I'm trying to decide whether to annex or puppet various countries. I can see some benefits to each approach, but would like to hear the comments of the veterans if they would provide them.
Thanks,
Larry Reese
Thanks,
Larry Reese
-
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.
Annex almost purely, the only benefit I see on puppeting is the hopes they can maintain their own defense in an emercency but usually the AI doesn't so its more worth to have all the resources, IC and manpower. The most obvious exception is Vichy France.
Annex of cource.The only thing to do is to make sure you defend the beachheads for possible landings.Maybe in case of France keep some interceptors against the AI bombers but thats all.Unfortunatelly the AI is quite dump in defending himself.
I used to prefer to annex my enemies, but I've started to change my mind. In the game I'm playing now as Germany, I puppeted Great Britain which gave me large parts of their navy in my alliance, which I really needed for my planned invasion of the US. Also, UK is starting to build up an army of respectable size.
puppet if you plan to war as germany early and annex if you what to slug it out. Puppets are usufull to fill in the holes - like ROmania which has 40 units can be very helpfull.
F
F
As Italy, puppet Ethiopia. Then you can leave some troops down there, being supplied properly. I even gave them some inf techs, and they started to build an empire of their own, nice to see 
In 1.06 you only get a fraction of annexed countries resources. If you need their full resource capacity (from say, Sweden) puppeting is the best course of action. Besides, everyone will leave Sweden alone and you won't have to waste precious manpower defending them.
But again, if you don't need resources, as say Soviet Union, annexation is the best course of action, esp since SU needs IC more than resources.
It all depends on your needs at any particular time. Germany needs puppets for resouces, SU needs annexed nations for IC, etc.
But again, if you don't need resources, as say Soviet Union, annexation is the best course of action, esp since SU needs IC more than resources.
It all depends on your needs at any particular time. Germany needs puppets for resouces, SU needs annexed nations for IC, etc.
puppet them all - germany
playing germany i puppet (i try to)puppet guys like gb or france, blegium, netherlands - no need to fight in far east and so on + safe sea without enemy fleets.but ic is lost.......
playing germany i puppet (i try to)puppet guys like gb or france, blegium, netherlands - no need to fight in far east and so on + safe sea without enemy fleets.but ic is lost.......
Murdoch said:
Is there an easy way to see what the IC and resources are for a particular country to get an idea of what you would be getting by annexing vs. puppeting? I guess I'm saying I'm lazy and would rather not click on each of the enemy provinces to see what it has.
I always Puppet, except for some early victims like Poland. Annexing countries is not realistic. Why would Hitler want Greece (for example) to be a part of the German Reich, and not be controlled by their own puppet government? That's just absurd, and it's one of the reasons why I stop playing as allies when the Soviet Union starts winning the war, and everything becomes part of the Soviet Union... Totally unrealistic, and no fun at all.
/ V
/ V
Larry Reese said:
I always annex.
- One doesn't have total control over puppets. I need to be able to build fortifications or improve infrastructure in many captured territories.
- It is unrealistic. Another poster spoke of Greece never being part of Germany proper, but that's not what I find annexation to mean. Greece certainly had no where near the freedom of action that a game puppeted one has.
- Puppeting the Netherlands means Japan is permenantly denied that East Indies oil, right?
Lately I don't even like to have coastal minor allies. Again, one can't build coastal forts. So, you'll see my Germany consistantly conquer Romania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia. Actually, in my latest game, I'm playing Germany attacking Italy, just for kicks. It's lame, but I keep resetting the major Allies warentry to zero.
I think the fact that there is considerable debate shows that it's actualy fairly balanced . It's worth noting that a puppeted (or allied) nation doesn't inherit your tech. Therefore the ICs they are using to build junk units that get run over could be used to build quality units of yours that will last.
The good news is that it appears you get the resource stockpile either way, which is important as germany. After annexing the better part of Europe including Sweden, I don't really have resource problems - go figure. You still get 50% of the resources, and in Sweden for instance, that's a couple hundred steel. You really don't need too much.
. It's worth noting that a puppeted (or allied) nation doesn't inherit your tech. Therefore the ICs they are using to build junk units that get run over could be used to build quality units of yours that will last.The good news is that it appears you get the resource stockpile either way, which is important as germany. After annexing the better part of Europe including Sweden, I don't really have resource problems - go figure. You still get 50% of the resources, and in Sweden for instance, that's a couple hundred steel. You really don't need too much.
The answer to this question is, like so many others about the game, it depends.
I do both. I'll annex countries close to me (Belgium, Netherlands), and tend to puppet those farther away (US). There are various reasons, the most critical of which is how much territory I'll have to defend if I annex vs puppet. Also, if the USSR has already been defeated, I may annex more than puppet, as I no longer need the troops deep in the Soviet Union. Of course, there's also the fatigue factor; the longer the game drags on, especially when I know I'm going to win, the more puppeting I'll do. Faster to puppet
It really comes down to a judgement call. In many ways, annexing makes the short term a more dicey situation, as you now have to defend all that shiny new territory with the same size army, but cna be better over the long term. Other times, puppeting can take you from a decent economic and political situation to one where you're crashing and whenever you attack your enemies, all you're doing is adding to the territory of various puppets even though it's your lads doing the dying.
I do both. I'll annex countries close to me (Belgium, Netherlands), and tend to puppet those farther away (US). There are various reasons, the most critical of which is how much territory I'll have to defend if I annex vs puppet. Also, if the USSR has already been defeated, I may annex more than puppet, as I no longer need the troops deep in the Soviet Union. Of course, there's also the fatigue factor; the longer the game drags on, especially when I know I'm going to win, the more puppeting I'll do. Faster to puppet
It really comes down to a judgement call. In many ways, annexing makes the short term a more dicey situation, as you now have to defend all that shiny new territory with the same size army, but cna be better over the long term. Other times, puppeting can take you from a decent economic and political situation to one where you're crashing and whenever you attack your enemies, all you're doing is adding to the territory of various puppets even though it's your lads doing the dying.
Maybe I don't understand
Most of the debate has turned on whether you need ICs or whether you need resources more. If you annex, don't you get all of both? Or is there reduced effectiveness in the annexed territories?
In essence then: Puppet (with military control) - you get control of their military (except the navy), but no control over how they use ICs and all resources over 100?
Annexation - they have no military (it is destroyed), you get all ICs, manpower, and all resources (but at reduced effectiveness), and the burden of defending all their territory as your own?
Does that about sum it up? Thanks for all the replies!
LR
Most of the debate has turned on whether you need ICs or whether you need resources more. If you annex, don't you get all of both? Or is there reduced effectiveness in the annexed territories?
In essence then: Puppet (with military control) - you get control of their military (except the navy), but no control over how they use ICs and all resources over 100?
Annexation - they have no military (it is destroyed), you get all ICs, manpower, and all resources (but at reduced effectiveness), and the burden of defending all their territory as your own?
Does that about sum it up? Thanks for all the replies!
LR
Controlled territory gives you around 33% of the resources. Annexation gives I think 50%. A puppet will get 100% of the resources and give all the excess to you (like over 100 I think) not sure on the exact number.
I prefer annexation myself as I will defend these territoties far better than the AI plus I can directly build defenses (land/coastal forts and aa). Gigantic nations are sometimes worth puppeting, like UK and USSR though I think it's more fun to annex them outright!
I prefer annexation myself as I will defend these territoties far better than the AI plus I can directly build defenses (land/coastal forts and aa). Gigantic nations are sometimes worth puppeting, like UK and USSR though I think it's more fun to annex them outright!
I both puppet and annex.
Puppets:
- Many nations have decent-sized armies that, with an affordable amount of tech, and military control, can be a significant benefit to you. As France, I once puppeted Italy, and got a great deal of use out of their army (and some out of their airforce) for the rest of the game. You can tap into foreign manpower that way.
- Puppeted nations produce resources much better than annexed ones. It would be crazy for Japan to annex Manchukuo, because Manchukuo is a much better puppet than occupied territory.
- If you are playing a SP game where the human player gets lots of penalties, using puppet state forces is a way to reduce or avoid them.
- Puppet states that do not automatically transfer resources to you (they don't share a land border with you) are a great place to stockpile extra resources. The USA can really take advantage of this!
- Puppet states sometimes give you tech. This isn't big, but I have been pleasantly surprised several times.
Annexed states:
- There are lots of benefits to outright annexation, as already mentioned. However, I believe that the true resource production efficiency is 25% for occupied territory, and 33% for annexed territory.
Puppets:
- Many nations have decent-sized armies that, with an affordable amount of tech, and military control, can be a significant benefit to you. As France, I once puppeted Italy, and got a great deal of use out of their army (and some out of their airforce) for the rest of the game. You can tap into foreign manpower that way.
- Puppeted nations produce resources much better than annexed ones. It would be crazy for Japan to annex Manchukuo, because Manchukuo is a much better puppet than occupied territory.
- If you are playing a SP game where the human player gets lots of penalties, using puppet state forces is a way to reduce or avoid them.
- Puppet states that do not automatically transfer resources to you (they don't share a land border with you) are a great place to stockpile extra resources. The USA can really take advantage of this!
- Puppet states sometimes give you tech. This isn't big, but I have been pleasantly surprised several times.
Annexed states:
- There are lots of benefits to outright annexation, as already mentioned. However, I believe that the true resource production efficiency is 25% for occupied territory, and 33% for annexed territory.
I use both. I will annex key nations in order to reduce my logistics penalties. I will puppet others for the economic boost or extra units they will provide. This is especially true with Super AI, which requires garrisoning some provinces in order to prevent partisan activity. I would rather use inferior puppet troops than wasting my own manpower building militia, or even worse; pulling my shock troops from the main battle to perform this rear echelon function. For me, it all depends on the situation at the time; but certain countries will always receive the same treatment.
If I play Germany I generally annex everything I touch except for Vichy, Romania, and Saudi. Romania can keep giving me oil that way, and the same for the Saudi's. Although I can think of a reason to Annex the Saudis, mainly to annex Oman and Yemen, but I generally just give them to Saudi as well. It provides me with the same ammount of resources either way, and when I get to them I don't exactly need the extra 15 or so IC they would have given me.
Plus IRL the Muslims would likely get pissed if I took over Mecca and the Hedjaz.
Plus IRL the Muslims would likely get pissed if I took over Mecca and the Hedjaz.
I almost always annex, for the simple (and non game-mechanic based) reason that it's nice to zoom out on the political map and see a huge chunk of the world in my country's color. No matter what country I'm playing (I always play majors), I research Industrial techs like there's no tomorrow, and those techs help alleviate any resource shortages. If that still leaves me with a net loss, I change ministers so as not to use the Administrative Genius, Industrial Specialist, Efficient Sociopath, or Prince of Terror. And if THAT still doesn't do it, I creatively modify the game (a.k.a. cheat); I go into the province.csv file and nudge the resource production of some of my home provinces up a bit to fill the gap. Reading this thread has piqued my interest a bit, however, so next game I intend to focus on puppeting to see how that works out.