazil having 8.5 and Argentina 3) even Mexico has 1.9 million km2.


Not that the US could do it if it really wanted to, just that it would be a massive, massive pain, unlike invading and occupying the Dominican Republic for instance. In HoI3 you just land in the capital and some other province and voila you just annexed millions of km2.

 

[Angel Walker]

Europe, not counting Russia, is only 6 million km2 (10 mil with European Russia), SA is 21 million km2, anyone here tell me if that is even remotely represented in game? not to mention the different terrain features it has?

[...]

The only reason that SA was "quiet" during the 19th and early 20th century was because we had little population and huge amounts of land, the exact opposite of Europe, there was no need to expand and have colonies or even industrialize the economy, its a crude thing to say but we had our own colonies here, in our own country, we exploited the natives, the blacks, or both only in the second half of the century with the expansion of real citizenship and a population boom did the wealth gap increased dramatically between Western Europe and SA and we paid the price for not investing in education and I+D.

In any case, if we don't want minors taking over whole continents, PDX has to implement the geographical and logistical difficulties that existed at the time all over the world, not just the Russian winter.

Great post! The size of South America annoys me so much... I have spent countless hours to make the continent at least look close to reality (see Community Map Project), however I can't change the fact that it's pretty much the size of Europe. And the terrain is so bad it almost seems stereotypical... really? Jungles all over Brazil?

Of course, Paradox has their priorities, but it still annoys me

I do disagree with the comment that SA had little population, though (this site has interesting info on that subject, and so far it matches other sources I have consulted). It had a low demographic density, and less developed urban areas, but in term of sheer numbers, some SA countries were comparable to European majors. Though I guess that's somewhat represented, Brazil and Argentina do have decent manpower (which is a problematic concept, but manpower simply running out in the middle of the war is not exclusive to minors), not sure about the others.

However, let's say in a slightly ahistorical 1936 the president/leader of Brazil died due to unforeseen circumstances and the person who takes over is as charismatic and goal driven as Hitler and using these abilities he assembles a grand counsel of clever people and unites the people, using these two aspects to grow industry, technology, and military.

Well, you don't have the kill the man. He is, after all, the man you're looking for. Though he was not a warmongering maniac and would see no reason to go on a pointless conquering spree in South America just to be spanked by Uncle Sam.

I can see Brazil walking away with it's victories.

I can't

As Celdur said, just because of the logistics involved (which should be a important gameplay factor), that'd be impossible.

If we do not restrain ourselves to gameplay reasons, but actually focus on the political and diplomatic repercussions of such thing, it's certainly an impossible scenario. You might as well argue for a USA conquest of the whole Americas, or a Soviet WC (both unfortunately very achievable).

In my view, a much more interesting game would be one in which you actually have somewhat plausible goals. I don't know, maybe a Brazilian-Argentinian war in which each country joined a different alliance, ending with a regime change and a partial military occupation. Or one case in which Germany does better than it historically did and managed to get most of SA in their influence zone, proposing a new partition of the continent. You know, basically a situation where you get a regional power and play a part in the larger conflict of WW2 and have fun, without doing more than even Germany could possibly hope to accomplish.

EDIT:

Please don't confuse US interventionism in the Caribbean and Central America with SA nations, SA countries are several orders of magnitude more difficult to invade, if only for the geography and size, average Central American/Caribbean nation size is 40 thousand km2 (those are the ones that the US invaded), average SA country 1 million km2 (with Brazil having 8.5 and Argentina 3) even Mexico has 1.9 million km2. Not that the US couldn't do it if it really wanted to, just that it would be a massive, massive pain, unlike invading and occupying the Dominican Republic for instance. In HoI3 you just land in the capital and some other province and voila you just annexed millions of km2.

Well, I think is that the main point is that the US wouldn't just sit and look as a possibly pro-axis madman conquers several nations within what they'd consider their geographical area of influence. Though I believe you agree with me on this, and you're just disagreeing with Cybvep's notion that the US could easily occupy South America. But please do correct me if I'm mistaken.

EDIT AGAIN:

But I think it's essential to have more tradeable resources and give more importance to delegating some aspects of majors industry or logistic to minors and allies but also make this a very important thing to do, there were many small countries that produce food, ammunition, sold industry resources, trucks, trains, produced licensed weapons and vehicles, constructed freighters...

Oh, that too! I do remember reading somewhere that only Argentina was responsible for 40% of British imports on meat (or it was the whole of their meat? Well, I'm going to look for a source tomorrow). And then you have Brazilian Rubber, which was actually represented in TFH as a strategic asset (though, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think it can benefit the US in any way, is it historically did), so I'm feeling a little optimistic towards HoI IV.

 

[MI24th]

Something about the Production Licensing I could never understand. As Canada I buy a P51 Multi-Role license from the U.S. I produce said aircraft and activate it for combat actions. As soon as the last plane rolls off the line, BAM! An idiot ray hits the factory, because now all of a sudden the only planes I can make are mid 30's P-36 pursuit planes. Once I buy a license, why can't I continue to build said equipment until I decide to upgrade to a better design?

 

[Fryslan0109]

This thread is comedy gold if you change the meaning of "minor" to "child".

 

[Celdur]

I agree with pretty much everything you said Angel Walker. I just want to clarify some things:


On the population side, i meant the population of SA in the 1940's.

For example Perú had around 7 million people in that era, Ecuador had 3 million, Colombia 11 million, Chile 5 million, Bolivia 2.2 million, Venezuela 3.8 million, Argentina 14 million and Brazil 40 million, this are rough estimates by the UN.

Another thing about Manpower is that it grew like crazy in those years. Even from 1936-1948 there was significant population growth in certain nations. Brazil went from 40 to 50 million for example, Venezuela from 3.8 to 5 million, Perú from 7 to 9 million, etc.


As i said before there was a huge population boom in SA and in LATAM in general, the population boom Europe had in the XIX century we had it in the middle to late XX century.

 

[1alexey]

Please don't confuse US interventionism in the Caribbean and Central America with SA nations, SA countries are several orders of magnitude more difficult to invade, if only for the geography and size, average Central American/Caribbean nation size is 40 thousand km2 (those are the ones that the US invaded), average SA country 1 million km2 (with Brazil having 8.5 and Argentina 3) even Mexico has 1.9 million km2.


Not that the US couldn't do it if it really wanted to, just that it would be a massive, massive pain, unlike invading and occupying the Dominican Republic for instance. In HoI3 you just land in the capital and some other province and voila you just annexed millions of km2.

Square footage is pointless statistic.
Capitals are always important, as they are centers of economy and industry. Taking over capital can mean taking over 1/4 of economy and most of industry for less developed countries.

Then, US invaded Africa, Italy and France, also pacific islands. Invading anyone in SA would be much easier. The only country that maybe could`ve stood up was Brazil, but IRL it was intimidated by threat of US invasion, so it cooperated peacefully.

 

[FOARP]

Square footage is pointless statistic.
Capitals are always important, as they are centers of economy and industry. Taking over capital can mean taking over 1/4 of economy and most of industry for less developed countries.

Then, US invaded Africa, Italy and France, also pacific islands. Invading anyone in SA would be much easier. The only country that maybe could`ve stood up was Brazil, but IRL it was intimidated by threat of US invasion, so it cooperated peacefully.

Sure, capitals are important as centres of industry - but not, normally, of resource production which very often was done in remote areas. Sloppy soft-coding like this just results in wars being a point-defence battle over the capitals.

On the more general point of whether a continental-conquest should be possible, I just say: model all the factors accurately, and then see what happens. My guess is that if you join a coalition and have their backing, work in co-operation with friendly governments, dominating a continent should be possible when you play as one of that continent's larger powers (e.g., Brazil in SA) and the major powers who might intervene against you are distracted elsewhere. If, as Brazil, you set out to single-handedly conquer all of South America, you should find the Allied majors intervening in force to stop you, though.

 

[1alexey]

Sure, capitals are important as centres of industry - but not, normally, of resource production which very often was done in remote areas. Sloppy soft-coding like this just results in wars being a point-defence battle over the capitals.

Consider for a moment, that capital usually is the place where at least 10% of population lives, and often you take other population canters on the way to capital. Capitals are usually also logistical centers, so it is not always possible to have a functioning home logistics without the capital.
Obviously there are cases where taking capital wouldn`t relust in surrender, but you have to be SU or US or UK or France for that, since if enemy can take your capital, the war is lost anyway with exeption of a few countries.

 

[FOARP]

Consider for a moment, that capital usually is the place where at least 10% of population lives, and often you take other population canters on the way to capital. Capitals are usually also logistical centers, so it is not always possible to have a functioning home logistics without the capital.
Obviously there are cases where taking capital wouldn`t relust in surrender, but you have to be SU or US or UK or France for that, since if enemy can take your capital, the war is lost anyway with exeption of a few countries.

Sure, but the capital should not be the source of all resources, meaning losing other parts of the country has no impact.

 

[Beagá]

I'm getting tired of hearing quotes like this (nothing against Beaga directly). Just why can't certain things be possible? Brazil producing a gigantic tank army and crushing the world underneath it: impossible, tanks are useless in jungle with no/little infrastructure, and no matter how much planning and work Brazil did they couldn't pump out enough tanks to challenge the world.

Becuase it´s fantasy, it´s that simple.

Really wanna a game that is very plausible regarding industry and military development yet it´s not very sandbox go play Victoria 2. The fact is, not a SINGLE american country had either the heavy industry (tanks, artillery and guns are made of steel not wood, copper, cattle, coffee, bananas, ye know the things most South american countries produced), they had vastly illiterate populations, and they were poor. And... 1929 crash.

To sum it up:

1- No industry
2- No trained workforce
3- No Money.

It makes sense in Victoria 2 to have a totally diferente country in 1900. It does NOT make sense to have a totally different country by 1940, or even 45 by that matter. I´m not saying that, say, Brazil couldn´t produce tanks, just that they would be bad like the hungarian models and thus probably we would just buy better stuff. Pointless to send people to die in 1944 in a plane that has the same performance as one from 1940 if you can buy better things. Not to mention that having tanks AND planes AND ships is even more rubbish. At most we would focus on one stuff.

If you really don´t care about plausibility go mod the game for YOUR taste or ask for ahistorical mode where countries aren´t as limited, or make a scenario. Kaiserreich was hugely succesful, nothing stops you from making a mod with all countries being different. Just don´t create stuff from thin air just because it´s "cool to do X as country Y" and screw the main game.

That´s also why so many people (me included) want a 1933 start. It would allow more ahistorical stuff without being too forced. In such a scenario it makes sense for a country that was neutral to align to a faction and have a greater military development, as a cost from internal unrest as, ya know, there was this little thing called the Great Depression which screwed most countries and thus military spending wasn´t really popular. It´s also Worth mentioning that we probably would (in HOI 3 terms) have a high dissent and Consumer Oriented industry and thus wouldn´t even have much IC to work with.

 

[Cybvep]

Please don't confuse US interventionism in the Caribbean and Central America with SA nations, SA countries are several orders of magnitude more difficult to invade, if only for the geography and size, average Central American/Caribbean nation size is 40 thousand km2 (those are the ones that the US invaded), average SA country 1 million km2 (with Brazil having 8.5 and Argentina 3) even Mexico has 1.9 million km2.

It wouldn't be easy, I agree. However, fughting Brazil or Argentina would be nothing like fighting Germany and it would be mostly a logistical challenge, not a strictly military one. The USA would probably try to install a friendly gov. Anyway, no reason for total war, unless a good chunk of the continent was already united, but that would have to be voluntary, as occupation would only put an additional strain on the Brazilian or the Argentinian economy.

 

[FOARP]

Becuase it´s fantasy, it´s that simple.

Really wanna a game that is very plausible regarding industry and military development yet it´s not very sandbox go play Victoria 2. The fact is, not a SINGLE american country had either the heavy industry (tanks, artillery and guns are made of steel not wood, copper, cattle, coffee, bananas, ye know the things most South american countries produced), they had vastly illiterate populations, and they were poor.

To sum it up:

1- No industry
2- No trained workforce
3- No Money.

It makes sense in Victoria 2 to have a totally diferente country in 1900. It does NOT make sense to have a totally different country by 1940, or even 45 by that matter. I´m not saying that, say, Brazil couldn´t produce tanks, just that they would be bad like the hungarian models and thus probably we would just buy better stuff. Pointless to send people to die in 1944 in a plane that has the same performance as one from 1940 if you can buy better things. Not to mention that having tanks AND planes AND ships is even more rubbish. At most we would focus on one stuff.

If you really don´t care about plausibility go mod the game for YOUR taste or ask for ahistorical mode where countries aren´t as limited, or make a scenario. Kaiserreich was hugely succesful, nothing stops you from making a mod with all countries being different. Just don´t create stuff from thin air just because it´s "cool to do X as country Y" and screw the main game.

That´s also why so many people (me included) want a 1933 start. It would allow more ahistorical stuff without being too forced. In such a scenario it makes sense for a country that was neutral to align to a faction and have a greater military development, as a cost from internal unrest as, ya know, there was this little thing called the Great Depression which screwed most countries and thus military spending wasn´t really popular.

Sorry to say this, but Beaga is right: I can't think of a single South American country that made its own weapons (EDIT: in substantial numbers) during this period. Brazil didn't even start to make its own automatic pistols until 1954. Tanks, guns, warships - they were all manufactured elsewhere during the game period. Like he says, even if they had concentrated their efforts they might have been able to field something only half-decent (like the Romanian IAR 80, or the Hungarian Turan) so why bother when you can buy better material from overseas?

Actually, I see the equipment mechanism being a good excuse to reduce the military/naval construction capacity of minors, since, if they can buy equipment, then they no longer need to make it themselves in order to be able to play the game. Resource production, on the other hand, can probably be buffed as compensation to allow them to make the money necessary to buy material.

Of course, none of this is to say that if, say, Brazil makes an alliance with the Axis, and the Axis manages to dominate the Atlantic so that Brazil can source weapons from Germany/Italy, that Brazil should not be able to build up a substantial force.

EDIT: I double checked. Argentina was able to make exactly 12 Nahuel tanks in 1945-46. these were heavily influenced by (and technically slightly inferior to) the design of the Sherman Tank, which debuted in 1942. Given time and resources Argentina might have made enough of these to equip a single division.

 

[DerekH]

I know I"m in the minority but I'd be perfectly OK with eliminating the ability to play minors AT ALL if it meant a more engaging/replayable (not necessarily balanced) approach to playing major nations. My experience with Paradox games I've played is that resorting to minors is interesting precisely because a game with any major is usually a walkover even for a first time player (provided they spent a little time on the forums and RTFM). I'd rather a return to a board game roots style and institute special diplomatic and economic rules for minors based on the strategic situation and time (as in "USA has X% chance of entering war on Y date with Z modifiers").

 

[FOARP]

I know I"m in the minority but I'd be perfectly OK with eliminating the ability to play minors AT ALL if it meant a more engaging/replayable (not necessarily balanced) approach to playing major nations.

I hate to sound paranoid, but if Paradox did that (and I don't think they would in a million years), it would only be a short trip to paying for DLC to unlock each country.

My experience with Paradox games I've played is that resorting to minors is interesting precisely because a game with any major is usually a walkover even for a first time player (provided they spent a little time on the forums and RTFM). I'd rather a return to a board game roots style and institute special diplomatic and economic rules for minors based on the strategic situation and time (as in "USA has X% chance of entering war on Y date with Z modifiers").

I don't like percentage-chance mechanisms for this kind of thing. I would much prefer "The US joins the Allies because the AI has decided to do so accordingly to understandable criteria".

 

[Angel Walker]

Something about the Production Licensing I could never understand. As Canada I buy a P51 Multi-Role license from the U.S. I produce said aircraft and activate it for combat actions. As soon as the last plane rolls off the line, BAM! An idiot ray hits the factory, because now all of a sudden the only planes I can make are mid 30's P-36 pursuit planes. Once I buy a license, why can't I continue to build said equipment until I decide to upgrade to a better design?

Well, balance reasons, I guess? Otherwise buying the design would become as powerful as researching the tech itself. In any case, HoI IV will probably have a system allowing you to buy equipment directly, which for most minors was way more common than buying production licenses.

This thread is comedy gold if you change the meaning of "minor" to "child".

lol

Sorry to say this, but Beaga is right: I can't think of a single South American country that made its own weapons (EDIT: in substantial numbers) during this period. Brazil didn't even start to make its own automatic pistols until 1954. Tanks, guns, warships - they were all manufactured elsewhere during the game period. Like he says, even if they had concentrated their efforts they might have been able to field something only half-decent (like the Romanian IAR 80, or the Hungarian Turan) so why bother when you can buy better material from overseas?

Actually, I see the equipment mechanism being a good excuse to reduce the military/naval construction capacity of minors, since, if they can buy equipment, then they no longer need to make it themselves in order to be able to play the game. Resource production, on the other hand, can probably be buffed as compensation to allow them to make the money necessary to buy material.

Of course, none of this is to say that if, say, Brazil makes an alliance with the Axis, and the Axis manages to dominate the Atlantic so that Brazil can source weapons from Germany/Italy, that Brazil should not be able to build up a substantial force..

Jut to add to your list, Brazilian did make 3 Marcilio Dias class destroyer during the war. According to the wiki they were based on the American Mahan class, so maybe that'd be a case of production licensing? And there were yet 6 Acre/Amazon Class, though they'd only be commissioned later.

But yeah, I'm with you and Beagá on this. Hopefully the buying equipment mechanic will allow minors to field "decent" armies without needing to develop unhistorical industry levels. While being fun, of course.

I hate to sound paranoid, but if Paradox did that (and I don't think they would in a million years), it would only be a short trip to paying for DLC to unlock each country.

Well, Crusader Kings did kinda work like that (DLC for Islamic Nations, Republics and Pagans, and it's a pretty good game).

Though I'm kind of divided on the issue. Despite my call for improvements on minor nations, I do see the logic behind limiting the scope of the game with the intention of increasing its detail. And if you have a very detailed and historically Germany sharing a place with a nonsense South America (from borders, to terrain, rivers, politics, diplomacy, resources, industry, etc.), no matter how well you represent Germany, it won't feel a very polished game. Several rotten apples, even if they are tiny apples with limited impact in the grand scheme of things, do spoil the barrel.

Then again a lot of people have fun playing minors, and dedicated modders can always smooth out the rough edges, so you might as well let them in.