Peace deals?

[Skales]

While I do like the way war works in CK2 and I believe it does represent the way war worked at the time well-ish. I also believe there is a space for improvement. First of all, there have been actual peace treaties defining borders, cash payment, tribunary status replacing a ruler, etc.

Second of all, there has been a lot of tug of war like places within CK timeline, the Byzantine Empire with most of their neighbours comes to mind but also stuff like England vs France, England vs Scotland, Reconquista etc. A lot of those places would not have defined borders, so unless you sign an actual peace deal deciding borders you might be free to engage in small scale warfare - a raid here and there, a border province being captured, a vassal switching sides perhaps etc.

It also would not be bad to be finally allowed to do stuff like "I am going to overthrow the king of Poland and also get a massive cash payment from the new king, oh and also I am going to give me nephew this Polish county he has a claim on." All in one deal, of course, we could finally get deals that are not one-sided, most wars in this period, especially in Europe would end in some sort of white peace afterall ( well major ones that is. ). So after signing the already mentioned peace deal with Poland you also give them a border province they have a claim on, etc.

 

[Metz77]

I agree that I'd like to get more detailed peace deals that somewhat exceed the original Casus Belli (though obviously not to an EU4 extent). I think defining borders on a sub-county level is probably a bit beyond what the engine can handle.

 

[Skales]

I agree that I'd like to get more detailed peace deals that somewhat exceed the original Casus Belli (though obviously not to an EU4 extent). I think defining borders on a sub-county level is probably a bit beyond what the engine can handle.

New basic unit in CK3 will be baronies, which pulls us just a little closer, which is partially why I brough it up.

 

[Teethmangler]

Apparently capturing a holding will make it immediatly part of your territory too, don't know how that'l play out in a war

 

[Skales]

Apparently capturing a holding will make it immediatly part of your territory too, don't know how that'l play out in a war

Interesting, might simulate some of those tug of war type conflicts better, for example if I as the Byzantine Empire want to send an expedition to capture Cyprus, all I need is an army and some ships to carry them there and then capture Cyprus, if the Abbasids, for example, want it back... well then they will have to send their own army there, it won't be like CK2 where a total war is started over it and most of the fighting takes place in Anatolia, unless of course, the Caliph wants to teach me a lesson and start an actual big boy war with me, but if he would still need to actually take Cyprus if he wants it back.

And of course such a war could be resolved in a peace deal as I explained above, so, for example, I will get a bunch of money from him and in exchange, the emir of Cyprus is brough back to power as a vassal of the Abbasids...

 

[Michael Bachari]

Apparently capturing a holding will make it immediatly part of your territory too, don't know how that'l play out in a war

Where did read that?

 

[Teethmangler]

Where did read that?

In the new article thread

 

[CommanderL]

I would love the ability to fight a defensive war and then white peace out with a beneficial marriage

 

[Skales]

I would love the ability to fight a defensive war and then white peace out with a beneficial marriage

Yeah I forgot about marriages, they should definitely be a thing, I could also see stuff like you winning the war and forcing the other side to give you such beneficial marriage to guarantee further peace.

Also exchanging of hostages!

 

[Metz77]

Yeah I forgot about marriages, they should definitely be a thing, I could also see stuff like you winning the war and forcing the other side to give you such beneficial marriage to guarantee further peace.

Also exchanging of hostages!

Ooh, yes, hostage exchanges were super important at the time. Even if they make it a peacetime negotiation like an alternative to paying ransom, it should really be in the game.

 

[CommanderL]

Ooh, yes, hostage exchanges were super important at the time. Even if they make it a peacetime negotiation like an alternative to paying ransom, it should really be in the game.

there should be an in-game difference between hostages and prisoners

 

[Skales]

Ooh, yes, hostage exchanges were super important at the time. Even if they make it a peacetime negotiation like an alternative to paying ransom, it should really be in the game.

They sort of are, some cassus belli allows you to take hostages after war, but you cant choose who they are and it is super limited, I only encountered it once. ( I believe free prisoners cassus belli allows you to take hostages if you win. )

But yeah that mechanic should be greatly expanded, because it was immensely important at the time, mods like AGOT would profit from it and it has clear in-game usage ( if you have a hostage obviously it protects you from war, also due to personal relationships being important in the game it naturally makes for great stories and great mechanics to have for example heir to the enemy nation grow up in your culture with your own children... ).