Federations / unification requires clarity

[Alitari]

So I just started a new game as I've heard that playing as the EU is great, because you start in a Federation and can thus easily unify the various nations.

First ... I couldn't tell which nation was the lead nation of the Federation. Say I select Germany. If I hover over the EU icon or name in the upper left corner, it says 'Germany is a member of the European Union federation' ... but it doesn't say who is the leader. Same for any other nation until I checked France.

Which nation is the leader in a Federation should be clear from any member of the Federation.

Second ... I got complete and protected control of France and several other EU members then used the Set Policy councilor ability on France to unify them ... and I couldn't. The text beside it said 'Requires control of all control points of the merging nation' ... check ... 'Requires consolidated control of both nations' executive control points ... check.

There was no feedback as to why I couldn't undergo unification.

Doing a Full Search on the Tech Tree for 'unification' gave only Unity Movements which (as I've researched it before on previous runs) gives the ability to research ANOTHER thing that gives the option to create a particular Federation.

*****

As others have noted, this is part of the 'needs more explaining of how the game's mechanisms work' ... both in text and visually (there should be some kind of overlay where I can see which nations are a part of a Federation or what nations COULD be a natural part of that Federation (like Canada and the USA in United North America (which, in all honesty, should include Mexico ... having to research all that and only unifying Canada and the USA is weak))

[ecpgieicg]

The place to view conditions for diplomatic actions are in the relation setting screen.

On the side where you toggle between ally and normal, you will see the conditions for federation and unification. On the side where you toggle rival and normal, you will see the conditions for war.

Sometimes, (though doesnt seem like your case), you need to check whether your nation has claim on the target capital region. In order to check that, you go to region list of the country and capital region has a unique icon. When you hover over, you will see text prompt for capital region.

I agree it's important that the player should be able to perform all in-game actions solely based on what the game presents to them. With the relationi setting page though, that is actually the case, already, for diplo actions. The one recommendation above about relation setting screen would be what a player needs. It's just not very natural.

So for your current playthrough, I'd just follow the above recommendation.

In the future, it'll be nice if, between the devs and the player community, other more natural places for the information are discovered and made into the game.

[Alitari]

The place to view conditions for diplomatic actions are in the relation setting screen.

On the side where you toggle between ally and normal, you will see the conditions for federation and unification. On the side where you toggle rival and normal, you will see the conditions for war.

That worked ... but my test of a united EU has ultimately been a failure.

As a Federation the EU has a lot of problems.

First it takes a long time to get together (22 nations?) and if another faction happens to completely control one before you do, they'll likely first drop the alliance with the other EU nations and then leave the Federation, which adds YEARS to the time needed to get them back in the fold (on top of the time required to retake those control points).

Second it has a lot of regions (30?), compared to the USA's (13?), for a marginal (10%?) increase in GDP. This results in a MUCH higher rest value for Unrest (I'm currently at 5.2, having a flat contribution to everything but Unity, Spoils, and Nukes) as a result of low Cohesion ... my Cohesion is currently stuck at 0 (rest value of 0) (despite? a Government of 8.1, Full Democracy).

With all the babysitting required to get to this point, I'm far behind on the Control Point game (I'm about 50% of my total, everyone else is around 100%) ... while my space game is doing great (I'm on par with the other top nation), I figure that I've been in a death spiral for a while.

Back to the boring but seemingly optimal 'control the USA' strategy.

[ecpgieicg]

First it takes a long time to get together (22 nations?) and if another faction happens to completely control one before you do, they'll likely first drop the alliance with the other EU nations and then leave the Federation, which adds YEARS to the time needed to get them back in the fold (on top of the time required to retake those control points).

That's why you need to control those nations one or a few after another.

I agree the game currently has a lot of micro management and in-game time and turns don't progress fast enough. But I honestly think the solution lies in UI and not the game balance in control point mission difficulties. (e.g. Take away the auto focus which makes agent mission selection painfully slow. e.g. Add keyboard shortcut for Continue/Close/Take Me There. e.g. Make grid shortcut and UI for agent missions. Etc etc etc)

You can easily fail your plans over and over and still reach a powerful mid-late game. The exploration and discovery are intrinsic to the game.

(That said, difficulty modes are really needed -- the option to confer human player mission difficulty bonus in order to fasttrack game progress.)

And with that, there is no reason to rely on controlling USA or some other fixed path.

Also, I don't agree that USA strategy is optimal. Admittedly I didn't try controlling USA at the earliest possible time -- ie. via incite unrest. If it is OP, I think devs need to nerf it. Because that makes the game boring.

Unless Incite Unrest is easy to the cheesiest level early game -- which I haven't tried, you can unite France, UK, Benelux much much earlier in the game. Similarly, you can control Eurasia much earlier in the game and have early boosts and mission controls from Kazakhstan in addition to spare control point for the like of Singapore, Canada, etc for optimal boost and research respectively.

In general, the early game is much driven by research which is in turn spurred by space exploration. Early game research and space exploration don't require large nations. You just need to ensure that your agents continue to level up.

All in all, the USA route doesn't have anything unique to offer -- hence, not optimal, just good among equals.

[Alitari]

First it takes a long time to get together (22 nations?) and if another faction happens to completely control one before you do, they'll likely first drop the alliance with the other EU nations and then leave the Federation, which adds YEARS to the time needed to get them back in the fold (on top of the time required to retake those control points).

That's why you need to control those nations one or a few after another.

I did control 'those nations' (not sure which are 'those nations' as I included the entire block that was in the Federation, not just the most lucrative ones) right after one another ... I snapped them up quickly ... but I couldn't be everywhere all at once and a few slipped through my fingers.

My test wasn't to pick up and unify the best of Europe, it was to unify Europe.

I agree the game currently has a lot of micro management and in-game time and turns don't progress fast enough. But I honestly think the solution lies in UI and not the game balance in control point mission difficulties. (e.g. Take away the auto focus which makes agent mission selection painfully slow. e.g. Add keyboard shortcut for Continue/Close/Take Me There. e.g. Make grid shortcut and UI for agent missions. Etc etc etc)

I agree, the UI needs a great deal of work to emphasize why X is happening when you want Y to be happening (having a block of text that vaguely says 'this increases it and that decreases it' doesn't explain why, at this particular time, this particular country is experiencing this, and what specific changes to specific other things could do to change that).

And I don't think that there's actually very much the devs could do to 'balance in control point mission difficulties' as that implies this is a game, which usually involve balance ... this isn't that, it's a simulation. In essence, this isn't something that is designed to be fun, but instead something that is designed to attempt to simulate a whole lot of things, leaving it to the player to find some aspect of it enjoyable.

A game in this setting would have presented differing starting points as having differing advantages ... like Europe is research focused, the USA is military focused, China is industry focused, etc. ... not only would playing the same faction feel different from one another (which they only marginally do currently), controlling different parts of the world would feel different (so a playthrough of Resistance controlling Europe would feel different than a playthrough of Resistance controlling the USA). As it's a simulation, the differences can't be stark as the world isn't black and white.

Also, I don't agree that USA strategy is optimal. Admittedly I didn't try controlling USA at the earliest possible time -- ie. via incite unrest. If it is OP, I think devs need to nerf it. Because that makes the game boring.

In my playthroughs, getting the USA fully under control and locked down was far easier than getting the EU fully under control and locked down (again, the whole of the EU, not just the best parts ... the USA comes with Flordia after all) ... and I'm not sure that it's possible to get China fully under control and locked down in the early game based on my mid-game attempts at it. So, to me, it appears to be a better (perhaps not optimal) strategy than others to get a viable platform to move into space.

[ecpgieicg]

I did control 'those nations' (not sure which are 'those nations' as I included the entire block that was in the Federation, not just the most lucrative ones) right after one another ... I snapped them up quickly ... but I couldn't be everywhere all at once and a few slipped through my fingers.

My test wasn't to pick up and unify the best of Europe, it was to unify Europe.

You misunderstood.

The point was that you unify them a few at a time.

You even said it yourself: you can't be everywhere at once. Hence, isn't the logical conclusion to unite a few (~2) at a time?

Specifically, those you are not actively uniting, you should not worry about losing control over. (In fact, if you are in early game, you shouldn't even control them. Maintaining relation with the other factions have benefits. Flipping their CP reduces relation quickly. So just doing it once when you need to is better.)

I managed to unite regions under (the Greater) Caliphate with this approach. Those nations flip on a dime. Europe is simple among all the big nation possibilities. And honestly it would appear strange not to do so before I even tried. Perhaps those European nations start off being too stable --- and that's how you get the impression that you should unite them all at once. But you don't have to.

-----------------------

In my playthroughs, getting the USA fully under control and locked down was far easier than getting the EU fully under control and locked down (again, the whole of the EU, not just the best parts ... the USA comes with Flordia after all) ... and I'm not sure that it's possible to get China fully under control and locked down in the early game based on my mid-game attempts at it. So, to me, it appears to be a better (perhaps not optimal) strategy than others to get a viable platform to move into space.

Sounds like you feel for USA and want to play as USA

China shouldn't be an option early game unless you build your whole council around Command (for Incite Unrest) and Persuasion. Something like don't buy org for research stuffs but only for those agent stats. Similarly, you likely have to sacrifice early admin points. So the China path may be more a curiosity than necessarily optimal path. But on the same token, the high cohesion + being big which blocks player from controlling China early game also has the effect of blocking AI factions. China tends to well run as a neural (never a point in spoil in my run). So one can always grab it later.

As to getting into space, you don't need any particular combination as long as something like at least half of your control capacity come from developed places (ie. research near 2 per control capacity + decent funding and/or boost + easy enough to get MC due to good starting economy). A lot more combination than just USA fits the bill.

The only caveat being if a player starts off with that, feels satisfied, and practically idle their agents, then AI agents will get more things done than player ones over time because player agents will miss out on the XP; and that can fundamentally fail a playthrough. Hence my earlier mentioning of it.

[KinSeth2]

I don't agree with this. If you take the USA early, it will take over your STARTING CP. However, CP in the early game rises quickly with councilors, orgs, and depending, research. If you want something optimal, I am beginning to believe a US start, dropping Canada, and then taking all the little Latin American nations may be the Optimal, for people who haven't beaten the game yet and just want a win.

Step 1: Grab Canada. Low GDP, easy to get. Gives you a foot in for the USA.

Step 2: Grab Mexico or just straight to USA. The USA in the early game is cheat codes. It's expensive, but drop Canada, it's doable sometimes before turns even extend back out. You will dominate research for the next year or two, longer if you invest in knowledge. Drop 2-3 of your armies/navies to fix the IP drop from them. You won't need them til later. You can literally gate the ENTIRE TECH TREE to what you want with this start. A ridiculous advantage. People say the US has no real federations til way later. This is correct. Neither does China. But...

Step 3: Grab all the Latin American countries. Don't even need Mexico really. Can if you can afford it, but not needed yet. USA will be your Militech and your Research and it will do those better than anyone for a very long time. Especially if nobody really messes with China which seems a safe bet from experience. Those tiny countries? Boost, and MC. They are at the equator, and tiny countries make mission controls efficiently. Later you can unite them all under Mexico and eventually the USA itself.

Step 4: You say idle your councilors, but this is where I take Russia, abandon it immediately and go for the executive point to disarm every nuke in its arsenal. Once I have the Exec point, I defend it and in 2 turns I can have a nuke-free Russia. The only nuclear rival for the USA is now gone. It's not even 2 years in yet. Once that's done, drop Russia entirely. It's useless now.

Step 5: You are now an unrivalled military powerhouse. Nobody can even come close to hurting you, and the only large nuclear arsenal in the game is under your control. You have domination over research and if you feel spicy you can take Singapore and rob it of all its riches with spoils. Now you can build your council and orgs at leisure with only a few points that are even remotely vulnerable to enemy agents. What's more is with a science councilor you can spike the USA to ridiculous heights. The only weakness it has compared to China is population and you can't fix that really. But within 3 years you can make it economically outperform China, and also put out 2-3x the research. Additional benefit is you don't have to go pissing off every faction.

The EU can totally get to this state... 5 years later. They will outproduce in MC but you will be miserable. Every faction will hate you for taking their points. Your military value will be trashed if done peacefully and won't help your relations anyway while adding another 3 years onto the docket. Sure. The GDP, MC, and population is higher. You are also 5 years later into the game and haven't been able to focus on anything but your narrow area of the world. EU is not great.

That said, I once took the USA to start and then took France 6 years later and used the USA to unite the EU. All of the countries had been developed by other factions and the united EU was really great as an addon to the USA. Still made all the factions hate me though cuz they all want those territories. Any playthrough as the EU will require you to make all other factions hate you. That alone is devastating.

[Alitari]

You misunderstood.

The point was that you unify them a few at a time.

You even said it yourself: you can't be everywhere at once. Hence, isn't the logical conclusion to unite a few (~2) at a time?

Specifically, those you are not actively uniting, you should not worry about losing control over. (In fact, if you are in early game, you shouldn't even control them. Maintaining relation with the other factions have benefits. Flipping their CP reduces relation quickly. So just doing it once when you need to is better.)

Misunderstandings continue!

I wasn't trying to unify them all at once, I was trying to unify them as quickly as possible ... so I grabbed up the key players, to my CP limit, had to figure out why I couldn't Unify them (which was the core focus of the original post), then as I was able to Unify, I Unified, adding more nations again to my CP limit.

As I said, the issue with doing that is that if ANY slip through your fingers (that is, you can't get any more because of your CP cap so other factions snatch them up) you're going to have to wait a long time to Unify them. As you noted, getting them back from another faction makes that faction make that nation leave the Federation, then drop the Alliance ... so instead of just having to take control and wait the short period of time to Unify, you have to wait to Ally, then wait to bring them back into the Federation, then wait until you can Unify.

[ecpgieicg]

As you noted, getting them back from another faction makes that faction make that nation leave the Federation, then drop the Alliance ... so instead of just having to take control and wait the short period of time to Unify, you have to wait to Ally, then wait to bring them back into the Federation, then wait until you can Unify.

That's not quite what I said. Though it is true.

If you snatchup a large number of countries, you will inevitably lose some. And you will be flipping those contested nations back and forth. Each time you flip an AI faction's CP, they will hate you more. Eventually, you wont be able to make non-aggression pack with them. Opportune non-aggression pack can be powerful.

(You can reduce the number of flips by couping. But frequent couping during unification will tank the unified nation's total GDP eventually.)