The issue is well known: PUs white-peaces frustrate players who did not know about it before and allied or attacked future target of PU.
Examples are both PUs created by decisions (like Lithuania) and re-created after failed independence war (like Sweden). I know that this was implemented due to some engine limitations, but I can not recall why exactly, only that it was because allies ... something
So this is my proposal how it could be done, to improve gameplay and histori_whatever.
If you find example which would be impossible to handle, like e.g. country fighting the same war on both sides, please show it, so I might rethink/improve suggestion.
Notation used below: D-Danmark, S -Sweden, P-Poland, L-Lithuania, V- vassals and any other subjects, I-player, other capital letters represent other countries
I will consider situation where future PU junior is war leader, but I believe that proposal below might be extended to other case as well. At first glance I would say that if, say, L is not war leader than current white-peaceing might be correct, to great chargin of Russian minors' players, who might wish to gain independence from Muscovy. On the other hand Lithuania historically had political interests in e.g. Pskov, and Kazimierz/Kazimieras, becoming king of Poland, would wish to continue such war. However Lithuanian example is very specific, and normal game mechanics do not allow for it (ruler of junior country moves to senior country), thus I will concentrate on situation when future junior is war leader.
1st example
so there is war L + A + B vs. I + C + E
P is allied with all above countries and extra to F and G; P can not be in war above on either side because Polish decision has such trigger and if we would consider generic example and PU from restore_cb then P can not DoW L if already at war with/against L
P PUs L and then joinst war as warleader, thus we have
P + V + L + A + B vs. I + C + E
P can call their other allies: A, B, I, C, E are already at this war, still F and G might be called, especially if it is defensive war
This means that L can continue its previous expansion against hordes, although for agressive ,war cb should probably be updated.
2nd example
independence war: S + A + B vs. D + V + C + E
and in parallel (started later) defensive war S + A + B vs. I + F + G
D is allied to C, E, I, F, G and H; D can not be in two wars against S at the same time, thus there is no danger that after succesfull restoration of PU will be at both sides of the same war
So first war concludes with S returning into fold. D joins war against I as warleader:
D + V + S + A + B vs. I + F + G
and as in first example D can call remaining allies, not already participating in this war
It seems to me that this should work, please point out any holes
Examples are both PUs created by decisions (like Lithuania) and re-created after failed independence war (like Sweden). I know that this was implemented due to some engine limitations, but I can not recall why exactly, only that it was because allies ... something
So this is my proposal how it could be done, to improve gameplay and histori_whatever.
If you find example which would be impossible to handle, like e.g. country fighting the same war on both sides, please show it, so I might rethink/improve suggestion.
Notation used below: D-Danmark, S -Sweden, P-Poland, L-Lithuania, V- vassals and any other subjects, I-player, other capital letters represent other countries
I will consider situation where future PU junior is war leader, but I believe that proposal below might be extended to other case as well. At first glance I would say that if, say, L is not war leader than current white-peaceing might be correct, to great chargin of Russian minors' players, who might wish to gain independence from Muscovy. On the other hand Lithuania historically had political interests in e.g. Pskov, and Kazimierz/Kazimieras, becoming king of Poland, would wish to continue such war. However Lithuanian example is very specific, and normal game mechanics do not allow for it (ruler of junior country moves to senior country), thus I will concentrate on situation when future junior is war leader.
1st example
so there is war L + A + B vs. I + C + E
P is allied with all above countries and extra to F and G; P can not be in war above on either side because Polish decision has such trigger and if we would consider generic example and PU from restore_cb then P can not DoW L if already at war with/against L
P PUs L and then joinst war as warleader, thus we have
P + V + L + A + B vs. I + C + E
P can call their other allies: A, B, I, C, E are already at this war, still F and G might be called, especially if it is defensive war
This means that L can continue its previous expansion against hordes, although for agressive ,war cb should probably be updated.
2nd example
independence war: S + A + B vs. D + V + C + E
and in parallel (started later) defensive war S + A + B vs. I + F + G
D is allied to C, E, I, F, G and H; D can not be in two wars against S at the same time, thus there is no danger that after succesfull restoration of PU will be at both sides of the same war
So first war concludes with S returning into fold. D joins war against I as warleader:
D + V + S + A + B vs. I + F + G
and as in first example D can call remaining allies, not already participating in this war
It seems to me that this should work, please point out any holes
Upvote
0