whats the point in forming nations ?

[tyler717]

i know some nations such as Italy and netherlands , have new set of national ideas when forming , but countries such as England forming GB makes no difference to their ideas, tax , ect (i know they get de centralisation for couple years) , in other words they are formed for the sake of it , i propose give longer/better lasting effects for forming new countries , like gaining 2 base tax in capital or +1 prestige for rest of the game, maybe GB gets +20% rest of the game naval force limits as
GB was naval power yet england wasnt so much ect otherwise you only form the country because you can

 

[SerFishy]

What is the point of playing video games anyway? It does not even make a difference in your tax, ideas etc.

 

[TheBloke]

i know some nations such as Italy and netherlands , have new set of national ideas when forming , but countries such as England forming GB makes no difference to their ideas, tax , ect (i know they get de centralisation for couple years) , in other words they are formed for the sake of it , i propose give longer/better lasting effects for forming new countries , like gaining 2 base tax in capital or +1 prestige for rest of the game, maybe GB gets +20% rest of the game naval force limits as
GB was naval power yet england wasnt so much ect otherwise you only form the country because you can

Yeah, in the case of forming Great Britain, the only reasons to do it are:

1. +25 Prestige
2. Decentralisation modifier for 20 years: +10% tax, at the cost of +1 Revolt Risk
3. You get a new flag and a new colour; I personally prefer the GBR flag to the ENG flag.
4. Because you can: it's a challenge/goal that the game sets you. Something to aim for.

These sort of decisions are there primarily, I believe, for the History Gamers. Those who want to form nations because that's what happened in history.

But there's also the challenge aspect - it's a goal that the game has set for you, for you to work towards. In the case of ENG -> GBR, this is a pretty minor challenge; as England, you just need to annex Ireland and Scotland, which is pretty easy. Going SCO -> GBR would be a bigger challenge.

And some of the other nation formations are much harder.

So it's a combination of recreating history, and the game giving you a fun challenge/goal. Having goals makes the game more fun and interesting.

The actual gameplay/modifier benefits are generally minor, and just icing on the cake in most cases.

I'd support greater modifier rewards for forming nations, so long as they were commensurate with the challenge and risk involved. So forming GBR from Scotland could give a bigger reward than forming GBR from England, for example.

 

[Contiguous]

It would be nice to get a tax base increase somewhere though.

 

[londoner247]

There's a downside to forming Great Britain (which may well be a bug) in that Portugal gets missions to remain friendly with England but doesn't seem to get those for Great Britain and so you can end up in a much more hostile colonial situation if you form Great Britain ...

 

[TheBloke]

There's a downside to forming Great Britain (which may well be a bug) in that Portugal gets missions to remain friendly with England but doesn't seem to get those for Great Britain and so you can end up in a much more hostile colonial situation if you form Great Britain ...

Oh, interesting! Didn't know that, thanks.

Though by the time I've formed GBR I'm usually about ready to start back-stabbing Portugal

 

[QVarus]

i know some nations such as Italy and netherlands , have new set of national ideas when forming , but countries such as England forming GB makes no difference to their ideas, tax , ect (i know they get de centralisation for couple years) , in other words they are formed for the sake of it , i propose give longer/better lasting effects for forming new countries , like gaining 2 base tax in capital or +1 prestige for rest of the game, maybe GB gets +20% rest of the game naval force limits as
GB was naval power yet england wasnt so much ect otherwise you only form the country because you can

iirc, forming a nation changes the culture of the former independent minors to accepted. if you play as england the primary culture is english and scotish provinces give you a culture penalty (-15% tax and manpower), their culture should change to accepted after the act of union.

 

[unmerged(804580)]

iirc, forming a nation changes the culture of the former independent minors to accepted. if you play as england the primary culture is english and scotish provinces give you a culture penalty (-15% tax and manpower), their culture should change to accepted after the act of union.

In my opinion, this is the primary benefit. You don't need to worry about at least one culture, though GB is kind of weak with only Scottish being added to the cultural union. They offer different things: forming Hindustan gives you claims, Italy gives you new ideas (which may be shittier than yours already depending on what nation you are) etc.

But well, ignore formations if you don't want to bother. I ignored Hindustan (as Gujarat), Malaya (as Bali) and Italy (as Tuscany) because I kind of got attached to my starting tag nation.

 

[unmerged(652342)]

Yeah, in the case of forming Great Britain, the only reasons to do it are:

1. +25 Prestige
2. Decentralisation modifier for 20 years: +10% tax, at the cost of +1 Revolt Risk
3. You get a new flag and a new colour; I personally prefer the GBR flag to the ENG flag.
4. Because you can: it's a challenge/goal that the game sets you. Something to aim for.

- 5.GB is british culture union tag

 

[LiberiusX]

i know some nations such as Italy and netherlands , have new set of national ideas when forming , but countries such as England forming GB makes no difference to their ideas, tax , ect (i know they get de centralisation for couple years) , in other words they are formed for the sake of it , i propose give longer/better lasting effects for forming new countries , like gaining 2 base tax in capital or +1 prestige for rest of the game, maybe GB gets +20% rest of the game naval force limits as
GB was naval power yet england wasnt so much ect otherwise you only form the country because you can

Roleplaying. Many players do not necessarily play this game to beat it, but to tell an alternate history with the same characters. In other words, I take the 'form x nation' decision, not really for any particular advantage, but because that's what I imagine my country doing at that time.

I really think they are at risk of (further) alienating those of us who want a historical simulator(granted, with a compromise between gameplay and historicity) in favor of some kind of balanced multiplayer board game that can be played single player.

 

[Eyestabber]

You gain more accepted cultures, IMO that's the main reason. Except for Prussia (but it gives you free cores).

 

[TheBloke]

I really think they are at risk of (further) alienating those of us who want a historical simulator(granted, with a compromise between gameplay and historicity) in favor of some kind of balanced multiplayer board game that can be played single player.

What is this apropos of? What changes risk further alienation?

I can understand disappointment thus far from History gamers, but I wasn't aware of new changes making it worse, and indeed rather the reverse - CoP seems to prioritise history over control and deep gameplay, from what we know thus far. At least with regards to Colonial Nations.

I am of the opposite preference and fully support strategy game changes over history every time. But I'm curious to hear what you think is making the game worse from your perspective, as from my biased standpoint I feel at least with CoP it's starting to shift the opposite way, in your favour.

 

[Anthropoid]

Oh, interesting! Didn't know that, thanks.

Though by the time I've formed GBR I'm usually about ready to start back-stabbing Portugal

Which makes it sensible that Portugal would be getting cold feet about the arrangement anyhow!

 

[salvettic]

It's fun, it's challenging, it changes your national ideas, it gives you an achievement (if you're playing it right), and best of all, it chages your colors!!

 

[unmerged(780209)]

There are of course some extreme examples. For instance, I believe (but haven't done it) that it's possible to form Manchu from Ming, thus eliminating the Faction System through some events, and getting rid of the various maluses?

 

[unmerged(780209)]

Which makes it sensible that Portugal would be getting cold feet about the arrangement anyhow!

It's only fair, since as Portugal, I immediately get rid of the alliance with Britain day 1. They only drag you into wars, usually with France. That might help Britain, but what does Portugal get out of it? Forget them!

 

[TheBloke]

There are of course some extreme examples. For instance, I believe (but haven't done it) that it's possible to form Manchu from Ming, thus eliminating the Faction System through some events, and getting rid of the various maluses?

Yes I believe that's correct. A unique occurrence for Ming being the only national with factions.

 

[Novacat]

There are of course some extreme examples. For instance, I believe (but haven't done it) that it's possible to form Manchu from Ming, thus eliminating the Faction System through some events, and getting rid of the various maluses?

Ming cannot form Manchu.

 

[dstarsboy]

I only form nations if they have prettier flags. ;P

 

[StatikShocker]

you guys claim that you gain accepted cultures?? when I formed Scandinavia, I LOST Norwegian, Swedish, and Hanoverian as accepted cultures. Its like it reassessed the percentage of base tax, and since I had colonized siberia it removed them when I clicked the decision.