Invasion option for neutral countries while at war or peace

[dizzy]

Can we get an invasion option to invade a neutral country?


1.) It'd have to cost money like any other invasion

2.) The force required would need to be considerable or could be stopped by any nation who decides to contest you in that zone

3.) The invasion target would obviously have to be within your invasion range

4.) It would raise tension levels based on the colony's value, among others

5.) The colony value would determine the radius to check if any other nation's colony is in range and this would affect tension levels


It shouldn't happen more than once between or during wars. But I like expansionist policies that aren't entirely dependent on random events as they currently are. It'd be nice to have this. 

[mycophobia]

I'd second this idea to, although it should be more limited. For example, limiting it to authoritarian nations only, or potentially requiring a prestige check for the government to actually listen to your suggestions. It shouldn't be something you can rely on to reliably fire even just because you made the suggestion.

There are precedent of the navy affecting a nation's expansions decisions as was the case with the Japanese navy leading up to ww2. The fact that you may not have proper cause to invade is fine, since the "investmenet" can be seen as effort made to fabricate claims. Ofcourse it still shouldn't be reliable to happen at all, and will clearly risk war with other maors, but at least it makes more sense than Russia randomly sending taskforce and seize dutch east indies or Italy taking over norway....

[dizzy]

I agree with those points, mycophobia, but let's take it a step further. Perhaps non-authoritarian countries get the option to 'meddle' with trying to 'stage' an incident so they can go to war against another colony. History is rife with these type actors. So I agree, going about it and final execution would be different for democratic countries versus authoritarian regimes.

However, authoritarian countries should just be able to decide one day, hey, I want this colony and build up for war to take it. This is also historically accurate. So I'd like to see a mechanic with several methods by which you can either outright 'conquer' or 'diplomatically influence' the annexation of a neutral colony based on your government type.

[mycophobia]

May 30, 2019 12:41:00 GMT -6 dizzy said:

I agree with those points, mycophobia, but let's take it a step further. Perhaps non-authoritarian countries get the option to 'meddle' with trying to 'stage' an incident so they can go to war against another colony. History is rife with these type actors. So I agree, going about it and final execution would be different for democratic countries versus authoritarian regimes.

However, authoritarian countries should just be able to decide one day, hey, I want this colony and build up for war to take it. This is also historically accurate. So I'd like to see a mechanic with several methods by which you can either outright 'conquer' or 'diplomatically influence' the annexation of a neutral colony based on your government type.

The authoritarian nations can certainly "just do it". The problem is this is rarely because the admiral told the top brass that's a good idea. The only concrete example is Japanese navy had significant influence on the decision to capture the SEA oil fields and rubber. 

But I agree its a good idea that authoritarian and democracies do thing different. In either case, you as the admiral make the suggestion, and a RNG based on your prestige will determine if the top brass listen to your idea.(Also making prestige more important for aggressive players, I think makes a good game mechanic to balance brinksmanship vs. conversative play.) If its authoritarian gov, the plan is now good to go, and you just put in $ and expect result and consequential tension. With democracy the timeline of execution can be much longer, and may just fade into nothing if its taking too long.

[alsadius]

I kind of like this idea, but it needs limits. In particular, if the neutral in question has oil pre-1920(or whenever oil is generally available), this needs to cause a gigantic mess on the international stage. Like, +4 tension across the board or something.

[dizzy]

Oh, good idea to have your prestige influence the rng. Is that a thing in RTW? Does prestige influence RNG of random events?

[mycophobia]

May 30, 2019 13:02:11 GMT -6 dizzy said:

Oh, good idea to have your prestige influence the rng. Is that a thing in RTW? Does prestige influence RNG of random events?

To my knowledge it does not currently, but I could be wrong. However it does influence your budget to a limited extent. I always felt prestige should matter more as a gameplay mechanic besides roleplay and scorekeeping reasons.

[brygun]

As a frequent player of expansionist Japan we support the invasion, I mean assimilation, of neutrals into the Co-Prosperity Sphere

[admdavis]

I agree with this suggestion. I'm playing as Austria, and Greece is just sitting there, with all that lovely non-Italian fronting coastline, and it's just calling to me, and I have to wait for an event to fire. I think proximity should maybe play a role as well. Like, for the US, it should be easier to convince the powers that be to scoop up territory in the Caribbean, than say, SE Asia. Or Germany and Russia to try and grab Nordic states. Areas where countries have potential strategic interests should be available for some kind of peacetime invasion planning.

[arminpfano]

I also like the idea, but an aggressive invasion has to come with hefty risks, like being in war with two or three opposite nations if things go wrong. Otherwise it would be too easy to grab two or three of the most attractive posessions.

[dizzy]

I recently completed 2 campaigns using this: Manual Invasion Mechanic for Neutral Nations and it works great. I'd like to see this included in one of the next patches. I think invading during peacetime would really wreck tensions, at least with same zone neighbors, but doing it during war should definitely be in the game.

Fredrik W

[cplrumrunner]

I fully agree with needing a neutral invasion mechanic. I'm playing as Japan, its 1917, and I've never gotten so much as a peep about tensions with or invading Korea. I looked it up and Korea was forced to become a protectorate of Japan in 1905 and was fully annexed in 1910. Also, I don't fully agree with the way 'invasion ranges' currently work. Japan attacked Russian held Port Arthur by land via Korea in 1904. In the game I can start a war with Russia that early easy enough, and even recreate the naval battle of Port Arthur as early as 1902-1903, but it's impossible for me to invade it. I know its kind of an edge-case as far as a naval game like this is concerned, but it's plausible enough to leapfrog through neutral territory to attack an enemy on land. I read in the manual something about 'invasion ranges being extended in the first year for nations with sneak attack' but I didn't notice it having any affect in my game. This was playing with 1.02 so hopefully its been fixed.

[dorn]

Jun 16, 2019 23:51:39 GMT -6 cplrumrunner said:

I fully agree with needing a neutral invasion mechanic. I'm playing as Japan, its 1917, and I've never gotten so much as a peep about tensions with or invading Korea. I looked it up and Korea was forced to become a protectorate of Japan in 1905 and was fully annexed in 1910. Also, I don't fully agree with the way 'invasion ranges' currently work. Japan attacked Russian held Port Arthur by land via Korea in 1904. In the game I can start a war with Russia that early easy enough, and even recreate the naval battle of Port Arthur as early as 1902-1903, but it's impossible for me to invade it. I know its kind of an edge-case as far as a naval game like this is concerned, but it's plausible enough to leapfrog through neutral territory to attack an enemy on land. I read in the manual something about 'invasion ranges being extended in the first year for nations with sneak attack' but I didn't notice it having any affect in my game. This was playing with 1.02 so hopefully its been fixed.

If invasion to neutral countries are included (it is good idea), it should be out of possibility to be influenced by player more than event asking player of his opinion of such invasion and state of the navy.

[cplrumrunner]

Jun 17, 2019 1:19:19 GMT -6 dorn said:

Jun 16, 2019 23:51:39 GMT -6 cplrumrunner said:

I fully agree with needing a neutral invasion mechanic. I'm playing as Japan, its 1917, and I've never gotten so much as a peep about tensions with or invading Korea. I looked it up and Korea was forced to become a protectorate of Japan in 1905 and was fully annexed in 1910. Also, I don't fully agree with the way 'invasion ranges' currently work. Japan attacked Russian held Port Arthur by land via Korea in 1904. In the game I can start a war with Russia that early easy enough, and even recreate the naval battle of Port Arthur as early as 1902-1903, but it's impossible for me to invade it. I know its kind of an edge-case as far as a naval game like this is concerned, but it's plausible enough to leapfrog through neutral territory to attack an enemy on land. I read in the manual something about 'invasion ranges being extended in the first year for nations with sneak attack' but I didn't notice it having any affect in my game. This was playing with 1.02 so hopefully its been fixed.

If invasion to neutral countries are included (it is good idea), it should be out of possibility to be influenced by player more than event asking player of his opinion of such invasion and state of the navy.

Yes. It should be part of an event tree not something the player can force, though I'd also say if the player is at war the event should have a greater chance of firing because war necessitates doing rude things like marching through or occupying neutral countries.

Personally, I'd love to see a lot more Hearts of Iron style political event trees, where it's not just a single event, but a chain of linked events, that can cause a range of things to happen along pseudo-historical lines.

[cplrumrunner]

Bump. I'm in 1940 in my Japan game, 1900 start, and never once got an event to let me take over Korea. Nor have I gotten any events to take over the Dutch East Indies even though I took all of French Indochina (Vietnam) early in the game. The only neutral invasion events I've gotten were for some of the smaller Pacific islands and even those I only had a 1/3 success with despite being the largest power in the West Pacific. I finally called BS on the game and edited my save file to give me ownership of Korea.

Please add more events or increase the likelihood of events for Japan to invade places like Korea and Indonesia to reflect its expansionist nature. Or give them an ability that lets them invade neutral locations if they're in the same region as a major power they're already at war with. For example, If at war with Russia you can invade Korea, and if you're at war with England or the USA you can invade Java.