Cascading Alliances Hotfix Project

[Achab]

Dear fellow players and modders.
It has been more than a year since the 2.32 official patch solved a lot of bugs and improved the game massively but unfortunately it also introduced the "Cascading Alliances" mechanism.

AI countries are just happy to call their allies into war and upon joining the war these allies call their allies and so on.

The logic behind this mechanism is justified when you play one of the greater powers. When you attack a greek minor as Rome its undestandable that all the other greek countries help them, after all they have +200 relations with your victim and -200 with you. On the other hand its true that the diplomacy mechanic is too time consuming and fickle to allow you as Rome to establish alliances with at least some of the greek parties instead.

But when you play a minor yourself, you are pretty screwed, as a minor conflict usually results in a massive war where huge blocks of allies fight each other, the human player usually being on the shorter end. Especially mods with high number of single province minors suffer from this mechanic.

I open this tread in hope that we as a comunity of players and modders can together find a hotfix to this Cascading Alliances monster, as its currently the main issue which discourages both new and veteran players alike from playing this inspiring game.

 

[Achab]

I wouldn't start this new thread about CAs without being able to announce a massive breakthrough I made after many hours of testing everything upon everything. Finally, my beloved barbies proved their universal use once again.

Here comes the fabulous instant peace event, which makes everything easier

country_event = {

	id = 777888

	is_triggered_only = yes

	
	title = "Chicken Ally"
	desc = "Maybe we are too weak, gutless and cowardly to fight this terrible war."

	option = {
		name = "Peace on the Earth!"	
		
			any_owned = { change_controller = BAR }
			capital_scope = { add_core = THIS }
			any_owned = { change_controller = THIS }

		}

	option = {
		name = "Do nothing!"
	              }
}

Mechanic:
After a country is fully occupied by BAR (yea, these blodie, blue-eyed barbie beasts, you all know I like them) and it acquires a core the occupation ends and the country signs universal separate peace with all enemies with the usual 5 years of truce.

Known drawbacks:
1) All trade routes are cancelled. (minor)
2) The country gains core on capital. (negligible)
3) Governors (not ruler) fired. (minor)

....

So now the tough job comes to find which countries should get this event the day they enter a war upon a CTA so they don't spread the CTAs any further. It can also include some communication events with the would be ganked player country which can specify conditions under which the country quits the war. Can also be combined with diplomatic relation improvement with the former enemy and relation decrease with the betrayed ally. Infamy as for dishonouring the CTA could also be an option.

Work in progress ...

 

[Cheexsta]

Brilliant stuff I can also see plenty of application in other situations where a peace needs to be forced. I wonder what happens if the country is in a civil war, though?

 

[Wave]

I didn't quite understand this but I don't think it's needed if it works

But did you say that only if the country is totally occupied by barbarians it triggers?

I think it could happen randomly (even if randoms don't really work in Paradox's games..) to some of the allies and only maximum of 2 or 3 nations would fight against one.

I think that it is very unfortunate due the cultures and other things that makes countries ally only the ones with same culture and/or religion. Cascading alliances could actually be a good thing if you could start huge world wars with several nations in both sides instead one versus rest of the world.

Also does war = no do anything? If you'd simply give that to all countries that are at war could it actually work.

EDIT: Who am I to ask it here as I can test it as well.. brb

 

[Achab]

Brilliant stuff I can also see plenty of application in other situations where a peace needs to be forced. I wonder what happens if the country is in a civil war, though?

Civil War is not ended by the event, only "normal" wars.

To force a faction to lose a CW just trigger for it:

any_owned = { secede_province = civil_war_faction }

Then you need to trigger event 2032 or 2033 respectively.
Or just do all the flag clearing yourself:

		clr_country_flag = province_distribution
		clr_country_flag = omen_increases_morale
		clr_country_flag = omen_decreases_morale
		clr_country_flag = deserting_troops
		clr_country_flag = financial_help
		clr_country_flag = military_help
		any_owned = {
			limit = { has_province_flag = rebel_side  }
			clr_province_flag = rebel_side
		}
		any_character = {
			limit = { has_character_flag = rebel_side }
			clr_character_flag = rebel_side
		}

 

[Achab]

I didn't quite understand this but I don't think it's needed if it works

But did you say that only if the country is totally occupied by barbarians it triggers?

I think it could happen randomly (even if randoms don't really work in Paradox's games..) to some of the allies and only maximum of 2 or 3 nations would fight against one.

I think that it is very unfortunate due the cultures and other things that makes countries ally only the ones with same culture and/or religion. Cascading alliances could actually be a good thing if you could start huge world wars with several nations in both sides instead one versus rest of the world.

Also does war = no do anything? If you'd simply give that to all countries that are at war could it actually work.

EDIT: Who am I to ask it here as I can test it as well.. brb

Unfortunately there is no direct way how to end a war (eg. there's no "war = no"). Also alliances can't be made or dissolved by an event or decision. CTA again can't be modded.

The thing I noticed and which also be used to fight CAs is that CTA success depends on the called country relations with both the allied country calling to arms and the would be enemy. When the relations are on the same level, the chance of honoring the CTA is "maybe". When you have significantly better relation with the ally than with the future enemy the chance is "Very Likely". And of course its "Impossible" when you hate your ally but like the country they are calling you against.

And relations can be modded by an event, for example:

		any_country = { 
			relation = { who = this value = 400 }
			}
		}

And everyone loves you

 

[UniversalWolf]

Is it possible to make a CTA have a negative impact on relations before figuring whether or not the CTA is answered? Successfully answering the CTA could then have a positive impact on relations to balance the negative.

Really reminds me how inappropriate the alliance system in general is for the time period. It just doesn't fit right.

 

[von Sachsen]

Does the AI drop alliances if relations are low enough? Also is there any alliance=yes trigger? If so would it be best to make an event to set any relations very low when any alliance with an none tributary is made, making the AI drop any alliances? The only real downsides would be the effective removal of alliances (not that bad) and many more low relations (also not that bad.)

 

[Achab]

Is it possible to make a CTA have a negative impact on relations before figuring whether or not the CTA is answered? Successfully answering the CTA could then have a positive impact on relations to balance the negative.

Really reminds me how inappropriate the alliance system in general is for the time period. It just doesn't fit right.

Unfortunately the CTA is a diplomatic action and you cannot mod the diplomatic interface directly. The only chance would be lowering the relations before the possible CTA, when the country notices their ally is at war (or maybe when their ally's ally is at war already).
But there is an additional disadvantage. Even if you made the relations so bad that they actually dismiss the CTA the alliance is broken and both the countries have a free alliance slot again which they fill by signing a new alliance almost immediately.

 

[Cheexsta]

After a bit of tinkering, it appears that the AI still accepts a CTA even when relations are at -200. They can (and do), however, break alliances while at peace when relations are bad enough.

 

[Achab]

After a bit of tinkering, it appears that the AI still accepts a CTA even when relations are at -200. They can (and do), however, break alliances while at peace when relations are bad enough.

When there is a CTA and relations with both the ally and the would be enemy are at -200 the chance of complying is "maybe" ... I think it means 40%-60%.
Alliances are broken at peace, but only to free alliance slots which are quickly filled by new alliances signed.
So unless you mass set relations to negative ... and screw the whole diplomacy system ....

 

[Achab]

Does the AI drop alliances if relations are low enough? Also is there any alliance=yes trigger? If so would it be best to make an event to set any relations very low when any alliance with an none tributary is made, making the AI drop any alliances? The only real downsides would be the effective removal of alliances (not that bad) and many more low relations (also not that bad.)

The trigger is:
num_of_allies =

Alliances are broken because of bad relations, but new ones are signed almost immediately. So unless you drop all relations to negative, there will still be alliances.
With such low relations any serious diplomacy is out of question, even things like trade routes and military access.

Also alliances are important for minors being able to survive, otherwise greater powers just pick them one by one. We try to prevent Cascading Alliances, not all alliances after all.

 

[Cheexsta]

The trigger is:
num_of_allies =

Alliances are broken because of bad relations, but new ones are signed almost immediately. So unless you drop all relations to negative, there will still be alliances.
With such low relations any serious diplomacy is out of question, even things like trade routes and military access.

Also alliances are important for minors being able to survive, otherwise greater powers just pick them one by one. We try to prevent Cascading Alliances, not all alliances after all.

I agree with the last part - minors really need alliances to survive. I'm playing with -100 relations at the moment, and it's incredibly easy to snap up tribes everywhere. On the other hand, I'm seeing countries thrive that would normally be swallowed early on (eg Pontus).

Regarding trade and military access, I actually have had no problems with either. I got access through two tribes in Hispania to attack Carthage (Epigoni Mod) and have trade routes set up all throughout the Mediterranean. It doesn't appear to be any harder to set up than normal (though, playing as Rome, pretty much everyone is at negative relations to start with anyway).

 

[Achab]

Regarding trade and military access, I actually have had no problems with either. I got access through two tribes in Hispania to attack Carthage (Epigoni Mod) and have trade routes set up all throughout the Mediterranean. It doesn't appear to be any harder to set up than normal (though, playing as Rome, pretty much everyone is at negative relations to start with anyway).

That sounds promising

I am currently working on a system where alliance members are as the CTAs spread during a war given country_flag depending on the level of remoteness from the "caller zero". So his direct allies are okay to fight, their allies only 50:50 and the next level allies will instapeace. Some nations will be extempt from this if they qualify for "war happy", eg. the ruler is highly martial or brave, or military faction, or they have massive idling army, etc.