Agressive Expansion Impact on Stability

[Linusz]

Does anyone else find the impact of aggressive expansion on stability a bit too harsh?

I am sitting on ~ 30 AE and my stability has a monthly tick of -0.17 while being at ~40 (one sacrifice). I am integrating a culture though, which means normally it should be +0.03. But still, this seems a little harsh to me, as it means 50 stab is not possible with one sacrifice and 30 AE. In return, this would mean massive PI input into sacrifices to keep up with high AE.

Another lesson learned: Don't integrate cultures while at high AE!

 

[Hemothep]

I would find it better if the stab hit only applied above 50 AE, like primary culture happiness in 1.4.2.
This is the classical era after all. Sucessfully conquering other people was a source of pride for many people. Only if they experience the turmoils of war themselves it made them call for peace and we got exactly that through war exhaustion.

 

[Harlehus]

Take this with a grain of salt since i haven't played Menander yet and haven't had a feel of this new mechanic yet, so i might be totally wrong. But surely a stability hit for aggressive expansion is a good mechanic? What is stopping you from enacting laws and ideas etc. that ticks down your AE faster?

 

[Linusz]

Take this with a grain of salt since i haven't played Menander yet and haven't had a feel of this new mechanic yet, so i might be totally wrong. But surely a stability hit for aggressive expansion is a good mechanic? What is stopping you from enacting laws and ideas etc. that ticks down your AE faster?

Basically I agree, the idea in itself is good and fits the system. I just find the amount of "tick" too harsh. But perhaps it just does not fit my playstyle. I used to expand aggressively always hitting for 50 AE to have a more efficient down-tick, min-max-ing AE. This far less viable now.

 

[toxicgrunt]

I have put a ton of hours into this patch, I believe that expansion may have been nerfed a bit too much for what this game used to be.

Its is very hard to expand now, everyone is unhappy, your stability is shot, the culture mechanics are not enough to do anything because many cultures exist in only one province and integrating them demolishes your capital culture. Compare this to being able to expand at 100 AE last patch

While I love the idea that internal stability is in the forefront now, but id be surprised if "skill" campaigns are feasible anymore, like the opm-> WC, Vassal->WC stuff you get in EU4. I havnt tried but I assume a WC outside of Diadochi is not probable

 

[Jays298]

Take this with a grain of salt since i haven't played Menander yet and haven't had a feel of this new mechanic yet, so i might be totally wrong. But surely a stability hit for aggressive expansion is a good mechanic? What is stopping you from enacting laws and ideas etc. that ticks down your AE faster?

The problem is that there is also a civil war threshold tick with AE now.

Time will tell how manageable these are.

I think it's the right idea, maybe wrong implementation.

I think they should have done a "wrong culture" negative provincial loyalty instead.

And save negative stability for empire size powers, maybe. Or change the "center point" of stability lower based on AE.

So instead of always ticking lower it might want to settle on 40 stability instead of 50.

 

[Harlehus]

I guess i will have to actually play the new patch in order to meaningfully comment on a matter like this. But, in theory at least, these changes seems ideal to me since in the last patch i limited my expansion quite heavily since the game is so easy and given that there was almost no penalty for expanding it almost felt like cheating to expand at a normal rate.

 

[Less2]

Don't really see how a stability hit from AE is justified logically. Pop happiness was bad enough (primary pops should always be happy at successful expansion, and even wrong culture pops shouldn't particularly care if they've been in the empire for 100 years and the newly conquered lands were a thousand miles away), but stability makes event less sense. Rome maintained roughly the same borders for a long, long time, yet it certainly had stability issues. Same for other empires.

 

[DystopianAlphaOmega]

It’s a hard balance to get really. I mean, Rome expanded at an absolutely ridiculous rate, but everyone else just didn’t for the most part (except maybe the tail end of the Diadochi Wars and those outside the Mediterranean like Maurya and Parthians). It’s difficult to model both well.

 

[MohawkWolfo98]

It’s a hard balance to get really. I mean, Rome expanded at an absolutely ridiculous rate, but everyone else just didn’t for the most part (except maybe the tail end of the Diadochi Wars and those outside the Mediterranean like Maurya and Parthians). It’s difficult to model both well.

Maybe the way to remedy this is maybe giving us new CBS which require much less war score to take provinces. The legacy of Alexander CB was a good step.

 

[Haresus]

The weird thing is that War Exhaustion has no direct impact on stability, I've had 30 war exhaustion for years (a war went horribly wrong) while having 70 stability without any real issues. Sure, it does cause a lot of unhappiness which eventually leads to provinces splitting off and then immediately being conquered back, but stability was high the whole time!

Surely war exhaustion should drive down stability, not aggressive expansion?

At the same time though, integrating new provinces to your empire would probably be somewhat destabilising, regardless of whether the war was bloody or not.

 

[Kill_off1004]

it´s way too much - 15 AE equals one pig stab which is base 50PI, 30AE equals 120PI already. And low stability affects every pop no mater the culture or integration, then you get another -10% happiness for the culture you´re at war with. In 1.4 I did a Mare Nostrum and later I had to stay at around 70AE all the time to conquer enough, I´m not sure if that would be even possible now, but even if it is, it would be no fun at all - don´t get me starting on trying a WC....

 

[Hemothep]

Another good solution would be to make AE lower non-integrated culture happiness instead of stability.
I mean realy: What roman senator was furious about romes fast successfull conquests?

 

[trjacobin]

Another good solution would be to make AE lower non-integrated culture happiness instead of AE.
I mean realy: What roman senator was furious about romes fast successfull conquests?

Many actually. After Rome annexed swathes of northern Africa and Greece, there were many senators who were worried that Rome was being 'polluted' by Greek and other 'decadent' cultures. The optimates here, for example, should really only care about their own internal political standing, and not expansion. Hell, they even hated other Italic tribes and didn't give them almost any representation until much much later (Socii wars).