Do not prevent World Conquest

[Jarvin]

Tall gameplay remains a joke in EU4, saying they tried but players didn't like it is missing the point.

No I'm talking about the intent, and to some extent capacity (i.e. we could argue that the devs in EU4 having to work within short DLC cycles prevented them from properly overhauling core of the game that would've been needed to make tall actually fun to interact with)

EU5 looks much more promising from the get-go, but I still don't think we can make any judgements until we actually see the game.

 

[Normannus]

If WCs are possible, it means that some or all of the following conditions are met:
1) It is possible to exert historically impossible control over a large territory
2) The AI is unable to properly use diplomacy, as states did historically, to deal with threats to the balance of power
3) The player is able to outpace the AI in internal management to such a degree that the AI is unable, even using the diplomatic systems mentioned in 2, to match them
4) The war system is exploitable to the point where the player can overcome massive disparities of power on-paper even if the AI is functional in regards to 2 and 3

World conquests have been impossible historically because of limitations on what a state can actually do and because their neighbors react negatively to disruptions in the power balance. If those two things aren’t present in game, the game has failed at simulating history. If they are properly present, WC will be impossible.

 

[unmerged(723031)]

The problem with essentially asking "just make the AI good", especially in terms of diplomatic gameplay, is that unironically AI by default are extremely stupid, it will do exactly what you tell it to do with 0 ability to make inferences based on the current game state ALONG with feeling fair and realistic. Getting an AI to attempt to understand what a player might be doing in the context of a nation in the simulation and NOT another player with omniscient understanding thats not rooted in the simulation, in my opinion, not possible nor should be expected. Besides good/experienced players can quickly learn and adapt to the checks the AI is doing and circumvent major roadblocks (coalitions, alliance chains, stronger enemy militaries, etc) and we end up back at the complaint that "the AI cant stop a the player from conquering the world!". Unless theres a magic event that not only causes my nation to instantly implode, but also causes my PC to self-immolate, i dont think the systems that are currently shown can fully deny the possibility of a world conquest being possible (at least with subjects, I am skeptical about a 1 tag conquest). As i said before, The focus shouldn't be on "does this stop the player from hyper expanding" or "does this stop world conquests", and it should be "does this system create interesting situations for the player" or "does the gameplay allow for multiple legit choices/decisions to be made for the player". If that means expansion is harder the larger you grow, thats good, and creates a dilemma for both internal stability and outwards diplomacy, but the system shouldnt be designed with "we need to stop world conquests"

Also, I personally think it's also okay for the AI to do "stupid" things by the player's perspective, in terms of diplomatic or army maneuvers. There are plenty of moments in history which we can look back on and say "what was he thinking?????", when if we saw an AI do that in game, we would be complaining about the AI being bad and needing to be fixed. This is not excusing the AI not being able to interact with game systems and not provide a consistent challenge, this is more a statement on its okay if AI MAYBE not always being "optimal" by player standards and react perfectly to the situation at hand.

If WCs are possible, it means that some or all of the following conditions are met:
1) It is possible to exert historically impossible control over a large territory
2) The AI is unable to properly use diplomacy, as states did historically, to deal with threats to the balance of power
3) The player is able to outpace the AI in internal management to such a degree that the AI is unable, even using the diplomatic systems mentioned in 2, to match them
4) The war system is exploitable to the point where the player can overcome massive disparities of power on-paper even if the AI is functional in regards to 2 and 3

World conquests have been impossible historically because of limitations on what a state can actually do and because their neighbors react negatively to disruptions in the power balance. If those two things aren’t present in game, the game has failed at simulating history. If they are properly present, WC will be impossible.

 

[Koopatin]

The thing is, if world conquest is possible, even if hard, by extension, every conquest on the way to WC would be easier. Every held territory less than the whole world would be easier to manage. And the smallest land grab would be unnoticeable and not even a stumbling block. For a lot of us, that is the real worry.

To be honest, for me it would be okayish if you could WC at the end of the game, and the only reason you do not go up in flames is because the game ends, or if a horde does that, it will burn down more or less instantly after the ruler changes.

(Side tangent—I would still prefer if hordes had to fight constant rebellions if they kept no troops back to pacify the land even in the Khans' lifetime. I would even more prefer if hordes do not auto-conquer land and take more as tributaries.)

 

[Siegfriedfr]

My take would be: do not include achievements related to world conquest.

 

[Arizal]

There are plenty of moments in history which we can look back on and say "what was he thinking?????"

Someone should do a series on real blunders and blame “the AI” for it. It might go old quickly, but it would be hilarious for some time.

 

[PossibleTango]

World Conquests will be possible. It's a paradox game, whether they want it to happen or not people will find a way. They always do. I just hope they make it far harder to conquest outside you cultural and geographical area. Once you get really big they should add mechanics that make you deal with more internal struggles like in real life. All great empires tend to crumble from the inside first.