Civil War ruined my country..

[Nimic]

But not the way you might suspect. This was in the middle of a clean-up war with Macedonia, but I had already gotten enough gains so I accepted peace. This was also a very minor rebellion; in fact, at first I didn't know who had rebelled, all my armies seemed still mine. Turns out it was that one Gaul province I had captured, a little away from the rest of my territory. Now, at no point was fighting an issue, there was no way I could lose.

What screwed me over was all the new troops my generals brought forward, in events you have no choice in. It took me a quite a few months to get my armies over to the province and take it, and in that time I got an obscene amount of new troops. Enough that my support limit looked something like 300/53. I couldn't afford to keep them, but neither could I afford to disband them.

Point of the story: Any possibility of adding a second option to the event where your generals bring more armies out? Maybe one thanking them, but saying you don't need them. Maybe even paying them (character wealth) for taking the trouble of finding more troops, or something like that.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Hopefully this is tweaked in a patch, but for the moment, just drop your Army maintenance as far as you can and do your best to kill them off as fast as possible. Attrition should be your friend in this case.

 

[DarthJF]

What was the events name? I've heard such terrible stories about it that I might want to delete it from event list.

 

[unmerged(67329)]

But not the way you might suspect. This was in the middle of a clean-up war with Macedonia, but I had already gotten enough gains so I accepted peace. This was also a very minor rebellion; in fact, at first I didn't know who had rebelled, all my armies seemed still mine. Turns out it was that one Gaul province I had captured, a little away from the rest of my territory. Now, at no point was fighting an issue, there was no way I could lose.

What screwed me over was all the new troops my generals brought forward, in events you have no choice in. It took me a quite a few months to get my armies over to the province and take it, and in that time I got an obscene amount of new troops. Enough that my support limit looked something like 300/53. I couldn't afford to keep them, but neither could I afford to disband them.

Point of the story: Any possibility of adding a second option to the event where your generals bring more armies out? Maybe one thanking them, but saying you don't need them. Maybe even paying them (character wealth) for taking the trouble of finding more troops, or something like that.

Here we go again. look in this thread for official (to me incomprehensible) word on it:
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=351571

Best advice you will get for now is either
-cheat yourself some money to disband

-*dont* end the civil war, lower maintainance and send your troops on suicide missions. the cost to disband gets lower the less troops are alive. and as long as the civil war is ongoing you get money covering your losses. (of course you need to kill them faster than they spawn if you dont end the war...)

(-of course you could presumably also use those troops to conquer an enemy you´d like to get off your back, but for myself, i consider having to get rid of them like this gamey and annoying enough already, so i didnt do it)

 

[mrg220t]

I am in the opposite of you. I was in a war with egypt using seluicid and in the middle of the war, I got into a civil war. I wasn't able to fight two wars at the same time and luckily my general recruited just enough army to beat egypt and win the civil war without going too much over my force limit. What determines how much army did your general raise?

 

[Nimic]

So basically the official word on it is that they're happy with what it does? With all due respect to Paradox, and I've got a lot of respect for Paradox, that is absolute rubbish. This smacks of artificially making a civil war more trouble. I love the civil war feature, but the reason for a civil war being a problem for a nation should be what a civil war actually is; fighting amongst a nations generals. I've also had that before, and I liked it. This I don't like.

I won't cheat myself money, since even though it might be fair and I know it, it'll still bother me for a while eventually resulting in me quitting the game anyway. I might do the other way, but something like that really takes away from the fun of a game I've had a lot of fun with up until that point. I'll probably have to start a new game.

 

[unmerged(67329)]

I might do the other way, but something like that really takes away from the fun of a game I've had a lot of fun with up until that point. I'll probably have to start a new game.

I should mention here that if you lower your maintainance enough you might eventually get some events of mercenaries leaving you for free. In one multiplayer game I had, that was enough to get me to break even together the other measures mentioned (I only had about 60k spawned there, tho).

My other game, i ended shortly after cheating, so i agree thats not a good method .

Anyways, seeing that my prediction is coming true that almost everyone who gets this event will be frustrated by it, i still hope Paradox will reconsider the issue.

 

[Nimic]

I should mention here that if you lower your maintainance enough you might eventually get some events of mercenaries leaving you for free. In one multiplayer game I had, that was enough to get me to break even together the other measures mentioned (I only had about 60k spawned there, tho).

My other game, i ended shortly after cheating, so i agree thats not a good method .

Anyways, seeing that my prediction is coming true that almost everyone who gets this event will be frustrated by it, i still hope Paradox will reconsider the issue.

Thanks, I might try that then. I can see how this could be a real problem in multiplayer.

 

[crazy canuck]

Thanks, I might try that then. I can see how this could be a real problem in multiplayer.

It will be a race to see who can get into a civil war first and then steamroll the rest of the players.

 

[Nimic]

It will be a race to see who can get into a civil war first and then steamroll the rest of the players.

You're right, of course, it won't be a problem because people will lose their economy, but it will be a problem because they'll just attack anything in sight.

 

[crazy canuck]

You're right, of course, it won't be a problem because people will lose their economy, but it will be a problem because they'll just attack anything in sight.

I am not even sure that it would ruin the economy. Just keep one province in rebellion so you get subsidized by the wealthy citizens while your uber army event keeps firing as you mop up the other players.

Its really a huge exploit.

 

[Tayran]

I am not even sure that it would ruin the economy. Just keep one province in rebellion so you get subsidized by the wealthy citizens while your uber army event keeps firing as you mop up the other players.

Its really a huge exploit.

Of course, I didnt even consider the MP effect. I guess the only right thing to do is to delete those events in MP. At least until the issue is fixed.

 

[Nimic]

I am not even sure that it would ruin the economy. Just keep one province in rebellion so you get subsidized by the wealthy citizens while your uber army event keeps firing as you mop up the other players.

Its really a huge exploit.

Yeah, my economy comment was assuming the player ended the civil war, but obviously as you pointed out they wouldn't want to in multiplayer. Not in singleplayer either, I guess, though in a game only for my own benefit I don't think I'd bring myself to exploit it.