Suggestions to producers on Cooperative governments and puppet States,

[3038457762a]

I'm a senior player of the game. I started playing in version 1.4 and always wanted to establish the function of puppet regime in wartime. The cooperative government undoubtedly satisfied me, but to my great disappointment, it took the surrender of the enemy to establish the cooperative government.



Moreover, since version 1.91 is updated, if I want to establish a cooperative government, I will lose the territory I want, and I will not be able to choose provinces to establish a cooperative government. Therefore, I will completely lose the functions it should have.



To be honest, choosing provinces to build a puppet government is what I want. Because I can't force the enemy to surrender quickly, and there is no diplomatic option for negotiation in the game, I want to minimize the energy spent on the enemy's territory in wartime. Moreover, because the enemy sometimes pours back, I need the puppet government to temporarily guarantee the victory.



At this point, I believe that many gamers have the same consensus as me.



So I suggest that we should remove the limitation of the surrender of the enemy, or increase the function of allowing players to choose provinces to establish puppet regimes, and the balance can be achieved through punitive buffs, or let the version 1.90 enter the negotiation to establish the function of cooperative government, without waiting for a few days.

 

[3038457762a]

žd

 

[Dlin369]

I hope they add Wang Jingwei’s regime as an event or a focus for Japan

 

[Vlad123]

Or like hoi2 you liberate a puppet regime...or like EU4 form client states, can deeper the puppet government are...client states

 

[3038457762a]

Or like hoi2 you liberate a puppet regime...or like EU4 form client states, can deeper the puppet government are...client states

Yes, it is a big problem to manage the enemy's territory in wartime. For example, when Japan attacked the Soviet Union or the United States, because the enemy's army units were often larger than their own, and they had strategic depth to mobilize for war. If the war could not be ended quickly, they would often recapture the territory they occupied, and the front would collapse at a stroke.



So we need puppet regime and puppet army to garrison.

 

[MobiusTwo]

Good thread. I've felt for awhile that you should be able to establish collaboration governments only in the provinces you want it to rule, and I also think you should be able to choose which provinces to release your puppets into in the first place. Likewise, you should be able to demand provinces or give whatever territory you want to your puppets.

 

[3038457762a]

Good thread. I've felt for awhile that you should be able to establish collaboration governments only in the provinces you want it to rule, and I also think you should be able to choose which provinces to release your puppets into in the first place. Likewise, you should be able to demand provinces or give whatever territory you want to your puppets.

Yes.

 

[Vlad123]

Good thread. I've felt for awhile that you should be able to establish collaboration governments only in the provinces you want it to rule, and I also think you should be able to choose which provinces to release your puppets into in the first place. Likewise, you should be able to demand provinces or give whatever territory you want to your puppets.

Like Eu4 with client states, because the various puppet, are in real...client states.

 

[MobiusTwo]

Yes.

The one problem I see is it could be easy to exploit. I often don't call my puppets into wars because it can reduce the amount of fronts I have to worry about. What would prevent a player from giving a bunch of territory to a non-combatant puppet, allowing you to only fight from a chokepoint of your choice?

 

[3038457762a]

The one problem I see is it could be easy to exploit. I often don't call my puppets into wars because it can reduce the amount of fronts I have to worry about. What would prevent a player from giving a bunch of territory to a non-combatant puppet, allowing you to only fight from a chokepoint of your choice?

First of all, the transfer of the occupied areas of the puppet regime to the metropolitan state also needs to consider the fairness. Leaving it one or two occupied areas is outrageous. The solution to this problem is simply to cancel the fairness buff of the transfer of the occupied areas to the metropolitan state.

 

[3038457762a]

d

 

[3038457762a]

d

 

[Fulmen]

The one problem I see is it could be easy to exploit. I often don't call my puppets into wars because it can reduce the amount of fronts I have to worry about. What would prevent a player from giving a bunch of territory to a non-combatant puppet, allowing you to only fight from a chokepoint of your choice?

Subjects should automatically be called into the wars of their master. There are a few obscure historical examples from the time period where a client state de jure did not join, or joined later than the master, but these cases aren't relevant enough for the game to not solve the issue this way.

For players it effectively already does this: the player can without penalty DoW an enemy client state not called into the war. This change was made to avoid MP exploits. The trouble with SP is that the AI is not programmed to do this, hence players can cheat by refusing to call a subject in until it suits them.