NationStates

Please see this announcement first.

This change would allow a region to formally "annex" another. This would work in much the same way as embassies, but would be displayed differently on the region page.

The intention of this change is to:

• Give an outcome to an invasion that raiders can aim for.
• Give in-game recognition to the control that some regions exert over others.

Any region could annex another, or be annexed by one.

The following aspects in particular need further discussion:

• How long it takes to annex a region, and to "de-annex" it.
• What influence cost there is for annexation.
• How an annexation is displayed on the region page both for the annexing and the annexed region.
• Whether a specific page should be introduced to record in-game "empires".

Discussion in this thread is open to everyone. Please use this thread for discussion of this change only - off-topic posts, regional bickering and so on will be dealt with swiftly and punished for as necessary.

Time: Obviously this should take longer than simple embassy establishment. In fact, I'd offer up making this a ridiculously long process, something like a week (or the equivalent amount of updates). That will give this proposal some weight and allow for some scrutiny when it is allowed.

Influence cost: This is tricky. As is, it takes a ton of influence to hold an actively-battled region. Maybe this should be time constrained thing rather than influence-based. Say if a Delegate has been in place for a week, then they can activate an Annex?

I think if we want the annex to mean something, it ought to have a significant cost.

In many raids currently the raiders often pile the region a lot, leaving the lead with oodles of influence.

Perhaps make the cost be equivalent of setting a password on the region?

This makes the raiders choose between locking down the region or annexing the region.

We could have a one-week time requirement as well.

As Skydip says, the influence cost shouldn't be so high as to make it impossible to hold regions. I agree that it should primarily be a time based decision that influence if this really going to be a useful tool. Make it a matter of primarily influence and we'll have the need for very large piles will all forces in one place rather than the more diverse R/D landscape we've had with smaller groupings more common. Also means that smaller groups can use it as well more effectively.

It is possible that it could have no influence cost at all, like embassies - the "cost" would be the amount of time it takes to do.

I think that would be the best thing for it. It wouldn't make it quite as significant to have an annexed region, but it might make things more fluid and dynamic when it is easier.

Charles Cerebella wrote:As Skydip says, the influence cost shouldn't be so high as to make it impossible to hold regions. I agree that it should primarily be a time based decision that influence if this really going to be a useful tool. Make it a matter of primarily influence and we'll have the need for very large piles will all forces in one place rather than the more diverse R/D landscape we've had with smaller groupings more common. Also means that smaller groups can use it as well more effectively.

I think we should be looking at this to be an idea that doesn't need piling at all, so perhaps having a low influence cost or none at all is a good idea.

If the annex is similar to an embassy, maybe the time could be the time it takes to make an embassy (3 days is it?) plus a day or two.

Aye that makes sense to me.

On the question of a specific page recording in-game game empires, assuming that means comparisons of largest empires, then I'm actually against it. I don't think there would be any way to viably distinguish actual empires, won in real battles, or founded with the intention to have real, thriving colonies, to those which are made up of hundreds of regions founded by one individual and populated with puppets.

On how they are displayed on regional pages, I'd suggest having embassies and empires each in a clickable spoiler like box. The ruler region's box could simply say, 'Ruler of the Teslandia Empire', and annexed regions could say 'Part of the Testlandia Empire' with the drop down box showing other annexed regions. It might be a good idea to give leader regions the option to name what their empire should be called rather than having it default.

Unless the intention is to give effective powers to the annexing region (like, access to the RC of its dominions), the influence cost should be null, and the length of time necessary to annex a region not much longer than an embassy construction - around 4-6 days.

It should be displayed on the annexed region page in a way that is more noticeable than a normal embassy, maybe just under the region name, with a clickable link.

I think the core question here is whether or not this would be an 'Embassy+' that just produces a link, or an actual Annexation that provides direct control of some sort. The decisions regarding time/cost will depend on this, with it being less/lower if it' and Embassy+ and much higher if it provides control.

Once that is determined then we can address issues like what kind of control is possible, what links would be created, what cost, etc etc.

Hooray! I and others have been chomping at the bit for this one for quite some time. Consequently, it's given me a lil time to think about it.

Sedgistan wrote:[list][*]How long it takes to annex a region, and to "de-annex" it.

It shouldn't take a very long time, cause that'll clog things up on the R/D side IMO.

[*]What influence cost there is for annexation.

Shouldn't be too high. I don't view annexes as something that should require a lot of influence.

[*]How an annexation is displayed on the region page both for the annexing and the annexed region.

Before the WFE in the annexed region: "Annexed by: ______" (a link that one can click to that particular empire's annex page). This distinction is removed once the region has been "freed"
After the WFE in the annexee region: "Regions Annexed: _____" (list regions), similar to how embassies are shown, with some regional links, and a cutoff so it's not huge.

[*]Whether a specific page should be introduced to record in-game "empires".

At first I thought this could simply go into the region's history page. And to be honest, they should be shown in the region's history, both for annexes and annexations.

I'd like for a page where a short blurb on the particular empire can be written (like a WFE), followed by a few lists: currently annexed, and something like "past annexations" where it displays regions that were annexed in the past, but have since been freed.

Perhaps, also, we can have a section for "regions freed?" in which the de-annexing delegate can write in a particular region to mark that said region has freed the annexed region? It'd be the same page as that for annexes, just that the page will have three categories.


Heck, you could almost lump that page with "embassies" and label it "Diplomacy"

I don't think this should have an Influence cost.

What if an annexation is friendly, not hostile ? Why should it have a cost ?

I'd suggest annexation costs time and resources, de-annexation costs influence. If a region choses to be annexated by another and be part of an empire, others can't just change. Of course founders can do as they wish at any time.

South Pacific Belschaft wrote:I think the core question here is whether or not this would be an 'Embassy+' that just produces a link, or an actual Annexation that provides direct control of some sort. The decisions regarding time/cost will depend on this, with it being less/lower if it' and Embassy+ and much higher if it provides control.

Once that is determined then we can address issues like what kind of control is possible, what links would be created, what cost, etc etc.

This is my question as well. If it's just an embassy under a different name, what's the point really?

I would love for annexation to provide some actual, tangible benefits. Some examples just off the top of my head:

- Nations can move freely within an empire (including the annexing and all annexed regions) without their influence in any of those regions decaying (or at least with a reduced decay rate)
- Nations in the annexing region gain influence in the annexed region at a reduced rate
- The Delegate/Founder of the annexing region can appoint Regional Officers in annexed regions
- The Delegate/Founder of the annexing region can turn off regional controls in annexed regions
- Etc.

As things stand now, actual imperialism is very difficult to achieve - you either need to find a willing colony, or get rid of an existing one and rebuild it from scratch. But if regions could actually be taken and subdued, and if there were actually benefits to existing in an empire-like structure, that sort of military activity would become more meaningful.

Keep in mind it should also be possible for annexed regions to free themselves, or be captured by another empire.

Some of those suggestions would make that impossible.

Ballotonia

- The Delegate/Founder of the annexing region can appoint Regional Officers in annexed regions
- The Delegate/Founder of the annexing region can turn off regional controls in annexed regions

These two I especially like, or perhaps they can appoint their own psuedo-custodian "Governor" position.

I don't like the idea of being able to use regional controls in annexed regions.

It ought to be an embassy+ thing, nothing more.

Then there's no point in annexing - if a region is part of your territory, you have to be able to exert control over it. Otherwise, people will stick with the more reliable refounding.

With annexation would there be a "Superior"(the annexing) region that annexes a "Subordinate"(the annexed) region, or would they simply be "Annexed" to each other and equal, as they are with Embassies now?
I would think that to be able to be controlling power, there needs to be a Superior and Subordinate system with annexation.

Additional question: If there is a Superior and Subordinate system, what happens if the Subordinate region is Superior to other previously annexed regions? Do the Sub-Subordinate regions become annexed to the Super-Superior region, or do we get an Empire family tree thing going?

I think the idea is that X (the annexer) owns Y (the annexed).

interesting. this feature will certainly make the game more fun. I am just wondering, however, how this would work in regards to legally annexing a region (where both regions give consent to the annex)

I imagine much the same way.

Cerian Quilor wrote:Then there's no point in annexing

...besides the game-added notification? Right there at the top of the region where everyone can see it?

Then we'll refound.

The Most Glorious Hack wrote:

Cerian Quilor wrote:Then there's no point in annexing

...besides the game-added notification? Right there at the top of the region where everyone can see it?

That looks a bit like this, perhaps?

Currently, it's just a slightly bigger embassy, with somewhat more prominence, that might last a few days longer. If the annexer can exert some measure of power over the annexxed region, that'll provide a new gameplay dynamic, and perhaps promote a different, slower style of play. Otherwise, it's just a little badge, and we've already got those.