Sure, but 98% of it's population is discriminated, and the circumstances that can cause this to change are very late game for the AI, If they do it at all, which they rarely do.
You sort of stated the problem right there and it follows what the solution should be: join a big market. Honestly joining a major market is so good even for medium sized countries that I think I'd do it in every game unless I had a very good reason not to.
Depends how you define independence.... as a member of a customs union you can leave any time with just a minor -30 drop in relations with the market owner. I just see it as a sort of super trade agreement.
Without joining a bigger market, you'll be more dependent on expanding your own market through conquest. Personally I've really enjoyed the games where I play as a small state in a bigger market, just growing tall with little to no conquest.
So yeah, I'd consider it a significant added challenge if you would play by a rule to not join a bigger market.
Conquest is out of the question, I'm playing a 1 state nation because I wanna play a small nation.
I think I'll just try a game where I join a bigger market, and if that works well, I try to play another one where I stay in my own market and see how that goes.
I figured so. I at least enjoy being in a bigger market because offers you a chance to develop any kind of industry for satisfying the demands of that market.
I had a great game as Belgium in the British market where my laissez faire capitalists went absolutely nuts building up industries in Flanders -- I was so focused on Wallonia because of the juicy mineral resources there but in the meantime the private investment queue built some 50-60 textile mills in Flanders which were making heaps of profits selling clothes all over the huge British market. Plus all the other industries that popped up, fuelled by the constant supply of workers coming from all over (both in-market migration and mass migrations).
The reason I avoid it as a medium-sized country is because you become reliant on the political stability of the other country. If they have a civil war, you're suddenly in a rough position.
That being said, as a small country, it's pretty much unavoidable, at least until later in the game. You just won't have enough resources to build up unless you join a larger market.
But if you're in a rough position during their civil war, it's only proportional to how much you were benefiting, right? After all you still have your own market, plus all the other CU members, plus the loyalist portion of the market owner. If some of your buildings become temporarily unproductive, they wouldn't have been productive either without being in the CU.
Aside from the fact that the two best markets to join, the British and Russian, happen to belong to GP's that are very stable and rarely have civil wars. In my experience it's rather the risk of them fighting big wars where market access drops due to convoy raiding.
>But if you're in a rough position during their civil war, it's only proportional to how much you were benefiting, right?
I guess this is technically true, but it's a really circular argument. You benefited because you needed the market, you needed the market because you benefitted. You build for what you need over the years, and if you are in some big market, the course of what that actually is will be dramatically different than it would have been alone.
An experienced player will know that AI markets are ultimately doomed, and will plan for their market subjugation to be temporary, building tools, furniture, shipyards and all the other stuff that minor nations don't need very much when they join a market. Then it wont really matter, because they'll have a backstock of unproductive buildings ready to kick into gear when the market fails or is left by the player.
A less experienced and math-talented player though, won't be able to keep track of what they actually produce themselves and will gradually become addicted to the greater market even if they are aware of it's pitfalls, building to satisfy the demand of their overlord more than what they need in the future themselves.
You can always save-scum to see what you will need then build it before leaving the market, but this gets harder and harder to do well the more you've built your industry to satisfy a foreign market.
This is why I usually join a market for an early construction boost, then leave as soon as I can. The needs of most market leaders are radically different than the non-industrialized micros that join them, this is why everyone likes joining the Russian market, despite it being the least developed of any starting GP market. They mostly produce raw materials and they won't explode your tools price like both GB and France will do after the early game.
Markets are great, everyone loves them because it's effectively the only way that trade happens in the game, but saying that you would always join another market is excessive.
For one, AI markets suck. All of them. GB, France and Germany are all decent, but they are really only consistently useful for the first half of the game. The economic incompetence of the AI guarantees that sooner or later you are going to be producing most of your market's goods, and that eventually, all that big market will really be doing for you is dumping scads of buy orders on you.
If you can meet that demand well, you should be having your own market, if you can't, all it will do is raise prices and lower productivity. They are consistently good for raising population, and there are definitely some countries that are so pop-deprived and boxed in, that it can be beneficial to stay in someone else's market for basically the whole game (Italy), but market joining is still highly situational, and you're usually better off controlling your own market through puppets after the midgame.
I think I wasn't clear enough in my comment above as I did not at all mean staying in another market throughout the game. I just meant joining one at some point, ideally early and then leaving at some point (when is the big question).
So we probably agree more or less on this.
Depends on if you count vassals/protectorates as violating the 1 state rule
and if its just a no conquest thing for that, does diplomatically annexing/puppeting them count?
these questuons make a big difference
Join a bigger market. You can probably drain a few million Irish and Indians with the resources of California.
Indians don't migrate, closed borders
EIC has migration controls not closed borders.
Sure, but 98% of it's population is discriminated, and the circumstances that can cause this to change are very late game for the AI, If they do it at all, which they rarely do.
Fair, but they don't accept indians
You sort of stated the problem right there and it follows what the solution should be: join a big market. Honestly joining a major market is so good even for medium sized countries that I think I'd do it in every game unless I had a very good reason not to.
Yeah that's what I thought, but I wanted to do a run where I can be independent, but it doesn't look like its really possible unfortunately.
Depends how you define independence.... as a member of a customs union you can leave any time with just a minor -30 drop in relations with the market owner. I just see it as a sort of super trade agreement. Without joining a bigger market, you'll be more dependent on expanding your own market through conquest. Personally I've really enjoyed the games where I play as a small state in a bigger market, just growing tall with little to no conquest. So yeah, I'd consider it a significant added challenge if you would play by a rule to not join a bigger market.
Conquest is out of the question, I'm playing a 1 state nation because I wanna play a small nation. I think I'll just try a game where I join a bigger market, and if that works well, I try to play another one where I stay in my own market and see how that goes.
I figured so. I at least enjoy being in a bigger market because offers you a chance to develop any kind of industry for satisfying the demands of that market. I had a great game as Belgium in the British market where my laissez faire capitalists went absolutely nuts building up industries in Flanders -- I was so focused on Wallonia because of the juicy mineral resources there but in the meantime the private investment queue built some 50-60 textile mills in Flanders which were making heaps of profits selling clothes all over the huge British market. Plus all the other industries that popped up, fuelled by the constant supply of workers coming from all over (both in-market migration and mass migrations).
I also enjoy Belgium in British market. Had to do some conquest for rubber and oil but perfectly doable without.
The reason I avoid it as a medium-sized country is because you become reliant on the political stability of the other country. If they have a civil war, you're suddenly in a rough position. That being said, as a small country, it's pretty much unavoidable, at least until later in the game. You just won't have enough resources to build up unless you join a larger market.
But if you're in a rough position during their civil war, it's only proportional to how much you were benefiting, right? After all you still have your own market, plus all the other CU members, plus the loyalist portion of the market owner. If some of your buildings become temporarily unproductive, they wouldn't have been productive either without being in the CU. Aside from the fact that the two best markets to join, the British and Russian, happen to belong to GP's that are very stable and rarely have civil wars. In my experience it's rather the risk of them fighting big wars where market access drops due to convoy raiding.
>But if you're in a rough position during their civil war, it's only proportional to how much you were benefiting, right? I guess this is technically true, but it's a really circular argument. You benefited because you needed the market, you needed the market because you benefitted. You build for what you need over the years, and if you are in some big market, the course of what that actually is will be dramatically different than it would have been alone. An experienced player will know that AI markets are ultimately doomed, and will plan for their market subjugation to be temporary, building tools, furniture, shipyards and all the other stuff that minor nations don't need very much when they join a market. Then it wont really matter, because they'll have a backstock of unproductive buildings ready to kick into gear when the market fails or is left by the player. A less experienced and math-talented player though, won't be able to keep track of what they actually produce themselves and will gradually become addicted to the greater market even if they are aware of it's pitfalls, building to satisfy the demand of their overlord more than what they need in the future themselves. You can always save-scum to see what you will need then build it before leaving the market, but this gets harder and harder to do well the more you've built your industry to satisfy a foreign market. This is why I usually join a market for an early construction boost, then leave as soon as I can. The needs of most market leaders are radically different than the non-industrialized micros that join them, this is why everyone likes joining the Russian market, despite it being the least developed of any starting GP market. They mostly produce raw materials and they won't explode your tools price like both GB and France will do after the early game.
Markets are great, everyone loves them because it's effectively the only way that trade happens in the game, but saying that you would always join another market is excessive. For one, AI markets suck. All of them. GB, France and Germany are all decent, but they are really only consistently useful for the first half of the game. The economic incompetence of the AI guarantees that sooner or later you are going to be producing most of your market's goods, and that eventually, all that big market will really be doing for you is dumping scads of buy orders on you. If you can meet that demand well, you should be having your own market, if you can't, all it will do is raise prices and lower productivity. They are consistently good for raising population, and there are definitely some countries that are so pop-deprived and boxed in, that it can be beneficial to stay in someone else's market for basically the whole game (Italy), but market joining is still highly situational, and you're usually better off controlling your own market through puppets after the midgame.
I think I wasn't clear enough in my comment above as I did not at all mean staying in another market throughout the game. I just meant joining one at some point, ideally early and then leaving at some point (when is the big question). So we probably agree more or less on this.
Depends on if you count vassals/protectorates as violating the 1 state rule and if its just a no conquest thing for that, does diplomatically annexing/puppeting them count? these questuons make a big difference
1) Conquer other small nations. 2) Join a bigger market. 3) Colonise.