• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Pellucid

Ottoboos get out! Reeee!
112 Badges
Mar 17, 2005
3.979
4.900
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars Pre-Order
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Knights of Honor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Hearts of Iron 4: Arms Against Tyranny
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
The fact that a wargoal needs to be occupied to force capitulation is absurd, especially combined with the fact that simply not assigning wargoals to one or more participants can force them out of the war.

It makes sense that a nation would be more likely to VOLUNTARILY leave a war when they stand to lose nothing, but what if they stand to GAIN from staying in? Doesn't matter. Has no impact on exhaustion whatsoever.

This is especially absurd when it comes to independence wars. Wanna keep your subject? Just assign no wargoals and set all your armies to defend. Since you have no wargoals on them, their war exhaustion can go below 0 without you doing anything at all. Hell, if they don't have a navy and are overseas, you don't even have to mobilize. They can overrun your entire overseas empire and, as long as you don't personally own much territory over there, it won't matter one bit.

Taking a wargoal should not be a prerequisite for forcing capitulation, it should be an accelerator. And it should be an accelerator for BOTH SIDES, not just the side whose wargoal is occupied. If I hold an enemy province wargoal, my war exhaustion increase should slow down and theirs should speed up.

Maybe you could hybridize the current system with a new one, where once you're at 0 your exhaustion climb dramatically slows down unless your opponent controls a wargoal. Having it utterly halt and making it so that nations can sit in bloody wars of attrition for years with no significant negative effect on their internal stability is ridiculous.
 
  • 9Like
  • 1
Reactions:
When you demand reparations from a country but cannot control any of its integrated territories, the war will last for at least ten years, even if you achieve other goals (such as occupying colonies)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I agree that the current system for war goals is questionable, but a system where war goals could be enforced without occupying them would be even worse.

In my opinion, this is mostly a problem of war goals being too static after the war has started. If I could just abandon war goals I no longer think are achievable in a reasonable amount of time, and if the AI then actually used that opportunity to get out of wars it can't win, the system would immediately work much better.

EDIT: I agree that the way independence wars currently work is bad though. There should be a "Keep as subject" war goal that requires you to occupy something.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I agree that the current system for war goals is questionable, but a system where war goals could be enforced without occupying them would be even worse.
I kind of disagree. If I go to war with Russia and say "I want your Alaskan colony" and then occupy all of mainland Russia, they should be more than happy to cough up that colony in exchange for peace. I think it should just be a lot HARDER to take a wargoal without occupying it.
 
I kind of disagree. If I go to war with Russia and say "I want your Alaskan colony" and then occupy all of mainland Russia, they should be more than happy to cough up that colony in exchange for peace. I think it should just be a lot HARDER to take a wargoal without occupying it.
Point is, the devs already stated their will to add "limited wars", so even your invasion of mainland Russia and loss of hundreds of thousands of men would be unacceptable for your people. The basis is solid, but it needs tweaking.
 
  • 1
Reactions: