An option to 'declare neutrality'

[jjake101]

Requirements
- Stability = 3+
- Legitimacy = 80+
- Prestige = 80+
- 500 Diplomatic points (increases 50% each time you declare neutrality)
- Diplomatic tech = 10 (just so your not spamming neutrality declarations for the whole game)
- Not at war for at least 10 years
- Has no current truces
- Not at Empire rank
- Not a subject nation

Result
- No country who has there capital on the same continent as you will be able to declare war on you without an absolutely huge aggressive expansion penalty that'll be enough to trigger giant coalitions against them. This same rule applies to you, you will not be able to declare war on another country who has there capital on the same continent as yours without an absolutely colossal amount of aggressive expansion (you will also lose your 'neutral' status. Any nation you have a Defense Guarantee with will also attack you if you are the aggressor)

- You have a new diplomatic option called 'Defense Guarantee'. For example lets say I'm playing as Brittany and declare neutrality, I could then ask France for a Defense Guarantee if they accept they will (without question) join a war on my side if I am attacked (even if they are allied to the enemy).

- Cost of production and maintenance of land units will also increase. Your manpower will also be severely crippled (people living in a neutral country see no reason to fight)

- This neutrality lasts for 25 (is 50 years to long?) years

 

[Mailosz]

It could be exploitable for: Russia and every country on border between Asia and Europe.

 

[ragingrondo12]

Unrealistic. Besides this provides next to no advantages for the nation that declares it. 500 Dip, increasing exponentially., with +3 stab... for that cost there is no point in doing it, especially when you get maintenance and production, and Manpower costs. Until this does something valuable, there is no point in adding it. Especially since the AI is loath to attack you unless you are extremely weak compared to them. And the feature is useless for MP as players dont care about AE.

 

[jjake101]

Unrealistic.

Switzerland would like a word with you... (Neutral since 1815. Within EU4's timeframe)

Besides this provides next to no advantages for the nation that declares it.

If your a smaller/weaker country next to a larger/powerful one, it could be a life saver...

especially when you get maintenance and production, and Manpower costs.

If your not gonna be going to war anytime soon... you wont really need troops or manpower anyway...

And the feature is useless for MP as players dont care about AE.

Sooo... people in multiplayer don't care if the ai forms massive coalitions against them....?

 

[SanX]

My question is; what are you going to do in the meantime being neutral? And why should any AI nation help you, knowingly you won't become any larger or a help in any of their wars?

 

[bzflater]

people in multiplayer don't care if the ai forms massive coalitions against them....?

AI nations are usually nearly extinct in the early 16th century. Whatever is left isn't enough to form anything resembling a coalition even if you get 500 AE.

 

[ragingrondo12]

Switzerland would like a word with you... (Neutral since 1815. Within EU4's timeframe)

Yeah, six years fro the time frame justifies ts placement in game.

If your a smaller/weaker country next to a larger/powerful one, it could be a life saver...

If you are a smaller nation next to an aggressive AI nation (which most really aren't) and you have no allies which to protect you or dont have massive development by the time you reach dip tech 10 (1520 ish) then the neutrality policy won't do anything, because in 50 years of gameplay, you haven't for what ever reason decided to grow stronger/expand.

If your not gonna be going to war anytime soon... you wont really need troops or manpower anyway...

... If you dont have troops or manpower, you're only raising the AI's willingnss to KO you. To plan not to be in war is ridiculous and if you are allied to an AI nation, unrealistic, So if you want to sit around and do nothing but tech up, then you're better off not playing eu4.

Sooo... people in multiplayer don't care if the ai forms massive coalitions against them....?

AI nations are consolidated by 1500. Players, who are your opponents in MP dont care about AE.

 

[Bas Agus Buaidh]

I think the idea is sound, but I think the method is flawed.

Personally, I believe in a change in the alliance system, whereby defensive and full military alliances are available. Cut the number of relations by 75% or 50%, however guaranteeing or defensive alliances only count as 50% of a relation. Therefore you start with two relations and can have two full allies, or four defensive allies.

This would effectively render a country as neutral, such a Switzerland, should it have purely defensive allies. Defensive allies territory should be much more expensive to occupy, in the same way non-belligerents are presently.

 

[Mattius]

Maybe you could declare neutrality in the league war.

 

[ShadowCammy]

I feel like that the conditions are a bit... expensive and unnecessary.
Switzerland declared neutrality almost directly after war with France. So the 10 years at peace should maybe be one or none at all.
Prestige should be dropped as well, since I'd imagine Switzerland never was a very prestigious nation if seen from the EU4 perspective, especially after losing a war.
Then you'd need to drop the "no truces". Even if you keep the no war for 10 years idea, then you may still have a truce afterwards.

Perhaps it should be put like this:
Stability = 3
Legitimacy >= 80/Republican Tradition >= 80
150 dip for declaring
Military tech. <= continental average (To show inability to fight other nations properly)
Aggressive expansion < 5 (So you can't take a lot of land and then suddenly declare neutrality)

Lasts as long as you want until you come out of neutrality.
Coming out would give you:
-3 stability
+2 unrest

 

[ragingrondo12]

I feel like that the conditions are a bit... expensive and unnecessary.
Switzerland declared neutrality almost directly after war with France. So the 10 years at peace should maybe be one or none at all.
Prestige should be dropped as well, since I'd imagine Switzerland never was a very prestigious nation if seen from the EU4 perspective, especially after losing a war.
Then you'd need to drop the "no truces". Even if you keep the no war for 10 years idea, then you may still have a truce afterwards.

Perhaps it should be put like this:
Stability = 3
Legitimacy >= 80/Republican Tradition >= 80
150 dip for declaring
Military tech. <= continental average (To show inability to fight other nations properly)
Aggressive expansion < 5 (So you can't take a lot of land and then suddenly declare neutrality)

Lasts as long as you want until you come out of neutrality.
Coming out would give you:
-3 stability
+2 unrest

They're expensive, unnecessary and give no realistic gameplay bonus or reason to be used.

 

[ShadowCammy]

They're expensive, unnecessary and give no realistic gameplay bonus or reason to be used.

Well does neutrality in real life have any real bonuses either or reasons to be declared other than not wanting to be messed with by foreign powers?

 

[Pigeoncount]

I don't see how this could work well, or be fun.

 

[ragingrondo12]

Well does neutrality in real life have any real bonuses either or reasons to be declared other than not wanting to be messed with by foreign powers?

Because this isnt real life, it's a game. therefore all things added to the game should have a solid gameplay value.

Gameplay>reality, unless you're advertising a completely realistic political simulator, which EU4 is not.

 

[Bas Agus Buaidh]

I think the issue with the idea of neutrality is one that doesn't fall within the parameters of EU4. Perhaps I'm a little too focussed on Switzerland/WW2, but neutrality seems to me to be a nation state issue. Real national identity didn't become a 'thing' until the 19th century, and the idea of being neutral is something philosphical, rather than tactical.