Wich Paradox game has the most interesting, most deep and challenging Diplomacy?

[Typ87]

I love forming alliances for example or earning trust from my allies over the time, doing contracts and agreements, or incite Nations against each other.
Wich game has the deepest diplomancy? HON4 is kinda dull in this term for example.

 

[Empire of Terra Nova]

eu4 for single player

stellaris for mp. not necessarily the inciting nations againat each other stuff, but the galactic community (basically a space un) mechanics are very fun, especially against human players (but are ok against the ai too)

 

[Arizal]

EUIV hands down. CK3 has potential, but as long as they keep the CK2 limited war options, it will stay less powerful than EUIV. Stellaris strangely had a regressive evolution. It started with a diplomatic system close to EUIV and somehow it was destroyed and replaced with a three buttons war system. For diplomacy, federations block a lot of diplomacy and the fact that allies are forced to go to war and there aren't that many diplomatic option make it less interesting overall.

 

[Typ87]

Im a bit dissapointed that Stellaris hasnt that much Diplomancy too offer. Thought it improved with the latest Add-Ons. I was thinking about to get those last 2 Add-Ons wich i miss for the game in order to play it again. But when i read what you write about EU4 having much more to offer in this term, maybe i should geht those Add-Ons missing in that game instead. I just love complex diplomancy with Bounds, Allies, loality, Betrayel, inciting and stuff like that.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

Vic 3 looks promising in that regard, from everything we know so far. But as this is still in development I'd say EU IV.

CK 2 (and 3) should be mentioned as forming alliances etc by marriage gives a new twist to the diplomacy game as children you can marry off to "random" people are a limited asset and any pacts may expire by the death of people, not nations.

 

[woa12]

I love forming alliances for example or earning trust from my allies over the time, doing contracts and agreements, or incite Nations against each other.
Wich game has the deepest diplomancy? HON4 is kinda dull in this term for example.

I can't tell you the deepest diplomacy but the most shallow is definitely Stellaris even with the expansions that tried to make it more interesting.

 

[Centurial]

Part of Stellaris' diplomacy problem is that it seems like most other empires you run into either hate you so much that they refuse to negotiate or love you so much that an alliance can go as far as the player wants to take it. There's not much inter-tangling alliances or agreements outside of all that.

That being said I don't think it's a terrible thing since the empires of Stellaris have a lot more personality and are more interesting compared to how they work in all the other space 4x's I've played.


(Also yeah, I'd say EU4 hands down for the OP)

 

[Kovax]

I think the player needs to specify whether that's single-player diplomatic options, or multi-player options. Stellaris seems to have quite a bit for multi-player, but for any MEANINGFUL SP diplomacy, it looks like you'll have to wait for Victoria 3, which might end up as a significant improvement over EU4 or CK2/3.

Diplomacy was a bad joke in both HOI3 and 4.

 

[Kazanov]

EU4 has the best diplomacy of all Paradox games until Victoria 3 comes.

 

[Kovax]

Even EUIII had fairly extensive diplomatic options, including the requested trust building over time and mutual actions, as well as many ways to build or tear down Relations. Unfortunately, those mattered very little when it came time for the AI to decide what to do, because the Random Number Generator overrode just about all other concerns.

For example: Two big countries are at war, and one is getting the snot beat out of it, with its armies basically wiped out, half of its provinces already occupied, and the rest under siege. The losing country asks a small country for an alliance, despite TERRIBLE Relations, nothing to gain from the deal, and the fact that they were at war with each other only a year or two before. The small country gladly accepts (because the RNG says so) and joins the war, getting itself pounded flat in a matter of weeks. Duh. The bad relations didn't matter, the low trust didn't matter, the surrender progress of the war didn't matter, but the RNG certainly did. There's a difference between "deep" diplomacy and "credible" diplomacy.