I was talking about Liberia with the "99% theoretically impossible". Panjab has a lot of threats, but also a lot of advantages.
The Panjab Problem -- Unifying India
- Thread starter ThunderHawk3
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
I was talking about Liberia with the "99% theoretically impossible". Panjab has a lot of threats, but also a lot of advantages.
As I said back in the big wall of text at the beginning, you start surrounded by enemies as Panjab (and your literacy is extremely low). Your goal as Panjab - the unification of India - is also extremely ambitious. I found survival alone to be a challenge.
What puzzles me is what you said about teching up. Your literacy is so low that your research gains at a crawl, and the UK is gaining much faster than you are. Did you mean that just survival is long and tedious?
Most of your neighbors are only a threat in the beginning. Once you westernize and research a couple army techs countries like Afghanistan and China aren't much of a threat.
You're never going to catch up to the UK in total # of techs obviously, but you can catch them in "important techs" easily enough. It's quite possible to research all the army techs, the navy techs that provide the ships, and the critical culture and industry techs as Panjab. When I finally started fighting the UK in the 1880's I had a tech advantage on them in army techs.
Punjab is probably the country I play most, but I think I've only united India once and it took almost the whole game. The key to winning pretty much every war for me were the mountains in Kashmir and later on the mountains in the provinces in the western most Chinese territories. Even with inferior troops you can inflict heavy casualties on attackers if you dig yourself into the mountains.
That said there is quite a bit of luck and timing involved...
I usually avoided picking fights with the UK until they were tied up somewhere else or until later in the game when I could field more troops than them in India. My overall strategy was focusing on army defense and industrial capacity and completely ignoring navy and just about everything else.
Here's a screenshot from my most recent game:
Edit:
Oh yeah, just remembered. Once you strike at GB you want to take Delhi. Once you take Delhi you pretty much cripple their ability to generate troops in India and usually they won't try shipping troops from other parts of the world to help in the conflict there unless they control the middle east or eastern Africa later in the game.
That said there is quite a bit of luck and timing involved...
I usually avoided picking fights with the UK until they were tied up somewhere else or until later in the game when I could field more troops than them in India. My overall strategy was focusing on army defense and industrial capacity and completely ignoring navy and just about everything else.
Here's a screenshot from my most recent game:
Edit:
Oh yeah, just remembered. Once you strike at GB you want to take Delhi. Once you take Delhi you pretty much cripple their ability to generate troops in India and usually they won't try shipping troops from other parts of the world to help in the conflict there unless they control the middle east or eastern Africa later in the game.
Slideshow time!
Following the wars the UK got hit with revolution. The Irish and Scots did not stick around:
Following the wars the UK got hit with revolution. The Irish and Scots did not stick around:
That was 1.4b game right ? If I recall, in 1.4b patch notes it says they lowered the chance of farmers turning into soldiers in colonies, guess that made it quite easier. I play Panjab before, I managed to take Delhi but it took conquering ALL Indian provinces + win majority of battles to get the war score sufficient enough.
But it was 1.3 game, British had enormous army in India with quite high % of pops being soldiers in all provinces.
Guess I'll give it a shot now with 1.4 again.
But it was 1.3 game, British had enormous army in India with quite high % of pops being soldiers in all provinces.
Guess I'll give it a shot now with 1.4 again.
That was 1.4b game right ? If I recall, in 1.4b patch notes it says they lowered the chance of farmers turning into soldiers in colonies, guess that made it quite easier. I play Panjab before, I managed to take Delhi but it took conquering ALL Indian provinces + win majority of battles to get the war score sufficient enough.
But it was 1.3 game, British had enormous army in India with quite high % of pops being soldiers in all provinces.
Guess I'll give it a shot now with 1.4 again.
Yes it was 1.4b.
I had to invade the British Isles (in 3 separate wars) to finish within the game time frame.
My game was 1.3. I had to fight a lot of containment wars that game... I don't think there was ever a point once the 1900s hit that I wasn't at war with one or more European powers.
I gave up on my punjab game. Was grinding my way through them but it just wasn't fun. I did manage to wipe out the vast majority of their armies with several years dedicated to just defending in the mountains. But my main problem was actually getting a decently large army as the losses were horrific and my pops were turning very soldier light. I literally had to take land to raise new armies at some points in the campaign.
The problem is once that happens that you need to take so much british land to demand concessions from them. its a huge slog to get a single state and without an invasion of the UK homelands you pretty much have to settle for a single state each time. Then its a huge slog again next time when the truce wears off. I just gave up after about halfway down the subcontinent.
The problem is once that happens that you need to take so much british land to demand concessions from them. its a huge slog to get a single state and without an invasion of the UK homelands you pretty much have to settle for a single state each time. Then its a huge slog again next time when the truce wears off. I just gave up after about halfway down the subcontinent.
My latest game, though in middle I found out that there's new beta out so kinda lost motivation + started wars with UK too late because wasn't confident enough(first war started 1887). Should be able to form India in the next run..Although it was really hard to build dreadnoughts as until 1920~ it took like 1 year to buy enough phones for a single one.
Hence operation British landing sadly failed on few occasions, as UK/Germany were allied up and Germany had huge fleet of dreadnoughts, making all my attempts at getting near UK mainland futile, and to add to that Germany was leader of alliance so couldn't really avoid war with them.
To add on, didn't really have time to develop industry, still wasn't too bad tho as UK turned some regions into states before I took them. Overall it's a really enjoyable country to play, quite demanding, but I suppose not as difficult as forming Poland with Krakow.
I managed it with Punjab in 1.2, UK doesn't seem so aggressive against you in that version taking out its anger on Burma instead which can't happen in 1.3 so they rage against Punjab. Attrition and getting busy while you had truces seemed to be important though, peace out with UK and you have 5 years to destroy Afghanistan for instance.
Well to be honest, Afganistan doesn't have much worth as their provinces aren't that rich, first of all I took Tibet + Karachi so UK doesn't sphere them/annex them before me. I was lucky since UK started improving their influence on me from day one so they never gave me any problem till I started the war.
Anyway, in 1.4 so far it seems UK's ability to create armies in India is quite limited, so even when they out-tech you, you can still easily outnumber them with default Panjab provinces + Tibet/Karachi. It was strange, each war they mobilized, had 400 brigades and not single in India after I took out their 100 brig stacks. Even when war lasted 5-6 years they didn't seem to bother bringing any army, even though I didn't even have navy at that point.
Anyway, in 1.4 so far it seems UK's ability to create armies in India is quite limited, so even when they out-tech you, you can still easily outnumber them with default Panjab provinces + Tibet/Karachi. It was strange, each war they mobilized, had 400 brigades and not single in India after I took out their 100 brig stacks. Even when war lasted 5-6 years they didn't seem to bother bringing any army, even though I didn't even have navy at that point.
I will point out that if you don't mind playing as a released country, Mughalistan gets over 3 million pops, 10% literacy, good tech, max relations with the UK and it can nearly double its population by annexing Panjab. Forming India as them should be considerably less painful.
I tried playing Panjab before in 1.2. I managed to Civilise, get 7th or 8th on the GP powers and conquer myself a nice bit of land. Amassed 100 brigades and got Machine Guns and some other military techs to find... UK had 300 brigades in India plus satelites. Kind've gave up there. I've thought about trying it again in 1.4b, but I think i'll wait till AHD.
Also, haven't read the whole thread, but there is one other Indian option. Hydrabad (spelling?). It is indeed a satelite of the UK, but that makes you immune to them. You also have a pretty high population, and most importantly, despite being surrounded by the UK you DO have the important factor of having more than one state. Meaning if you can civilise and hit GP status, you can break free. It is however, still an inferior candidate to Panjab.
Also, haven't read the whole thread, but there is one other Indian option. Hydrabad (spelling?
). It is indeed a satelite of the UK, but that makes you immune to them. You also have a pretty high population, and most importantly, despite being surrounded by the UK you DO have the important factor of having more than one state. Meaning if you can civilise and hit GP status, you can break free. It is however, still an inferior candidate to Panjab.
To be honest I think there should be a different decision for forming India. If as an Indian state one can occupy the entirety of the subcontinent (minus Sri Lanka and Burma), a decision should be available to form India. It shouldn't require occupation of the British homeland to pull that off.
Also, why the core on the Tibetan province? as that's not a unique state (part of the mega-state of Tibet) it requires the full annexation of that country. Either make it part of another Indian state or add the core after Indian formation.
Also, why the core on the Tibetan province? as that's not a unique state (part of the mega-state of Tibet) it requires the full annexation of that country. Either make it part of another Indian state or add the core after Indian formation.
Couple of dates and, probable, reasons why forming India from within is challenging:
British India lasted from 1613–1947
East India Company 1612–1757
Company rule in India 1757–1857
British Raj 1858–1947
British rule in Burma 1824–1942
Princely states 1765–1947
Partition of India 1947
Indian nationalism didn't become a 'force' until 1885 and even then it didn't gain Indian independence from Britain. It wasn't until the Indian elite became educated in Britain was their a real push for it. So why is unifying India hard? Because it was at the time. Simple as that really.
British India lasted from 1613–1947
East India Company 1612–1757
Company rule in India 1757–1857
British Raj 1858–1947
British rule in Burma 1824–1942
Princely states 1765–1947
Partition of India 1947
Indian nationalism didn't become a 'force' until 1885 and even then it didn't gain Indian independence from Britain. It wasn't until the Indian elite became educated in Britain was their a real push for it. So why is unifying India hard? Because it was at the time. Simple as that really.
- 1
I believe that's the region that was granted to India in 1914 by the Simla Accord... and since the Indian cores placed in Vic2 represent all of modern India (minus Pakistan) there it is. Considering those borders rely on some very specific events, it doesn't really make much sense.
No doubt, and it doesn't happen, unless a player is very forceful. However, if Panjab can civilize, become a recognized Great Power, and occupy the whole subcontinent, why wouldn't that mark a proper moment?
Indeed - one alternative would be to make it part of the Assam province or whichever is next door. Still owned by Tibet at the beginning but that way a player could take that one province, instead of all of Tibet.
Or, add it like the Italian Irredenta cores.
- Status