Willingness to Accept a Call to Arms Should Have More Modifiers--Specifically Distance.

[ENFP]

I think a lot of the problems with abusing alliances in game would be solved if willingness to accept a call to arms scaled with how far the recipient's capital is from the CB target. This would not be too hard to implement, no? Anyone else agree? What other modifiers would you add to help make alliances more reasonable?

 

[prismaticmarcus]

Sorry, what's the problem that needs solving? What do you mean by 'abusing alliances?'

 

[peteoj]

Sorry, what's the problem that needs solving? What do you mean by 'abusing alliances?'

One thing that trivializes game difficulty is the ease by which the player can rely on their much more powerful allies, making It slightly more difficult to call them to war would incentivize the player to focus on making themselves more powerful and actually interacting with the games mechanics more. It would also make it less ridiculous to seeing far off allies drop everything to support your war that doesn't affect them at all.

 

[MyLordFellington]

Yea... diplomacy aspect is lacking. While I dislike Victoria 3, the AI does have motives or weights in why it might join in a war to help you. They should take inspiration. I don't think CK3 has any of this... distance could be one factor, but I think you'd need to have a better diplomacy system than just opinion modifiers.

Allies are way too loyal in this game. They will march across Eurasia to help you out.

 

[ENFP]

Sorry, what's the problem that needs solving? What do you mean by 'abusing alliances?'

I was suggesting that alliances at present are a bit too strong for the player--specifically that AI acceptance on call to arms is a bit too trivial. I think it should be pretty hard to call in the Latin Emperor into my war for Ulster. Right now the game does not differentiate between that war and one in Anatolia--I think it should.

 

[The Shacks]

I was suggesting that alliances at present are a bit too strong for the player--specifically that AI acceptance on call to arms is a bit too trivial. I think it should be pretty hard to call in the Latin Emperor into my war for Ulster. Right now the game does not differentiate between that war and one in Anatolia--I think it should.

Some better logic on all this would only help the AI too. It wages total war for peripheral wars or for minor ally wars across the continent. Large entities like the ERE get really bogged down by this and sometimes death spiral cos of it.

 

[ray243]

Some better logic on all this would only help the AI too. It wages total war for peripheral wars or for minor ally wars across the continent. Large entities like the ERE get really bogged down by this and sometimes death spiral cos of it.

So large ally might only be willing to send a certain percentage of the total military forces available. Byzantine might be willing to send 1k men out of its total army of 10K men as an example.

 

[The Shacks]

Yep, I have wondered why CK3 doesent have something like this for a long time. How does EU4 have a more nuanced nation/ally AI than anything in CK when CK is meant to be a simulation much more allegedly.

 

[ENFP]

So large ally might only be willing to send a certain percentage of the total military forces available. Byzantine might be willing to send 1k men out of its total army of 10K men as an example.

This would be a very cool way to handle it, but definitely way more complicated than what I suggested. Maybe it could be pulled off though! I would love to see a similar system for all the historical GRTS games!

 

[ray243]

This would be a very cool way to handle it, but definitely way more complicated than what I suggested. Maybe it could be pulled off though! I would love to see a similar system for all the historical GRTS games!

What we need a warfare system where an AI isn't just sending entire army of its empire to help a small ally. There should be some sort of way to indicate how many spare troops they might commit to an ally in an area.

You still need to ensure you have plenty of troops on other borders of your empire. Maybe big empires will generally only chose to send the troops from a sector close to their ally for help. With big internal debates about having to send more troops if that is not enough.

 

[Athius]

I love this idea!

 

[Sarsante]

I agree something should be done but it's tricky to do it without making it worse for the AI.

Only time AI ever declares a war is when by sheer luck they've like 4-5 alliances, so if we nerf what players can do how that change would affect AI?

I really think changes to alliances should be a player only thing or maybe like add a cooldown to call for offensive wars so it wouldn't cripple the AI.

 

[Beauarien]

Alliances should even have levels; we can imagine that at the first level, your ally only sends a small reinforcement, and as you progress, they care more about your victory.

 

[Emperor 1997]

I think a lot of the problems with abusing alliances in game would be solved if willingness to accept a call to arms scaled with how far the recipient's capital is from the CB target. This would not be too hard to implement, no? Anyone else agree? What other modifiers would you add to help make alliances more reasonable?

Strong Realms should not be able to be called into an War, where the Attacker has less Troops than the Defender.
This happens to me, more than enough, the AI use my Power, to declare an War for an random County.

I agree something should be done but it's tricky to do it without making it worse for the AI.

Only time AI ever declares a war is when by sheer luck they've like 4-5 alliances, so if we nerf what players can do how that change would affect AI?

I really think changes to alliances should be a player only thing or maybe like add a cooldown to call for offensive wars so it wouldn't cripple the AI.

No, it should affect AI too, because the AI is abusing Alliances too, by declaring Wars they can not win on their own.


Marriage should first result in an non-aggression Pact, between the 2 Realms and Alliances should be negotiated, via Interaction.

 

[Sarsante]

Strong Realms should not be able to be called into an War, where the Attacker has less Troops than the Defender.
This happens to me, more than enough, the AI use my Power, to declare an War for an random County.

No, it should affect AI too, because the AI is abusing Alliances too, by declaring Wars they can not win on their own.


Marriage should first result in an non-aggression Pact, between the 2 Realms and Alliances should be negotiated, via Interaction.

AI barely does anything, making it harder for it to use alliances ultimately will just make the game even easier and boring.

 

[Greifental]

Maybe we just need a reduced diplomatic range.

 

[newtlord]

AI barely does anything, making it harder for it to use alliances ultimately will just make the game even easier and boring.

One of the reasons that the AI barely does anything is that potentially powerful AI rulers waste their strength fighting pointless wars on behalf of irrelevant allies, so limiting such wars might allow them to fight more of their own wars instead, and thereby allow them to grown and pose more of a challenge to the player. In other Paradox games, the AI logic is much more likely to support its allies in a defensive war than in an offensive one, so this wouldn't necessarily keep them from interfering with player attacks, but it would help keep them from committing all their strength to aid a minor relative in his petty conquests.

 

[Emperor 1997]

AI barely does anything, making it harder for it to use alliances ultimately will just make the game even easier and boring.

Talk this to an certain Count, I am currently allied, the Count has started 2 Wars in a very short Time Period.


The AI is very active, if they have superior Power or are allied to someone with superior Power.

 

[Sarsante]

Talk this to an certain Count, I am currently allied, the Count has started 2 Wars in a very short Time Period.


The AI is very active, if they have superior Power or are allied to someone with superior Power.

only noticeable changes on the map are caused by conquerors otherwise most of the time I could swear there is no AI on the map.

new game: https://prnt.sc/Paxrmaxa1XFa

24 years into the game: https://prnt.sc/l_RtqQd_3_Zd

wow Seljuks conquered like 2 duchies, Byzantines conquered 1 county, France vassalized Brittany, HRE didn't do anything as usual, William conquered England and pressed his wife claim on Flanders which it's the only surprising thing not made by a conqueror on the map. Such massive changes.