lols!
..ehhmm question about claims : Do they have any relation to Core's in EUIII?
The point is that I've lost a strategic asset, and therefore, all else equal, I am less likely to win, and consequently less likely to attack, than I was previously.
Except that a single claim is worth the same as 10.
Question about claims : Do they have any relation to Cores in EUIII?
That is the point on which you are mistaken.
If you haven't figured it out, I'm not going to tell you. I observe in passing that belief in some sense is its own reality: If I believe that I am weaker through lacking these claims, then I am less likely to attack even if I'm objectively wrong.
It is a precedent of attacking a power until it is annexed. Also it is a precedent of you being the only one here who whines and cries. Even Ike took his annexation just fine.
That is the point on which you are mistaken.
In the converter, no. In being slightly similar as a game mechanic, yes.
So claims won't convert to anything in EUIII? -But in CK they give something like Casus Belli and perhaps a slightly better use of annexed territory? Or even open up the possibility of annexing said territory? (You can hear from my questions that I do not play CK, can't you? )
You're such a troll yoshi
my own personal home troll
You cannot annex a province unless you have a claim on it. Claims cost prestige and reputation to get.
let's see if I understand : With a claim you can annex a single province (?) while at war with the controlling king...without you can only control it, and hope to get it with peacedeal?
Yes, because nobody has any great sympathy for the biggest power being reduced to, oh the horror, the second-biggest power. That's Realpolitik for you!
Whats an FoCoG?