Balance Peace Options

[Jams5901]

Maybe it’s just me, but it seems odd that in a war, one of three things happen:
1. one side gains something
2. the other side gains something
3. White peace

Historically, it wasn’t so clear cut. A peace treaty could result in one side losing some land, but getting something in return. I know this won’t affect all players, as many see the appeal of eu4 to be just a map painter, in which giving up territory would be unthinkable. It’d just be nice to use some land that you don’t want anymore fro greater bargaining rights.

Provinces would be worth the same of war score as normal, just depending on which side gains or loses it. Ie if I ask for a 10 war score province, but give up a 7 war score one, the total war score would be 3.

I’d imagine other peace options to work the same, but obviously they can’t contradict, (so you can’t vassalize each other or something), however I’m not sure how good would work. There would have to be some check, so a nation can’t just buy their way to victory.

 

[JaxElite]

Full agree. Sadly the gsme and most of the players think in a binary vicrory/defeat way.

The simple purpose of wars in all of human history has been to bring a massive weight to the scale in negotiation. With the single exception of extermination wars. So why should i suddenly lose all other tools of negotiating in war? Basically a "hey i blockade your harbours and ruin your economy. If you accept my earlier offer to buy these provinces now, i will pull off. And if you don't accept i'll take them by force

 

[Jams5901]

Yes I totally agree! While obviously not all players would use it, I also can’t see it being too hard to add in and program. So while it may not be the most popular item to add in, it wouldn’t waste too much dev time, so I don’t really see a reason not to add it. However, there might well be some severe balancing issue that I haven’t thought of.

 

[Nikoleis]

I guess that if your warscore is positive, and you're the one proposing, what you are willing to give could be seen as easily given away anyway, since you direct the transaction, so it could be worth only half the warscore cost. ANd if you're on the losing side, similarly, what you ask your opponent should be worth double. You're not in a good position to negotiate. Finally cost are balanced between 10 and -10, but neither side can obtain provinces, because no one would normally be allowed to anyway. This should make most of the abuse risky or costly, but if that is not enough, maybe giving too much as a winner could get you some prestige, or even stability hit. After all, the way you negotiated it doesn't fit your situation on the terrain, people are going to be worried about your ability to rule competently