It's not just difficult, it's flat out impossible to do that.

The goal isn't to judge military power, but... GDP. So yeah. It's pretty accurate c_c

nvm

Edited 3/14/2016 15:08:55

To judge GDP:
France = +65 (2,833,687 GDP)
Germany = +47 (3,874,437 GDP)
Netherland = +14 (880,716 GDP)

France is hugely overvalued compared to both countries with hight and lower GDP.

Size plays quite a role, specially in Europe where everything is rich; bigger country means bigger income due to income scaling being lower the higher it is.

France = 643.801 km²
Germany = 357.168 km²

Roughly 1.75x?

Europe is one big asshole for mapmakers and templatemakers alike, I guess. At times I wonder why not make an inner map of Europe xD

Edited 3/14/2016 15:22:36

Posting the major nations incomes only makes me more concerned, you're overestimating American power. You are implying that China is stronger than Russia (3x more no less!. Looking at GDP and population is not an accurate way to judge military power,it is quite difficult to judge power based on each territory, but take this into account: http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp

Like Zeph said, It will be pretty much impossible. I realize that GDP and area may not be the most accurate measures to sue, but they're more accurate than population, which is what I was using previously.
___________________________

I would argue that Military strength is a poor measure of overall power in the modern day. Sure, there are still wars, but nothing even close to what we had in previous centuries. I mean come on, this isn't the 1950s where the country with more Nukes is boss.

To judge GDP:
France = +65 (2,833,687 GDP)
Germany = +47 (3,874,437 GDP)
Netherland = +14 (880,716 GDP)

France is hugely overvalued compared to both countries with hight and lower GDP.

I'm tired of people complaining about this. If you have a solution, i'd love to hear it, but it doesn't seem like anyone does.

Using a linear gdp scale instead of a exponential scale would probably fix the problem but I understand if you don't want to redo bonuses again. It is a lot of work. Would be much nicer if you could edit bonuses by clicking on the actual map.

I would have to use a shorter scale of bonus values if I were to do that. Using a linear scale makes the map... Well, linear. If I were to use something like this for example:

1-100 billion: 1
101-200 billion: 2
201-300 billion: 3
301-400 billion: 4
401-500 billion: 5
500 billion+: 6

If I do this, every single territory in africa will be worth 1, and every single territory in the US and Western europe would be 6.

Scaling it, while it may produce some discrepancies, will at least add some variety in bonus values.

Exponential scale is going to do way better. The size will still affect the countries' general value.

Russia's army of 1s will probably still outscale Germany.

So no point in such a change.

Edited 3/14/2016 20:54:46

Size plays quite a role, specially in Europe where everything is rich; bigger country means bigger income due to income scaling being lower the higher it is.

In reality surface area plays no direct role at (potential)military strength. Resources and population, and how they are used, is all that matters.

If you want to keep the Geopolitical Earth Map realistic, then do not look to surface area. For me, making France stronger than Germany makes no sense, and I can't help but see this Geopolitical Earth Map as failed by that.

Well, to be fair france has won wars against germany more than once.

If you'd like to suggest another way I could do it I'd be happy to explore it, but you haven't actually offered any suggestions, just said over and over again how much of a failure it is that france is stronger than germany.

I'm not specifically looking at surface area, it's just a logical consequence of using a scaling system that countries with more territories are worth more.

In fact, I was just looking, and World nations has similar "flaw" where germany and the UK are both less powerful than france. I think that WL players are used to this at least, even if it's not optimal.

Edited 3/14/2016 21:54:32

"Well, to be fair france has won wars against germany more than once."
Name one*

































































*without American help

Edited 3/15/2016 00:47:41

In reality surface area plays no direct role at (potential)military strength. Resources and population, and how they are used, is all that matters.

Actually, harder nations are considerably harder to occupy and much easier to defend.

If you want to keep the Geopolitical Earth Map realistic, then do not look to surface area. For me, making France stronger than Germany makes no sense, and I can't help but see this Geopolitical Earth Map as failed by that.

It's a consequence of warlight mapmaking. He has to keep the territories a certain size. If they are too small, Fizzer says "nope" (see: Diplomacy Huge by Belgian Gentleman). If they are too big, they disrupt gameplay (see: Urumqi in World Nations maps).

It's not failed, and it's very easy to solve; if bigger bonuses are needed, altering them isn't too difficult. As long as the scaling is consistent and sort of balanced to an extent, it's good to go for me.

France is stronger than Germany nowadays, check Global Firepower for proof. They have a stronger military.

Name one*

War of the First Coalition

Doesn't count. Germany wan't an actual country

Solution:
Make a mix of the power index of the GFP list and the GBP to get the
potential military strength of every country.
Based on the outcome of that, chance the bonus values. A Geopolitical Earth Map is expected to be realistic, not balanced.

It's a consequence of warlight mapmaking. He has to keep the territories a certain size. If they are too small, Fizzer says "nope" (see: Diplomacy Huge by Belgian Gentleman). If they are too big, they disrupt gameplay (see: Urumqi in World Nations maps).

Isn't it possible to scale the map up a bit, and divide Germany in some more territories?
Issander's Huge World has Germany with 11 territories instead of 7...

Edited 3/15/2016 11:30:34

Currently the map is at it's maximum resolution, so no more scaling up.

My guess is that It's a combination of having to use bonus links on every territory on my map, and Issanders huge world using a different, non-standard map projection. I actually seriously considered this when researching which projection to use, but I decided on this one as everyone is used to it.

I am aiming to make it realistic and i'm not sure that your anti-france campaign is really realistic to be honest. Germany is weaker than france in every metric besides gdp. You seem to be all about that global firepower index, and france is indeed more powerful that germany in that...

Edited 3/15/2016 12:08:05

How about this calculation:

Country total bonus value = ((Totalmilitary+paramilitary/10.000) *(Heavy Weapons Index Score*3)) + ((2×GDP (100 Billion of US$))
USA +543 = (23,49950 * 8,37 = 197) + 2×173,48075
Russia +352 = (33,64000 * 9,66 = 325) + 2×18,60598
China +409 = (35,03000 * 5,76 = 202) + 2×103,56508
France +83 = (3,55250 * 7,23 = 26) + 2×28,33687
Germany +92 = (2,26770 * 6,45 = 15) + 2×38,74437
Netherland +21 = (0,46500 * 6,60 = 3) + 2×8,80716

Totalmilitary+paramilitary:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_military_and_paramilitary_personnel

Heavy Weapons Index Score:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Global_Militarization_Index

GDP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

Edited 3/15/2016 16:15:34

It's fine as is, but if you want more balance, use rankings, not raw scores.

How about this calculation:

Country total bonus value = ((Totalmilitary+paramilitary/10.000) *(Heavy Weapons Index Score*3)) + ((2×GDP (100 Billion of US$))
USA +543 = (23,49950 * 8,37 = 197) + 2×173,48075
Russia +352 = (33,64000 * 9,66 = 325) + 2×18,60598
China +409 = (35,03000 * 5,76 = 202) + 2×103,56508
France +83 = (3,55250 * 7,23 = 26) + 2×28,33687
Germany +92 = (2,26770 * 6,45 = 15) + 2×38,74437
Netherland +21 = (0,46500 * 6,60 = 3) + 2×8,80716


Totalmilitary+paramilitary:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_military_and_paramilitary_personnel
Heavy Weapons Index Score:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Global_Militarization_Index
GDP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

Seems good, but It only gives values for entire countries. Perhaps the country score could be calculated and then divided proportionally between territories based on population?

I'll definitely experiment with this later tonight, try doing some small european countries this way to test it out.

Edited 3/15/2016 16:54:49