Well apparently 90% of the CB allow war leader changes, so the issue raised in OP stay intact.
Cascading War Leaders
- Thread starter Darkath
- Start date
-
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.
"You're entirely correct both in your analysis of the mechanics and in the need for analysis on each player's part, but that does not change the fact that either the mechanic was designed to not be known, and then acting on knowing it is an exploit or it was designed to be known or knowable, and then the lack of in-game information is an oversight, and rectifying oversights is desireable in and of itself."
I did state that the game isnt perfect!~
although having the game trace alliance webs for me, would in fact ruin the entire strategy aspects of simply declaring a war for me. Remove the strategy from a strategy game, and what's left?
I like a supprise once in a while... Especially someone who has no allies, signing alliances AFTER I dow and bringing in the big boys. It's fun never being sure.
I did state that the game isnt perfect!~
although having the game trace alliance webs for me, would in fact ruin the entire strategy aspects of simply declaring a war for me. Remove the strategy from a strategy game, and what's left?
I like a supprise once in a while... Especially someone who has no allies, signing alliances AFTER I dow and bringing in the big boys. It's fun never being sure.
All right, so let's say the game does not trace the web, do you agree that it should not KEEP cascading?
And do you agree that the information should be made obviously available in game? (Just like the costs for different war-goals)
Interesting. I did not even know that CBs that disallowed war leader changes were a thing. (Interesting that it isn't listed in, I dunno, 00_cb_types :glare: )
Trial and error is nice and all but the mechanics of this are incredibly opaque, I don't think anyone's would scream and holler if the game warned you about war leader changes.
Looking into it, the CBs that bar war leader changes are also incredibly random. HRE enforcement of religious conformance, revoke electorate, claim throne, liberation war (looking in 00_cb_types this is only from events), it looks like Cleansing of Heresy does it but not Holy War or Excommunication...
Hmm, the Change Government wargoal gets it, is that the one from Revolution and Counter-Revolution, or is it the one that everybody gets against Milan while it's an Ambrosian Republic?
Trial and error is nice and all but the mechanics of this are incredibly opaque, I don't think anyone's would scream and holler if the game warned you about war leader changes.
Looking into it, the CBs that bar war leader changes are also incredibly random. HRE enforcement of religious conformance, revoke electorate, claim throne, liberation war (looking in 00_cb_types this is only from events), it looks like Cleansing of Heresy does it but not Holy War or Excommunication...
Hmm, the Change Government wargoal gets it, is that the one from Revolution and Counter-Revolution, or is it the one that everybody gets against Milan while it's an Ambrosian Republic?
It's not entirely random. It seems to be mostly CBs that enfore something specific to the nation you're attacking. Changing Religion, revoking Electorate, Annexing, Claim Thone, they're all linked in a way.
Yes I 100% agree with cascading alliances and warleaders. If I'm Mr Big dog on the block, and austria dows Slazburg, who is allied to Hungary, who is allied to me, being 15 times his size, I do not want hungary calling the shots....
I would be fine with a little icon for warleader locking CBs, they added icons for everything else...
Not entirely random. Just... very. You can force religion on people who aren't heretics but Holy Wars allow leader changes, as do all the Defender of the Faith CBs even though, when declared against a heretic, that's exactly the same thing as Cleansing of Heresy.
Hmm, although if the war_goal_change_government is indeed a Revolutionary War then that's a big point in its favor after the nerf to its other aspects.
(Another point for opaque mechanics: apparently the Emperor gets a CB on princes that refuse to conform religion. I never knew! The AI certainly never tries. Would be nice to have it written that "you will lose 25 prestige if they say no but also gain a casus belli to force the issue")
Hmm, although if the war_goal_change_government is indeed a Revolutionary War then that's a big point in its favor after the nerf to its other aspects.
(Another point for opaque mechanics: apparently the Emperor gets a CB on princes that refuse to conform religion. I never knew! The AI certainly never tries. Would be nice to have it written that "you will lose 25 prestige if they say no but also gain a casus belli to force the issue")
Last edited:
It's the specific Milan one i think. The Revolution/Counter Revolution is called Revolutionary War and allow war leader change.
What i take from these files, is that hauptmann's point about picking good CBs is moot IMO, because except Cleansing of Heresy, all those CB that ban war leader changes are ultra-specific and are only triggered by events, missions or specific conditions.
"(Another point for opaque mechanics: apparently the Emperor gets a CB on princes that refuse to conform religion. I never knew! Would be nice to have it written that "you will lose 25 prestige if they say no but also gain a casus belli to force the issue")"
Pretty sure that was listed as a CB somewhere at release... I ONLY knew to use it as a CB my first HRE game... didnt know it was better used when you just made nice before hand.
Pretty sure that was listed as a CB somewhere at release... I ONLY knew to use it as a CB my first HRE game... didnt know it was better used when you just made nice before hand.
Hah! I'll bet that was popular with the electors.
I am a little curious why you say that declaring with no CB is better than Conquest, if it's available (you take a stab hit, your allies don't want to join and the Emperor will intervene even if you're part of the Empire and he's your ally, you take almost as much AE as getting caught fabricating...).
I am a little curious why you say that declaring with no CB is better than Conquest, if it's available (you take a stab hit, your allies don't want to join and the Emperor will intervene even if you're part of the Empire and he's your ally, you take almost as much AE as getting caught fabricating...).
Say venice is allied with france but only has venizia left. 15 tax base province = 60 warscore. Would you rather, seige venice's one province then annex for the cost of stab then white peace france, or try to get 60 warscore against france....
There is no "cannot make seperate peace with target of wargoal" when there is no wargoal.
well worth the 60 admin points of a single stab hit (which you get plaugued with anyways).
Excellent point. Just note that this is with Stab cost modifiers and the Diplomacy bonus.
It's still worth it at 200 ADM for two stab hits.
Excellent point. Just note that this is with Stab cost modifiers and the Diplomacy bonus.
If you didnt take diplo and religious, yer still playing the game wrong. =P
I support the suggestions in the original post. Things get too chaotic when the war leader keeps switching and calling in more allies. Sometimes a war without Spain, France, Russia, and the 90k stacks would be refreshing.
I do think withdrawing the "no separate peace with someone you have a wargoal on" rule would be nice. That's been a pet peeve of mine...I declare war on X, Y gets involved, and now I can't cut a peace deal with the guy I started with.
IMO, there should be some mechanic that doesn't always have allies DOW on you if said ally is allied to an ally of your target; perhaps have it weighted differently, or the nation has to make a choice.
Ironically, sometimes the best casus belli is no casus belli. Declaring on your war target is often a complete waste of time if they're allied to someone bigger and especially if they're in a coalition. If you declare war on their allies however, no matter how far away they are and take the stab hit, you magically can separate peace your real wartarget when they join their allies and can evade the coalitions altogether.
I do hate the cascading war leaders with a vengance.
I do hate the cascading war leaders with a vengance.