Divided States

[medic911]

Opened SR for the first time in a while since i apparently bombed by job interviews and subsequently will have free time I didnt expect this January . . . long story . . . but when I opened the sandbox, I saw something awesome, "Divided States 2020!" I had inquired about a shattered US only scenario years ago and thought the idea was lost now that full dev stopped, but there it is!

That you to the folks at BG for including this, I'm sure it will be much fun leading Arizona to world domination, or turning Idaho into an imperial overlord of South America.

Its been 3 months and already France has attacked Norway for some reason though...

And do ISIL, Kurdistan, Syria, and Iraq all start out at peace? that seems a bit odd....

Anyways, I'm not complaining; i got exactly what i asked for and more, so yay!

[YoMomma]

Would be no point to put them at war, Isis would be gone within a cpl of days, so yea.

[way2co0l]

Well, I think that when they redid the volatility settings to be higher across the board, it likely resulted in them declaring war before very long anyway. Now that that's been rebalanced at lower levels of volatility, they may not go to war at all. Not necessarily a bad thing. It doesn't look likely that they will be gone in any foreseeable future either. The one thing I'd like to see is the ISIS loyalty hexes removed and put back to the original Iraq and Syria loyalty so that if a foreign power such as the player country were to declare on them, then they could return the land to those respective countries. Right now that's not possible. That's the bigger issue for me.

[medic911]

i think i hit the without alliances one by mistake, because there are no allies (the main clue) and there are a bunch of semi-crazy wars going on. France looks like its run by Napoleon again, Putin put the USSR band back together, and there is one china--owned by Taiwan.

fun stuff. The Republic of Arizona/New Mexico needs to pick up the pace before Russia swallows up everyone . . . maybe it should colonize Old Mexico

[YoMomma]

The one thing I'd like to see is the ISIS loyalty hexes removed and put back to the original Iraq and Syria loyalty so that if a foreign power such as the player country were to declare on them, then they could return the land to those respective countries. Right now that's not possible. That's the bigger issue for me.

I dont care about that. Maybe i want Isis to do the dirty work for me? Then its annoying they dont have loyalty. Like i would ever care about releasing Iraq or Syria.

Or even better maybe i think Kurdistan deserve their country after being abused so many times?

[Kristijonas]

That's what I dislike about SR: you can't have several loyalties per hex. Imagine if you could - that would open up so much more depth and strategy to the game. You could choose which countries to support in territory disputes without already knowing that it is only possible for one of the countries to receive the territory anyway. For example as a Lithuanian in 1936 scenario I'd like to see German and Lithuanian loyalties in Memel, Polish and Lithuanian loyalties in Vilnius(Wilno). It'd certainly add more depth. As it is now Both territories are loyal only to Lithuania I think. Or maybe Memel is loyal to Germany. So as a third power there's not much you could do. There is also little space for local wars (not all wars end in total annexation in real life...) and multi-loyal hexes would allow more space for that. AI could even be programmed to agree with a peace once it retakes their loyal territories (in wars declared for recapturing loyal territories).
As it is now, there is no good way about it. You can't have Iraq and ISIS, developers had to choose. I think ISIS may be a more interesting choice personally. Kurdistan also exists in the game btw.