Potential Threat Rate for more consequent AI behaviour

[Frigabus]

Introducing the Potential Threat Rate could be a good way to bring the "foreign policy" of AI rulers closer to reality. Currently, AI rulers form alliances, prepare for wars, and start schemes rather randomly.
When a real leader sees that another political force poses a potential threat to his country/rule, he does not sit idly by, but takes action: he looks for allies, tries to assassinate the enemy leader (his allies or prominent generals), tries to gain leverage against him, kidnaps his heir, sends money to factions opposing the threatening opponent, tries to neutralize him with a marriage proposal, sets aside money to hire mercenaries, develops his military force, or even voluntarily submits if he sees no other solution.
I suggest that for each AI ruler, the game would assign a Potential Threat Rate for all other rulers (whether independent or vassal) who are capable of starting a war (have some casus belli) against him - even if there is a truce between the two rulers.

Factors that could influence the Potential Threat Rate:
• Military superiority/disadvantage (allies count on both sides).
• Gold reserves.
• The potential attacker's opinion of the ruler and vice versa.
• The potential attacker's relationship to the ruler (friend, rival, lover, ally etc.).
• The potential attacker has the Conqueror (or similar) trait.
• The potential attacker has a personality that makes aggressive wars likely (e.g. ambitious).
• The ruler's personality traits (Paranoid and Craven react differently than Trusting or Brave).
• The potential attacker has previously launched successful offensive wars, increasing with each successful war.
• In the case of vassals, the power of the factions they lead is also taken into account.

If the Potential Threat Rate is below 0, it has no effect.
In the case of a low value, soft solutions come: personal schemes, increasing money reserves, military development, hiring better champions/generals.
In the case of a medium value, more serious steps are taken: hostile schemes, more costly military development, active alliance search, supporting factions against the potential attacker.
In the case of a high value, drastic steps are taken: obtaining money by any means possible (e.g. selling artifacts), kidnapping the potential attacker's family members, challenging the potential attacker to a duel or submitting yourself to a third power in exchange for protection.

 

[Truenorth14]

Maybe even a game rule (turned off by default) to add an extra check where just being a player adds more threat with a lesser amount if the player is an heir or an ally of another potential threat?

 

[Juneba111]

I like the idea. It sounds like something that goes in the way of the "defensive pact" that CK2 players usually ask for, but without being stuck just to alliances, so more like overall ways to curb a threat or even to prepare for a potential war. And it sounds simple, kinda how every character has an Opinion rate of other characters around them (but just for rulers in that case).
But the devs would certainly have to make it work with the economic archetypes, because those mostly dictate how AI rulers behave in regards to war expenditure and, consequently, warmongering. An AI ruler that has the "warlike" archetype and simultaneously with a high "Potential Threat" rate towards an expanding neighbour might have a harder time managing their chest of gold if these two things aren't properly tweaked.