I suggest the following option to a court/government: For a specific port, support a specific nation other than one self. By doing this, the nations influence in that port is added to the supported nations influence for purpose of determining control. So, if nation A has 10 M influence, nation B has 8 M influence and nation C has 3 M influence, nation C could decide to support nation B, giving nation B control over the port. This decision should only be implemented after a vote in the supporting nation.

I think this will make diplomacy and advancing in ones nation more interesting for smaller nations. As it is, only few nations control ports, and the smaller ones have no influence on this. By implementing my suggestion, smaller nations may negotiate with larger ones as to how they use their influence. It will also give an extra dimension to alliances and port control wars.

I realize that I am relatively new to this game, so there may be consequences of this that I do not see yet, but I think this suggestion would make it more interesting to belong to a small nation, instead of changing nationality to one of the larger ones.

i am relatively new myself but this seems like a good idea

Excellent thinking : I could see this being part of the 'alliance' thread of diplomacy, along with trade benefits, such use of joint influence would indeed open up many options for smaller nations : it could also form part of the 'vassal' option, where smaller nations could negotiate protection deals with their influence holdings becoming part of the trade-off along with tribute : for example, a smaller 'vassal' nation could reduce any tribute element by offering its influence support instead.

+1 This is a good idea.

I admit, I felt like this might be a good idea for getting less powerful nations involved. However, it seems to undermine the reasoning behind port control, tax revenue. Tax revenue should go to the most influential nation not the second. Alliances can be made between nations to overthrow the most influential through other means. I do agree that less influential nations could/should be able to play a bigger role, but not in this way.

Welcome to the game Haron. Interestingly good suggestion. It must also be a record for getting such a meaningful suggestion at your first post.

I am not sure if you understand this, but this is also a game changer. Perhaps we can do this. I will wait for more user input and some slight tailoring perhaps before I can safely comment on this.

If I got it right, you propose that nations get to choose where their's subject influence is going. Or individuals?

Like Danik said this could work when they implement diplomacy and that could be part of vassal country.
To confront it alliance between nation should have same but less effect like instead of 100% from vassal nation allied nation can give 20% (numbers are negotinable).. Of course other bonuses are possible with allied nations which aren't with vassal but that's part of the other topic

+1, national influence only.

Thank you, Captain Jack.

To clarify, I suggest that an entire nations influence has to go to one other nation only - not that individuals can give away their influence. Thus giving rise to interesting possible internal conflict inside the nations (the government has to decide through voting). So, for a specific port, Norways entire influence would support one other nation (or none at all).

I do NOT think the supporting nation should get any of the tax revenue. The reasons for support could vary. For instance, maybe two medium sized nations could support each other in two different ports. A small nation could support a large one perhaps for a sum of gold. Or maybe for promise of protection of some sort. Or maybe the larger nation just threathens them to get their support.

At least, that was what I had in mind

+1 . like the idea.
one more benefict is both party can enjoy the title bonuses on controlled port.