+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Inability to press claims or gain territory in a defensive war

  1. #1

    Inability to press claims or gain territory in a defensive war

    I recently started playing a pagan country and have really started to notice something that REALLY annoys me about this game. Being a pagan Kingdom, I am nearly constantly repelling and pushing back Christian invasions, nearly each and everytime I end up moving into their territory and taking a county or two to force them into surrender...

    What do I get for that? NOTHING. Seriously, I am supposed to be happy with the fact they are a little embarrassed (lose prestige) and toss me a few coins? Im supposed to just pack up and go home to the pre-war lines like nothing happened? Its not a white peace... its a surrender. There should be a war score system like other paradox games so the player can get something out of it when they decisively win.

    I know it's a little more complicated then that, with the claim system in this game, but I see no logical reason at all that we can not at the very least press claims (within reason) we do have during these defensive wars, or perhaps gain claims on the territory we did capture for future use. The way it currently works just feels incredibly unrealistic. Think about it... If England invaded France, and France won and pushed them back into the sea and took Normandy, would France just have given it back? Hell no.

  2. #2
    I would argue Victoria 2's War Goal system would be an appropriate solution. Obviously we don't want EU3 style province by province selections because that makes things rather weird.

  3. #3
    EU3 wars, while they make sense, don't work. In EU3 every war between the human and the AI is to the death, with one country absolutely ruined after the war. This is not fun, nor does it result in historical outcomes. CK2's system is fun and results in historical outcomes.

    In CK2 I believe that truces are one-sided, meaning that you can attack your attacker right back. However you still have to reraise your levies and put them on fleets.

    A modified system, where the defender was allowed to add a single war goal, making the war symmetric, would be nice. Then a white peace would be a lost of prestige for both, and the other two outcomes would be each side's war goal.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by HelloGoodSir View Post
    EU3 wars, while they make sense, don't work. In EU3 every war between the human and the AI is to the death, with one country absolutely ruined after the war. This is not fun, nor does it result in historical outcomes. CK2's system is fun and results in historical outcomes.

    In CK2 I believe that truces are one-sided, meaning that you can attack your attacker right back. However you still have to reraise your levies and put them on fleets.

    A modified system, where the defender was allowed to add a single war goal, making the war symmetric, would be nice. Then a white peace would be a lost of prestige for both, and the other two outcomes would be each side's war goal.
    I'd give one exception for the White Peace. If your war goal is the status quo, then it should be much easier to strike peace than if you want something. Clearly you should suffer no prestige loss there.

  5. #5
    Why not just immediately re-declare war after you win?

  6. #6
    Pillager of Treasures
    Rome GoldSengokuVictoria II: Heart of DarknessCK2: Holy KnightEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,317
    Quote Originally Posted by justin6477 View Post
    I would argue Victoria 2's War Goal system would be an appropriate solution. Obviously we don't want EU3 style province by province selections because that makes things rather weird.
    Quote Originally Posted by HelloGoodSir View Post
    A modified system, where the defender was allowed to add a single war goal, making the war symmetric, would be nice. Then a white peace would be a lost of prestige for both, and the other two outcomes would be each side's war goal.
    +1

  7. #7
    Field Marshal
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteHeir to the ThroneVictoria: Revolutions
    Victoria 2

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Abandoned this account
    Posts
    7,729
    Quote Originally Posted by icon41gimp View Post
    Why not just immediately re-declare war after you win?
    +1

    Quote Originally Posted by JalenTigh View Post
    I recently started playing a pagan country and have really started to notice something that REALLY annoys me about this game. Being a pagan Kingdom, I am nearly constantly repelling and pushing back Christian invasions, nearly each and everytime I end up moving into their territory and taking a county or two to force them into surrender...

    What do I get for that? NOTHING. Seriously, I am supposed to be happy with the fact they are a little embarrassed (lose prestige) and toss me a few coins? Im supposed to just pack up and go home to the pre-war lines like nothing happened? Its not a white peace... its a surrender. There should be a war score system like other paradox games so the player can get something out of it when they decisively win.
    [...]
    You seem to not understand how wars work, and how easy it is (against religious enemies) to grab tons of land from a defeated opponent. All that's stopping you is a tiny prestige penalty, and the opinions of the religious enemy's buddies. And who cares about those.

    It is true, that you cannot press territorial claims DIRECTLY when you are winning a war. BUT!!! All you really need to get a hand on those juicy castles you sieged down, is to end the war, disband your levies (and ONLY the levies! not the mercs, not the religious orders) and immediately re-declare war. Who cares if you break a truce? Only the people who share *HIS* religion. Not the people who share yours. Your vassals, your religious head, your clerics all don't give a damn! The prestige penalty is laughable for anyone above count level.

    So when your re-raised troops arrive again at the provinces they sieged just weeks before, those juicy castles are still at best manned by 50 or 100 men. You can tear through them with assaults in no time.

    Might be that it is a bit of a hassle, when you are attacking from long distance, across oceans and all that. But if you really want that land, even then it's not that difficult. Make peace, disband the troops where they stand (this means you only get back half the manpower, but if you've been fighting the war for some time, then the holdings will have replenished the levies many times over already), re-declare war, re-raise levies, ship them over, assault his castles and you're done. It takes only 3-4 months to sail from one end of the map to another, so even if you're in Scandinavia and the enemy is in Palestine, he will not have enough time to recover.

    This game REALLY does not need war goals. War goals in Victoria II aren't much fun (need Jingoism to escalate a war?? Hello??) and unneccessarily complex.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts