I had another war with my Chu Empire to support my Permian tributary in its moronic conquest of Murmansk. And once again I lost most of my troops to 3 things:
1) I can't tell my ally to move his ass to EITHER his wargoal or me. EU IV is eons above CK II in this regard.
2) My allies lands STILL - even in JD - count as HOSTILE holdings. That they should feed allied armies is obvious. Especially in the north this costs you 30% of your troop limit for attrition in already terrible regions. So you effectively lose 50% of your army or march in subpar numbers to a formidable tribal coalition. You can't even conquer it to make it friendly, it is your damn ally!
3) Separate tributary wars. If I only have to follow defensive calls, taking a call to arms shouldn't also add you to all their offensive wars. That should be a SEPARATE call to arms.
In general the diplomacy system of CK II is still terrible. I am off to Africa again. With 200k the only thing stopping me blitzing it is the entire world coalitioning me. Aladdin await.
1) I can't tell my ally to move his ass to EITHER his wargoal or me. EU IV is eons above CK II in this regard.
2) My allies lands STILL - even in JD - count as HOSTILE holdings. That they should feed allied armies is obvious. Especially in the north this costs you 30% of your troop limit for attrition in already terrible regions. So you effectively lose 50% of your army or march in subpar numbers to a formidable tribal coalition. You can't even conquer it to make it friendly, it is your damn ally!
3) Separate tributary wars. If I only have to follow defensive calls, taking a call to arms shouldn't also add you to all their offensive wars. That should be a SEPARATE call to arms.
In general the diplomacy system of CK II is still terrible. I am off to Africa again. With 200k the only thing stopping me blitzing it is the entire world coalitioning me. Aladdin await.
Upvote
0
.png){kind=avatar}
