A false promise of help modifier?

[LordHarromont]

It happens a lot, and I do mean a lot, where you or an AI answers a call to war and subsequently does nothing.
Saying you'll help, and doing nothing, is better than declining since it avoids the opinion penalty.

That, to me, doesn't seem right. How about a penalty for if you say you'll help in a war, but then have 0% war contribution? This penalty should, naturally, be higher than the penalty for declining to help from the begging.

 

[CISAC]

This.
The AI does absolutely nothing to help and doesn't even join you in fights.
If they do "help", they just go straight to the enemy capital to siege it which really doesn't help when the war score you get from battles is way more than the one you get from sieging.

 

[Drakken]

While I agree about the penalty idea, I must say I never had a problem with the Allied AI in my wars.

When I send my troops to attack the enemy while being at a numerical disadvantage, they beeline to join me as soon as possible. While the micromanagement remains tedious, I follow their troops the best I can.

 

[LordHarromont]

While I agree about the penalty idea, I must say I never had a problem with the Allied AI in my wars.

When I send my troops to attack the enemy while being at a numerical disadvantage, they beeline to join me as soon as possible. While the micromanagement remains tedious, I follow their troops the best I can.

That's fair. A big issue though is if the AI is involved in more than one war at a time. It has happened that they prioritize some other conflict over the one you're in.
Also, while the AI might join into a fight if it judges they can make a difference, that would require them to be in the neighborhood at all. Often, they just go to siege somewhere while you desperately need their troops to beat the enemies doomstack. I posted another suggestion earlier to get a 'attach to this army' order option like there was in CK2. That way, if they do decide to help, they do indeed. . . help.