AI:"Our army got destroyed, navy sank, and all provinces occupied, but we won't surrender because...

[RadRussian]

... we have a +85 'length of war' modifier in our favor and our ally Mexico has high war enthusiasm so we must be winning this war. Rather than conceding defeat, starting to forge alliances and rebuilding army, we'll try to exhaust an aggressor by doing nothing for next 5 years. It's not like our neighbors will attack us while we are weak, right?"

I don't know what this relatively new addition of not getting full WS because of allies was aiming at but it's hurting the AI more than it hurts player.
Some examples (all screen shots are taken during the late game though):

I wiped an entire Russian army in 2 battles and they still they think they can win.

Danes are sitting at -3 stability, have rebels all over the country, WS is -83% and they still have high war enthusiasm.

Again, the late game is a bad example because I won it a long time ago but in early and mid game, I don't understand how sitting at 20 WE, not developing in any way while your enemy receives your production and trade income will help this nation rebuild itself.

Coalitions will protect this nation from your further agression, you say? Yes, coalitions can slow down player's expansion but there are tons of issues with them.

When I play next to say, Ottomans and they DoW on me with their godly troops, I usually try to stall the war and if it's not possible, give them what they want right away. I know that sitting 5 years at 20 WE won't do me good but I can certainly expand and gain more than I lost during the 15-year truce with AI.

I'm not very familiar with what happened historically when nations lost important battles, but I know that Napoleon destroyed several coalitions by winning battles only.

 

[happymix91]

Because AIs can't think like human beings, so a game needs some restrictions to make them act like a human. These restrictions sometimes make a game weird like your post, but as long as human can't make a perfect AI, we must deal with it.

 

[RadRussian]

Because AIs can't think like human beings, so a game needs some restrictions to make them act like a human. These restrictions sometimes make a game weird like your post, but as long as human can't make a perfect AI, we must deal with it.

That's not what humans do, at least I don't. Say, I lost a major battle and my army got wiped out. Instead of putting myself into debt and driving my inflation, I'd rather give away some land and try to expand more. But AI does nothing. How is it an advantage to them?

 

[Guancyto]

With the Russians, at least, presumably they're thinking they can muster up more bodies to throw at the problem until General Winter takes command.

 

[Vanillamarine]

The AI is programmed to act specifically to hinder human expansion instead of programming it to do what is best for itself. That is the reason you see these weirdo modifiers, at first they might seem proper tools to help the AI but it just means you cannot really make a quick peace with AI nations at all, thats why you simply 100% them all the time.

 

[ChildeR]

You haven't shown anything near what the title states. When you fully occupy someone, they should pretty much always be willing to surrender. Not worth 100% WS, maybe, if the war hasn't gone on long, but some concessions.

 

[ChildeR]

The AI is programmed to act specifically to hinder human expansion instead of programming it to do what is best for itself.

The AI uses the same factors when deciding whether to peace out against AI, so it isn't for hindering *human* expansion. It's for hindering all others' expansion. Which makes sense from a game theory PoV. It may not seem optimal for a single nation to drag the war on, but unless everyone does it the blobs all blob much faster. (Pareto optimality? I forget the terms.)

 

[SaphireSeas]

Firstly your pictures indicate you haven't occupied all of Russia - that's an auto 100% war score. Because the War hasn't lasted long (a few months by the length of war modifier) the Ai is programmed not to give in yet. It is possible that they might get through this in less extreme circumstances.

In short: It's wierd, but there are less extreme circumstances where it can stop the AI giving away a province needlessly.

 

[Thrake]

In highly imbalanced wars as those you've shown, length of war makes for weird behaviour, but in the typical war where it takes a handful years to get the upper hands make the AI much better. I remember EUIII where you could pretty much white peace any ally out because there were not all those modifiers...

Really, the system isn't perfect but it's quite good. Danemark exemple is a bit weird admitedly but I'm sure you can easily get massive concessions by then because relative strength of alliances,... are in your favor. Not 100% but it won't take long before you could (white peace Norway and then they'll realise you occupy like half of ther country).

 

[happymix91]

That's not what humans do, at least I don't. Say, I lost a major battle and my army got wiped out. Instead of putting myself into debt and driving my inflation, I'd rather give away some land and try to expand more. But AI does nothing. How is it an advantage to them?

For reality and lack of great AI system, a game must sacrifice something. This is how simulation in our age works.

In 30 years war, Pfalz lost almost every territories and armies, but didn't accept peace for nearly 30 years. How can a game and AI simulate exact history and human's doing? You must deal with it before the dev can make something great. They want to make a game more historical and realistic, not avoiding doing it, but they simply can't do it now.

 

[Frederick_Will]

Yea, I will admit that seeing a country being beat down with no chance to win but wants to stay in a war for a few years is annoying. Perhaps they will hope someone will come along and attack you, giving them a chance to recover.(or maybe disaters, or rebels, etc.,) Curious as to how quick/long wars will be with the new for mechanics.

The issue is really bad with coalition wars as of late. Due to the large bonus to war enthusiasm, you can get 50%+ warscore on someone, and barely get anything out of it. Lets not forget the other countries who cant peace out. could be 5 or 10 years of sitting fully occupied. What are they there for at that point? i don't see why they cant peace out. Due to enthusiasm, its not like they will want to peace out quickly or give you much. It may be a few years down the road before you could do something useful with them.

 

[GrounchoVilla]

Think of Paraguay during its utterly disastrous war against multiple nations in the 19th century ...

 

[neaiskink]

in case of russia it makes sense; you will see yourself bled dry by attrition.
while surrendering some small stuff would make sense, surendering completely would not.

 

[RadRussian]

Firstly your pictures indicate you haven't occupied all of Russia - that's an auto 100% war score. Because the War hasn't lasted long (a few months by the length of war modifier) the Ai is programmed not to give in yet. It is possible that they might get through this in less extreme circumstances.

In short: It's wierd, but there are less extreme circumstances where it can stop the AI giving away a province needlessly.

Sorry, the title was referring to my first war with GBR. I sank their navy, and they only had 20k of their 100k army at home (AI isn't good with bringing his armies back, but that's a different story) and after I occupied all of their European provinces, I was getting only 33 WS with no ticking WS though because technically I was not blocking his ports.
They had several large CNs as well as Mexico as an ally.

 

[SaphireSeas]

Ah. That explains it. AI sees an ally with untouched army as strong alliance. Also all of those Mexican provinces would have to be occupied to achieve 100% (and all those Brit. Colonies).
From EU4 Wiki (and experience):
All provinces (from all enemies) must be occupied to achieve a total victory.

 

[WeissRaben]

In 30 years war, Pfalz lost almost every territories and armies, but didn't accept peace for nearly 30 years.

...uuuuh. No. The Prince Palatine lost all of his titles in 1622, after Spain and Austria fully occupied Pfalz and Bohemia. He was even banished from the HRE!

 

[RadRussian]

When we talk about it from historical perspective (i'd rather not), then we must also bring up supply lines, the real cost of maintaining an army, the problematic siegeing, etc. I'd much rather prefer the game to deliver better gameplay, not simulation.
What I'm arguing is that the topic, even if it's historical, doesn't make for a good gameplay feature.
We already have coalitions, so you won't blobb faster than you already are. However, it will give AI chance to rebound and expand. Instead, they are just sitting ducks for local rivals.

 

[happymix91]

...uuuuh. No. The Prince Palatine lost all of his titles in 1622, after Spain and Austria fully occupied Pfalz and Bohemia. He was even banished from the HRE!

Yes, but he continuously standed against the emperor(so he shocked and dead after the death of Gustav Adolf, as he lost his hope for regaining his former title) and his son eventually regained electorate.

 

[happymix91]

When we talk about it from historical perspective (i'd rather not), then we must also bring up supply lines, the real cost of maintaining an army, the problematic siegeing, etc. I'd much rather prefer the game to deliver better gameplay, not simulation.
What I'm arguing is that the topic, even if it's historical, doesn't make for a good gameplay feature.
We already have coalitions, so you won't blobb faster than you already are. However, it will give AI chance to rebound and expand. Instead, they are just sitting ducks for local rivals.

It is not only for keep blobbing, but also for compensating bad decision of AI and which can't exactly know their position in wars, and lack of system which provides effective defense without army. Why should Scanderbeg surreder to Osman?

 

[WeissRaben]

Yes, but he continuously standed against the emperor(so he shocked and dead after the death of Gustav Adolf, as he lost his hope for regaining his former title) and his son eventually regained electorate.

One person is free to fight as much as he wants. But the country was fully occupied and partitioned 3 years after the war started.