Military anexation?

[peregrino05]

Hi, and thanks for this great game..

Im playing with a country and i have conquered all the cities of my enemy.

Can i annex this enemy?

thanks

[Pocus]

You'll probably, except for the smallest countries to annex first regions adjacent to your home territory.

[sorta]

Similar question. Playing Ottomans. Have control of all cities for various North African countries with 100 war weariness. On the treaties I can offer don't see annexation. Is this possible?

See an option for regions but some show no regions. For the country that does I want it all! Bit confused.

Thanks

[sorta]

More info.
In Cyrenaica own bothe the cities:
Benghazi with 100 MC and 9% loyalty
Derna with 100% MC and 24% loyalty
Fighting stopped months ago.
What's to stop me annexing it?

[Khanti]

Similar question. In manual it is said that I can claim regions in peace treaty. And "Claimed Regions" means "Acquire regions to which you have a claim". So to which regions I have a claim? To all that I captured in war, to adjacent only?

[vicberg]

Regions adjacent to your home country (only). This means any deep strikes cannot be annexed.

[Khanti]

Thank you for your answer. I knew deep strike was not an option, but I hoped for a chain strike to be effective (take all conquered regions, if they are strictly connected). Looks like Napoleon had not such dilemmas in annexing, as we have

In practice: in my war as Prussia against Denmark I could only claimed Kiel and a few regions around it, despite I conquered all regions till Aarhus-Aalborg.



What a waste of war.

[sorta]

Ok thanks for the answer. So for Ottoman this seems to rule out a north African empire. Is that correct?

The Ottomans will have to attack Egypt (an ally) and then when they win will get a marsh region. So even with repeated wars even taking Alexandra is a stretch?

Also most of the capitals are ottoman victory objectives. As the Ottoman I control all the cities in NA with no opposition so why should I sign a peace treaty and loose them?

[sorta]

Continuing to playtest as the Ottomans and Tunisia has offered me two regions (Kelibia and Nabeul). These regions aren't adjacent to my home country. Also they are two patches of desert so why would any one accept them especially when you loose 3 cities, including a VP city and engagement points.

[sorta]

Hello, where can I find info about how to conquer minor countries, regions which we have claims? Have looked in manual and forum and can't find answers.

[Captain_Orso]

Define 'conquer'.

[sorta]

Sorry but no. Its pretty clear from the person who started the thread and my comments/examples above what we are getting at. I'm not going to produce a list of synonyms to hopefully find the right word to get an answer especially as conquering a minor nation is pretty standard in almost all the English language wargames I've played for the last 40 years.

Key words gleaned from above comments are:
'adjacency' when you have the Med between you
'claimed regions'.

If someone who knows how the diplomacy (?) program works and says the Ottoman can't conquer (sorry annex) say Tunisia and the game is wad then fine I'll stop trying.

[Khanti]

Define 'conquer'.

It's pretty simple. It there's a war and I have 100% military control of some enemy territory (90%?, 75%?), then it's "conquered".
Model when a country can only annex (rightfully take into its own territory) adjacent provinces was made in PON. I didn't like it, but from 60+ years perspective (and 1600+ turns) I could accept it.
In WON, we have only 10 years, so perspective is different. And it that particular period of time taking enemy territory and incorporating it into own/satellite country was normal.

Example: if as Prussia I won war with Denmark, I could incorporate that territories I want, not just adjacent In Napoleonic Europe "adjacency" wasn't necessity for political rule.

I would like to be able to forge claims for particular provinces to make it possible to incorporate them into my country in peace treaty.

[sorta]

Questions
1) so can Ottomans annex any North African states as they are not adjacent (except Egypt)
I was able to get two usless desert provinces offered to me by Tunisia so how does adjancy work again?

2) why bother making peace when you occupy all their cities. Then you loose them. Why would you do this?

[Captain_Orso]

Sorry but no. Its pretty clear from the person who started the thread and my comments/examples above what we are getting at. I'm not going to produce a list of synonyms to hopefully find the right word to get an answer especially as conquering a minor nation is pretty standard in almost all the English language wargames I've played for the last 40 years.

Key words gleaned from above comments are:
'adjacency' when you have the Med between you
'claimed regions'.

If someone who knows how the diplomacy (?) program works and says the Ottoman can't conquer (sorry annex) say Tunisia and the game is wad then fine I'll stop trying.

Hey, HEY! Careful there...

It's pretty simple. It there's a war and I have 100% military control of some enemy territory (90%?, 75%?), then it's "conquered".
Model when a country can only annex (rightfully take into its own territory) adjacent provinces was made in PON. I didn't like it, but from 60+ years perspective (and 1600+ turns) I could accept it.
In WON, we have only 10 years, so perspective is different. And it that particular period of time taking enemy territory and incorporating it into own/satellite country was normal.

Example: if as Prussia I won war with Denmark, I could incorporate that territories I want, not just adjacent In Napoleonic Europe "adjacency" wasn't necessity for political rule.

I would like to be able to forge claims for particular provinces to make it possible to incorporate them into my country in peace treaty.

You can control a region by either having >50% MC, or you had the last non-artillery-non-leader combat unit in the region, but that does not give you ownership, and when you sign a Peace Treaty with that faction control and ownership will revert to that of the owning player.

Unfortunately, Pocus isn't letting you annex just any region you wish. You may plea for a change to the way annexing works, but I would suggest you having a good argument for your request.

Otherwise, see below.

Questions
1) so can Ottomans annex any North African states as they are not adjacent (except Egypt)
I was able to get two usless desert provinces offered to me by Tunisia so how does adjancy work again?

2) why bother making peace when you occupy all their cities. Then you loose them. Why would you do this?

I'm not absolutely sure, and I haven't tested this out, but I believe when Pocus stated that to annex a region it has to be adjacent to a region which already belongs to you, it may actually be referring to just one possibility.

As Russia I have DoW'ed Checenia and have taken Grozny. When I look at what I can ask for when offering a Peace Treaty, it lists all of the regions directly adjacent to Russian owned regions--about 5 of them--in which I have not even set foot.

I remember reading that one way to get a region to be offered for annexation, is that you must have control of a region in which you have least 20 or 25% loyalty. Then that region--if you do not already own it--and all adjacent regions will be offered for annexation. Of course, it is expected that you have more than 25% loyalty in your own regions, so regions adjacent to your regions will generally always be offered.

So, back to North Africa. I believe you simply need a region with >=25% loyalty. There are some RGD's, like Develop Region, which increase loyalty in your favor, which you can use to raise loyalty. Also, winning battles in the area can change loyalty toward your faction. Once you gain >=25% loyalty in a region, you should have it, and all adjacent regions, available in a Peace Treaty.

BTW the Capital of an enemy faction can only be annexed as the last region of that faction. Whether that include the Turkish objectives I don't know.

What happens to a faction without any territory? I believe it just works as a government in exile.

I'm not sure if it happens in WON, but in CW2 in an enemy controlled, un-garrisoned town in which you have >50% loyalty, a partisan unit belonging to you can be spontaneously generated, which then captures the town. This might open the possibility of an exiled leader to build unit and come back to life as a nation.

Why annex instead of maintaining a perpetual war? Just guessing, but I it may be that regions you've annexed produce more resources than enemy owned regions you control.

[sorta]

Hi Cpt orso. Thanks for your reply. Much appreciated for trying to help.

The problem I have is that like you I'm guessing and assuming based on how all the previous ageod games have worked. This is compounded by playing Turkey which isn't physically adjacent to say Tunisia. I'm assuming that playing one of the big European powers everything works as it should as at last you can be physically adjacent. And the big powers get scripts. As far as I can tell Ottomans don't (I've only played in end 1806). I continued playtesting and got >25% loyalty with 100% MC and still nothing in Tripoli and Cyrencia. Tunis did offer 2 desert regions (good negotiating AI!). However when accepting this I lost the 3 cities and took an EP hit for war going badly - this makes no sense.

So the logical outcome is for Ottomans to just occupy all the cities (especially the VP cities) and never sign a peace treaty. Is this what the designers expect or is it an exploit?

[Captain_Orso]

Do I understand correctly, you control Tripoli and Cyrencia and have >25% loyalty in both?

[sorta]

Tripoli 30%

Cyrnacia
Derna 40% Benghazi 27%

Tunisa
Bizatz 48% La Goulette 36% Tunis 32%

All have 100% MC

With Tunisia I was offered two useless patches of desert and accepted to see what happened. Lost the cities and EPs etc but I can dow in the future and try and gain more desert in the hope of getting a city one day.- however doesn't this undermine the adjacency rule that posters have assumed happens?

[Baris]

I think Ottomans wouldn't have much realistic military objective goals in Tunis or Libya historically in time period. But I think for gameplay multiplayer terms to keep things interesting for Ottoman player there can be few factional special rules.

[sorta]

Alex, Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers and Valletta are all Ottoman VP cities so clearly the option to take N Af is there. Same as in EiA and most other Nap grand strategy games I've played. Weather this was realistic is another question and which plagues most strategy games e.g. War in the east and weather its realistic to just run away in 41 without trying to defend. However I'd like to understanding the current dip/annex system. No one seems to know.

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

I remember reading that one way to get a region to be offered for annexation, is that you must have control of a region in which you have least 20 or 25% loyalty. Then that region--if you do not already own it--and all adjacent regions will be offered for annexation. Of course, it is expected that you have more than 25% loyalty in your own regions, so regions adjacent to your regions will generally always be offered.

This is definately not true for Austria in 1805. I had captured 9 of the 15 objective cities with 3 of them being besiged. The Western cities all had loyalty above 50. They were all joined with regions that had greater than 20% loyalty. And the only regions Austria would offer were 9 regions close to the eastern border of Bavaria but only 3 regions actually connected to Bavaria. (It is possible it this done by design so that it doesn't ruin the conditions for the Pressburg Treaty)

I have already annexed 3/4 of Austria. It is already producing money, War Supplies, Horses, and conscripts for me. At this point, accepting a peace offer from Austria takes that all away from me and gives it back to Austria as well as taking away all the NM and VP you earned taking it.


Because there is a Diplomacy option in the game, people think they have to have a peace offer. You don't. If you are winning the war, only bad things will happen to you if you accept a peace. Don't do it.

There might be one reason. So they can build up their army so you can CRUSH it again. If you have all their cities producing for you they can't ever build up their army again.

[sorta]

Bruce I think you are spot on with your comments about not offering peace as that was where I got to as the Ottomans. As I said previously why would I swap 3 cities (ie all Tunisia's cities), lose EP, be warned about losing the war, loose resources for annexing 2 regions of desert. I would not! So yes you are right but that means the program is wrong because the NAP period involved short wars and acquisitions. Or its WAD but could someone who knows about the program pls confirm?

Also where can the definitive info on dip/acq be found? Everyone is being helpful but its all 'I read somewhere' or references to how stuff worked in other ageod games. I have lots of ageod games so know how it works in CW2 etc but this doesn't help as it works different in WON.

Anyway i've playested 3 game years and have no definitive answers on a pretty important part of the game so its time to load up CW2 and 30 YW. If I'd started a thread about modding graphics and pretty backgrounds I'd be swamped with replies by now

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

Bruce I think you are spot on with your comments about not offering peace as that was where I got to as the Ottomans. As I said previously why would I swap 3 cities (ie all Tunisia's cities), lose EP, be warned about losing the war, loose resources for annexing 2 regions of desert. I would not! So yes you are right but that means the program is wrong because the NAP period involved short wars and acquisitions. Or its WAD but could someone who knows about the program pls confirm?

Also where can the definitive info on dip/acq be found? Everyone is being helpful but its all 'I read somewhere' or references to how stuff worked in other ageod games. I have lots of ageod games so know how it works in CW2 etc but this doesn't help as it works different in WON.

Anyway i've playested 3 game years and have no definitive answers on a pretty important part of the game so its time to load up CW2 and 30 YW. If I'd started a thread about modding graphics and pretty backgrounds I'd be swamped with replies by now

People think because there is a Diplomacy Peace option, it must be used.
Being "Conqured" is in the game already. France has 75% or 100% of all the territories of the The Kingdom of Piedmont. it has conquered the The Kingdom of Peidmont but why would they.

Why did you attack Tunisa. To gain territory? Then take it.

Countries made peace offers that gave up money and territory so there entire country was not conquered/ravaged by war. Currently, the AI is not doing a good enough job of peace offers {Bribes} to get you to stop the attack. It waits until you have "conquered" most of the country and at that point there is not peace treaty good enough to bribe you to take. Why give back territory you already have.

[Khanti]

(...) and have no definitive answers on a pretty important part of the game so its time to load up CW2 and 30 YW. If I'd started a thread about modding graphics and pretty backgrounds I'd be swamped with replies by now

Yes, please give us [color="#FF0000"]pretty backgrounds[/color] and [color="#40E0D0"]modified graphics[/color]

[color="#008000"]Seriously:[/color] Playing Ottomans wasn't tested (I supposed). You should be happy - they are in game and playable!
When they fix Pressburg, Tilsit, British fleet, supply flowing through allies (some of them are probably fixed in Feb patch), then they could have time for Ottoman debate about annexations. It's clearly obvious annexation system wasn't made with Ottomans geographical position in mind (to capture regions light years from home territory).
Patience is virtue.

[sorta]

Patience is a virtue but so is communication. There has been deafening silence from the developers on what is IMO a big part of the game. If it doesn't work but will be fixed just say so, not a problem. I'm 3 game years in and the only conclusion I can make is that peace treaties don't work so will ignore them. I'm hosting two 7 player pbem games and players will be asking me questions which I can't answer. Regarding patience I've stuck with CWII from release to patch 1.06, War in the West from release to 1.08, Empire in Arms from release, 30 YW, etc etc without complaint (ok did give up on EIA) but at least for these games the developers keep the players informed.

[Captain_Orso]

I am an idiot!

There are 2 cases in which you may annex a foreign region:
- The foreign region is adjacent to a region you already own,
- There are >=2 regions adjacent to each other, which you control, and where you have =>20% loyalty.

So to annex a North African coastal city, not only must you have =>20% loyalty in the city but also in a region adjacent to the city.

[BruceASinger@gmail.com]

I am an idiot!

There are 2 cases in which you may annex a foreign region:
- The foreign region is adjacent to a region you already own,
- There are >=2 regions adjacent to each other, which you control, and where you have =>20% loyalty.

So to annex a North African coastal city, not only must you have =>20% loyalty in the city but also in a region adjacent to the city.

I disagree with the first statement.

The rest of the post is very helpful.

How do you find out this information?

[Captain_Orso]

Through something I read in the beta-tester's forum, but had forgotten about.

[sorta]

Thank you. Now I will test it (trust but verify!).
Glad it wasn't in the manual, would take the fun away.

[Captain_Orso]

Thank you. Now I will test it (trust but verify!).

I wouldn't expect any less

Glad it wasn't in the manual, would take the fun away.

......