AE - A literate and exhaustive rework suggestion

[AKronblad]

You got it backwards. The size of the TARGET is important, not the attcker. Attacking a smaller target gives more/full AE, attacking a big target gives less AE.
So, France conquers Italian minors? RALLY THE TROOPS!
Tuscany drops the hammer on France? Let's have a sip of wine and watch.

Shouldn't it be the DIFFERENCE (or RATIO) in size between ATTACKER and TARGET that matters? Basically the larger this variable, the larger the AE.

Also, maybe you mentioned it too, but DoW should potentially also incur AE, if a special CB or in lacking CB.
I really like your post and your ideas in total though.

 

[Alblaka]

If anyone is interested, I have been tweaking the Outraged AI Attitude in my current game and I think I have an interesting balance, but I need help testing it as I tend to not go on massive conquering sprees.

My version of Outraged is based far more on Threat and Relative Strength rather than AE. Countries that are stronger than the target will generally not enter into a Coalition, if they are vastly larger they almost assuredly will not. Also, the further away the Target is the less likely a country is to enter into a Coalition.

I just recently added a block of HRE specific checks that make HRE states both more likely to join a coalition just as a baseline, but also more likely to join against people who own non-core HRe land. This goes doubly for Foreigners and Doubly for The Emperor Himself! In fact, HRE states are more likely to join Coalitions against Foreign Countries and the Emperor in general. Please pay attention to how this impacts Burgundy, because by the time I implemented it the inheritance event had already fired. I will be paying attention to how the states react to me being the Emperor. And pretty soon I'm going to see how they react to me annexing two Dutch Vassals....

Also I completely and totally stole the Ignore Attitude from Veritas et Fortitudo. Credit where its do, that is a very elegant way of creating a distant modifier.

Download

So far the effects have been interesting. England and Provence are in an effectively permanent Coalition against France, with me (Austria) being allied to both. The Ottomans haven't expanded much but even when they annexed three provinces from Byzantium they only got Hungary into a Coalition. Now Hungary has been beaten down and The Mameluks are alone in a Coalition against them. Sweden and The Hansa were in a Coalition against a massive Denmark for a while. Oh and when Serbia annexed Bosnia they got no Coalition, and even after taking a chunk of Croatia from both Hungary and Venice they didn't get a Coalition. All of their neighboring powers are too strong to need a Coalition (The Ottomans) or are focusing on The Ottomans (Hungary). Italian states? They didn't give a damn (well Venice probably did but I was occupying them completely and they were alone in a Coalition against me so they didn't really have any opportunity to do anything).

This definitely sounds interesting, I will give it a try in my next HRE game.

In that case, if I have claims on 3 provinces of my target, my CB should be able to encompass all the land I want rather than forcing me to pick just one.

I think this was still implied. He just meant to say "if you only have a claim for one province, and then declare a conquest for your claims, you should only be able to take that one province."

lol, they have avoided dynamic AE since relase, dynamic AE is exactly what the system needs. as the OP state, only static modifiers IS NOT enough.

I just hope Paradox sees reason as well and considers our suggestion/plea.

Shouldn't it be the DIFFERENCE (or RATIO) in size between ATTACKER and TARGET that matters? Basically the larger this variable, the larger the AE.

Not necessaryly.
The main point of the concept "AE sales antiproportionally with target size" is meant to have two effects:
-Attacking nations weaker then yourself (aka small) induces more/normal AE, as it seems like bullying.
-Attacking a large blob induces less AE, because the blob is 'less affected' by losing some provinces and as well it probably wasn't bullying, but more of a 2 fair rivals beating each other's heads in (Which is more likely something endorsed by other powers, as long as the power balance isn't tilted too far).

 

[Aaron1818]

+1

 

[srd5090]

Great ideas OP, might make a good mod. As for Paradox...

"hurr durr theses changes would change too much of the game's functions so we aren't doing it, NOT GON' HAPPEN"

*Proceeds to change too much of the game's functions every patch*

 

[mozgriken]

Great post, feedbacks, and follow-ups...easily the most genuine attempt at a constructive dialogue as I have encountered on any gaming forum in my experience... no wonder it went 6 pages w/ no dev commentary.