Relation suggestion

[unmerged(594)]

One thing I don't like in this excellent game is the low impact your relation with other countries have. From what I have seen it doesn't really matter if your relation with someone is -200. The computer almost never attacks you anyway. Wouldn't it be nice if a country that have a relation of about -150 with you almost always would declare war on you. That way you couldn't annex other countries not caring about what the rest of the world would think about you.
Also if your country grows to big, it should be even easier that other countries declares war on you, maybe as soon as your relation with them goes negative. That would make it much harder to create huge empires, cause you would almost always be at war with a lot of other countries, or you would have to spend a lot of money giving them gifts.

 

[unmerged(372)]

This is a problem with EU ai, but even more so the problem with 99.999999% of the ai's of other strategy games. Everyone knows, as much as they try to deny it, that every single country's purpose in these games is to conquer the world utterly and completely. The human player almost always tries to do this. And I know from several AARs here that there are quite a few such exceptions in EU. The computer players do not have enough aggresiveness or any ability at all to press their advantages.

I have never in my life seen an ai player press an advantage, no matter how easy it is for a human player to do so. For example, using africa: Tunisia never ever has a land army. I have only seen a couple of game where it is even attacked. Example 2: Morocco and Algeria go to war. Morocco wins every battle and conquers all of the Algerian provinces (and there aren't as many since Morocco won some from Algeria in a previous war). No annexation, just takes 2 provinces. That is, in my opinion, the biggest ai problem, and the reason why that extra bit of bloodthirsty realism is not there in EU, or any other game.

 

[unmerged(258)]

An exception to this seems to be Oman (for whatever reason). It seems to love annexing Aden and then taking Hedschaus - usually the entire enemy nation in the first war. It tends to take over the whole Arabian peninsula below the major powers. Even on the less aggressive settings ...

 

[unmerged(543)]

IMHO it seems by far too easy to annex other countries completely. I think that a maxumum of say three provinces per war would stall this in a nice way.

 

[Emperor of Europe]

Originally posted by Arngrim:
IMHO it seems by far too easy to annex other countries completely. I think that a maxumum of say three provinces per war would stall this in a nice way.

Three provinces per war IS the current limit. Annexing entire countries happens if you capture EVERY province the enemy has, and should be kept like it is. Improvements need to be made on the AI instead.

Regards,

Empor

------------------
Uhm... nice province. I
think I'll take it.

 

[unmerged(457)]

OMAN really is the exception. It has proved to be very aggressive in many GCs. Is there something diffrent in Omans AI compared to other minors? As I see it there should be more countries acting like Oman.

------------------
When it's time to sleep - I'll sleep.
When it's time to wage war - I'll wage war.

 

[unmerged(594)]

I think the current annex system is really very good. Losing one hundred in relation with every other countries with the same religion.
What I don't like is that this doesn't seem to impact the game so much, I mean in one game I had a relation of -200 with almost every other countries, but none of them declared war with me. So what's the point then about having good relations with other countries, when they can be your worst enemies and still they never consider attacking you.