Weak and strong nations on early days of the game

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Weak and strong nations on early days of the game

      US = weak
      China = very weak
      Russia = very weak
      India = weak
      Israel = Very Strong
      Saudi Arabia = normal/weak
      Syria = average/strong
      Turkey = average
      Iraq = strong
      Serbia = strong
      Romania/Ukraine/Belarus = strong
      Scandinavian = average/strong
      European countries (e.g. Germany, France, Italy...) = very strong
      Iran = average/strong (depends on resources and allies)
      African countries = average (most)/weak (DR Congo, Algeria, Libya, partially Egypt)/strong (South Africa, Kenya, Ethiopia...)
      Canada = weak
      Mexico = average/weak
      Brazil = very weak
      Peru = Strong
      Stan countries = average/strong
      Venzuela/Colombia = strong, but mostly Colombia stronger
      Argentina = average
      Chile = weak/strong it depends on the player more than the country's length

      This is calculated based on the gap between the cities, the shorter the gap the stronger.
      "Success is not final, Failure is NOT fatal. I DON'T CARE if your sick, I DON'T CARE what your going through, if you're not dead, he ain't through you yet. As long as you're alive you CAN STILL MAKE IT HAPPEN. As long as there's breath in your nostrils, boo, you're still in the game, you still can win."

    • Hi,

      Interesting topic, I don't think city density determines nation relative strength...


      It really depends on playing style.

      US, canada, Russia, and China(and arguably australia) can be very strong if played correctly.

      If you go with a coalition for any of those, then you are in a strong position. But if you make a lot of enemies, you have so many borders and too much land to defend.
      "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres."-Charles De Gaulle, Leader of Free France in World War 2.
      English: "Patriotism is to love your country. Nationalism is hating that of others."

    • PaskalSF wrote:

      This is calculated based on the gap between the cities, the shorter the gap the stronger.
      But why is India so low???

      India is about half the size of China (which I agree, is a weak country), and most land between cities is open ground, meaning it takes even less time to travel between cities. Only 2 ports for naval invasions, which can be blocked pretty easily. Only city that's semi-hard to get to is Kolkata because of the jungle province of Dumka, and there aren't even any threats there (only Bangladesh, which India has to occupy as an anchor against potential invasion by Myanmar). There are only 3 player nations bordering India, and they are China, Pakistan, and Myanmar. China can be disregarded since they are just too big. Pakistan, while on paper looks formidable (6 cities, potential 7th with Jammu), have to deal with Afganistan from the north (who 50% of the time I've played India invades Pakistan if active), have the Indus River cutting their country in half, and cannot successfully storm any Indian cities if played smart by the Indian player. Myanmar can become a threat if played smartly by the opponent, but they have to deal with Thailand blitzing Yangon and Myeik, and even potentially Vietnam getting into the fray. Whilst this is happening, India can mop up Bangladesh, Nepal (China usually goes for Taiwan or North Korea, and if they take, you could invade Tibet but warning it's so slow), Sri Lanka, and potentially even Kashmir if Pakistan is inactive/dealing with Afganistan.
      "War does not determine who is right; only who is left."

      Always strive to be better
      Don't try and be the best
      A better world is always within out fingertips
      But Utopia just causes more stress.

    • ewac123 wrote:

      Hi,

      Interesting topic, I don't think city density determines nation relative strength...


      It really depends on playing style.

      US, canada, Russia, and China(and arguably australia) can be very strong if played correctly.

      If you go with a coalition for any of those, then you are in a strong position. But if you make a lot of enemies, you have so many borders and too much land to defend.
      correct, but at early days small nations have advantages over large ones, because large ones have a massive gap between cities therefore provinces are at risk
      "Success is not final, Failure is NOT fatal. I DON'T CARE if your sick, I DON'T CARE what your going through, if you're not dead, he ain't through you yet. As long as you're alive you CAN STILL MAKE IT HAPPEN. As long as there's breath in your nostrils, boo, you're still in the game, you still can win."

    • _Pyth0n_ wrote:

      PaskalSF wrote:

      This is calculated based on the gap between the cities, the shorter the gap the stronger.
      But why is India so low???
      India is about half the size of China (which I agree, is a weak country), and most land between cities is open ground, meaning it takes even less time to travel between cities. Only 2 ports for naval invasions, which can be blocked pretty easily. Only city that's semi-hard to get to is Kolkata because of the jungle province of Dumka, and there aren't even any threats there (only Bangladesh, which India has to occupy as an anchor against potential invasion by Myanmar). There are only 3 player nations bordering India, and they are China, Pakistan, and Myanmar. China can be disregarded since they are just too big. Pakistan, while on paper looks formidable (6 cities, potential 7th with Jammu), have to deal with Afganistan from the north (who 50% of the time I've played India invades Pakistan if active), have the Indus River cutting their country in half, and cannot successfully storm any Indian cities if played smart by the Indian player. Myanmar can become a threat if played smartly by the opponent, but they have to deal with Thailand blitzing Yangon and Myeik, and even potentially Vietnam getting into the fray. Whilst this is happening, India can mop up Bangladesh, Nepal (China usually goes for Taiwan or North Korea, and if they take, you could invade Tibet but warning it's so slow), Sri Lanka, and potentially even Kashmir if Pakistan is inactive/dealing with Afganistan.
      correct, India can be average/strong but it really depends on player
      "Success is not final, Failure is NOT fatal. I DON'T CARE if your sick, I DON'T CARE what your going through, if you're not dead, he ain't through you yet. As long as you're alive you CAN STILL MAKE IT HAPPEN. As long as there's breath in your nostrils, boo, you're still in the game, you still can win."

    • TheShinwacker wrote:

      If you had the chance to win a million dollars by winning a game against 64 other players of your skill level what country would you chose?
      WW3 I assume:
      In order:
      India
      Australia
      Japan
      South Africa
      Kazakhstan
      Ethiopia
      "War does not determine who is right; only who is left."

      Always strive to be better
      Don't try and be the best
      A better world is always within out fingertips
      But Utopia just causes more stress.

    • Bigtallnerd419 wrote:

      TheShinwacker wrote:

      If you had the chance to win a million dollars by winning a game against 64 other players of your skill level what country would you chose?
      Argentina. (Before they killed a city).
      Ye was about to say you'd be in for a bloodbath against Chile if they were competent. Sure they can't really invade but they can defend, especially if they get airbases to ferry troops around (I guess ASF could counter, but Chilean ASF can counter that as well, but Argentinian ASF is western = better ASF so yea). Once you finally get rid of competent Chile (usually auto win for Argentina its just a matter of time), Bolivia just swoops in like the Grim Reaper.
      "War does not determine who is right; only who is left."

      Always strive to be better
      Don't try and be the best
      A better world is always within out fingertips
      But Utopia just causes more stress.

    • and coalitions are still a thing, so if I were Argentina, I would gang up with Brazil, Bolivia, Columbia, and Peru. then you only have Venezuela and Chile to take care of, then deal with the coalition that probably formed between America, Canada, Mexico, Cuba, and maybe Venezuela if they pitied him. Venezuela will ultimately get beat by Brazil and Columbia therefore leaving the northern coalition 1 man down, weakening them. I as Argentina with my northern friends Bolivia and Peru can take Chile three to one giving you control of all south America. South America with the advantage over there northern neighbors then can proceed to invade Cuba keeping a watch on the borders of Mexico possibly starting an invasion there as well. From this point if the cards are played right the south American coalition with you in it now controls the americas and can now gear up to deal with the most definite war with Europe, Asia and Africa.
      "The greatest battles are never won by men but with words"-Me

      "Free flies and no work"-ME

      "Duty is heavier than a mountain death as light as a feather" Lan from the Wheel of Time

    • TheShinwacker wrote:

      and coalitions are still a thing, so if I were Argentina, I would gang up with Brazil, Bolivia, Columbia, and Peru. then you only have Venezuela and Chile to take care of, then deal with the coalition that probably formed between America, Canada, Mexico, Cuba, and maybe Venezuela if they pitied him. Venezuela will ultimately get beat by Brazil and Columbia therefore leaving the northern coalition 1 man down, weakening them. I as Argentina with my northern friends Bolivia and Peru can take Chile three to one giving you control of all south America. South America with the advantage over there northern neighbors then can proceed to invade Cuba keeping a watch on the borders of Mexico possibly starting an invasion there as well. From this point if the cards are played right the south American coalition with you in it now controls the americas and can now gear up to deal with the most definite war with Europe, Asia and Africa.
      To be fair this is dealing with a scenario assuming NA and SA unite respectively, which is quite rare since there is usually a pan-American coalition, with both NA and SA states. For example, one coalition might be Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and Columbia, with the other being America, Cuba, Chile, Peru, and Bolivia/Venezuela (poor Venezuela :P ).
      "War does not determine who is right; only who is left."

      Always strive to be better
      Don't try and be the best
      A better world is always within out fingertips
      But Utopia just causes more stress.

    • I am a level 60 player with a 1:5 w/l ration.

      USA
      is a very strong nation. Probably the strongest if you consider basically everything. The problem ist, that this is always the first ever nation to be picked by a Noob, so good players cant even do proper testing with it. It can be played like an Island and has many core cities.

      Australia
      is probably at the same level as the US

      Cuba + Japan
      after the balance patch now mediocre... they lost 1 core cities and a 3 stack including a scout car. (cuba) They are not bad due to the position, but got heavily nerfed. You will struggle in the late game with only 5 cores. I dont know which stack Japan lost... Japan stil has 6 cores, so needs another try maybe

      North Korea+south
      Unplayable. 4 cores means you have lost before entering the game

      Europe
      They are all good, but have some serious disadvantage. UK is the best considering everything, because its an Island and can commit in being one. Germany has only 2 potential Naval bases. So if you go against a Naval Nation in the late game you are doomed. Belarus and Austria are interesting for being 100% land locked.

      Asia + Africa
      They are all kinda the same same. You cant commit to be a land based or naval based nation with everyone of them. Chad as a landlocked nation is more interesting.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by bkn ().