Essential Improvements of War Mechanism

[Rinyee]

1. The game should incorporate an weighted algorithm based on economic base, military strength, prestige to determine the war leader. Therefore, occasion like Trier negotiates peace in a defensive war on behalf of England, France, Austria and Brandenburg won't happen again. Consider the WW2, Germany first declared war upon Poland, but it was never Poland's turn to make peace.

2. Ally's request to join offensive war should never pop up randomly. I had encountered sudden ally's request to join offensive war numerous times when either I was busy with my own wars or my troops were not properly stationed for the battle. A collaborative offensive war should always be discussed and planed in advance, player should have the option to decide a future date with the AI to launch the war. I understand it sounds complicated, but I already know some simple way for player to discuss the date with the AI and for the AI to discuss with other AI allies. It is all about how you design the algorithm.

3. There should be an option for the leading country to designate a province (or three neighboring provinces) as aggregation point. There should be an option for the leading country to request a certain amount of the allies forces to follow one of its army as well. This suggestion is to resolve the situation when all allies forces are scattered and destroyed one by one. For example, I had a war with ottoman once and it had 80+ ships, and my coalition had 60 ~70 ships as well. However, all ottoman ships moved together and I was never able to confront it with my 30+ ships. As mentioned above, detailed algorithm can be discussed in details later.

 

[Martin_Mortyry]

A collaborative offensive war should always be discussed and planed in advance, player should have the option to decide a future date with the AI to launch the war. I understand it sounds complicated, but I already know some simple way for player to discuss the date with the AI and for the AI to discuss with other AI allies. It is all about how you design the algorithm.

Well, creators of Civilization managed this mechanics pretty well, why wouldn't Paradox? On all the other things I also highly agree, especially the aggregation points.

 

[Durnilhas]

I agree with the war leader and.. not. I think you should add a rules like :
the agressive country that start the war should block some provinces or minimum warscore, something that the war leader has to take for him in a peace deal. If not the war leader (if AI) will do nothing for you !! Imagine as aragon you attack castille and you ask help to france, if france take the lead of the war you will be upset...

Ally's request to join offensive war should never pop up randomly

Yes AI often ask you to join war when you are not ready. But currently i think the AI algorithme are based on data for the current time T. They probably use some parameter like manpower/war exaustion/number of soldier/income/stability/number of loan or, even if you are at war, using your ennemy information to decide if you are able to win and join his war. While you, as human, decide on subjective opinion and futhermore you can plan and anticipate action.

But the AI algo based on instant data decision brings 2 problems

Second proposal :

• AI can't stop "randomly" ask you to join a war since you probably be able to manage it. No to "consider" yourself ready for another war does not mean you CAN'T do it. You probably prefer to use AI that let them using you. But beside i give those arguments I totaly agree with your point of view ! An interface wich ask a planned war to ally could be interesting but i think it couldn't be done with AI. And with player there is chat (wich does not prevent kid to launch war without telling you)

• You ask to paradox to make algorithm that plan futur... I don't think they can do that. It's pretty hard to do some AI like that. You asking for a human like AI.

There should be an option for the leading country to designate a province (or three neighboring provinces) as aggregation point

It's a good idea. Or something to lead a little more the AI wich is often splited everywhere and can be stack wiped even when ennemy is outnumbered.

 

[grommile]

1. The game should incorporate an weighted algorithm based on economic base, military strength, prestige to determine the war leader.

You are asking for the reversal of a deliberate change that was made to remove a much-hated aspect of the alliance system.

 

[ozyhuboi]

Hell, I've always believed peaces should be more collaborative instead of unilateral. This could prevent small countries from simply taking advantage the power of large countries and large countries from taking advantage of the expansion options/CB opportunities of small countries. I was thinking that at least on player-AI interaction, there should be for some way for the player to sort of mark the options they want when they are an ally in a war so they don't get stuck with too much or being taken advantage of and getting nothing.

In the long-term, such a system could could also be used between AIs after much work and testing and if certain members of the alliance are unsatisfied and in a strong position, they could simply take their ball and go home, making a separate peace.