Ideas for more Peacetime benefits

[Diogeneticist]

Everyone knows that peace in EU4 is dull and fairly pointless, everyone would rather be at war. So, I'm suggesting that there should be a mechanic, similar to the disaster system, that gives bonuses of stability, monarch power, base tax or manpower increases. For each of these, one of the requirements is that you are at peace and below a specific war exhaustion--this means if you go to war you lose all progress towards the 'positive disaster'. The requirements could range from things like supporting rebels in a rival country gives +1% per month to a military MP boost, to building a production/government building giving +1% per month to a base tax boost. This would give players an incentive to spend more time not in war and also allow for peaceful 'tall' nations to form.

Another idea is to have decisions which give you a challenge which if you fulfil you get a bonus. That is, you could, for example, have a decision to 'reform monetary policy'. For the next 10 years you get a large malus to tax, production and trade income, but if you can go the 10 years without taking any loans, you get a bonus to mercantilism and +1 base tax in several provinces.

Generally I'm just asking for more to do when you're not at war and trying to think of half decent ways to implement things using the current game system. Please contribute any ideas you have for things to do during peace.

 

[Pyske]

I might have excluded the first sentence, but I do like both of your concepts of "positive disasters" and "reform decisions". That said, you probably need more inflection points if you want them to keep the player occupied. Possibly subordinate deadlines within a multi-step process, or similar.

Making events more common during peace than war is another possible way of making the game more interactive during peacetime.

Similarly, it might be interesting to have some mechanisms that pay a "peace dividend" which grows over time, eventually reaching some cap, which which is reset to 0 when at war (or possibly reset to 0 when in an offensive war and -1 per month while in a defensive one).

 

[Diogeneticist]

Regarding your peace dividend idea, a simple bonus to relations with neighbouring countries could be given out for countries that are at peace for a period of time. For example, after 5 years of peace you get a ticking bonus to relations per year to every nation that borders you.

 

[al-Aziz]

I agree with the idea behind this, but your examples seem to focus on *not* doing things. I'm not sure how to make things more interesting- perhaps you could have an assembly of nobles, less like in CK2 and more like the houses in Victoria II, and you would have to manage their clashing interests? This is already somewhat represented by the faction mechanic, but maybe the decisions you make will actually have an effect on the game. If you annoyed the (collective) "stronger military" faction through ignoring their demands, they could withhold good generals, lowering your military tradition. However, if you satisfied them, the "decentralization" faction might protest and demand you raise autonomy as recomsense for this. Obviously these aren't really balanced, but they're just examples.

Your national ideas would interact with the assembly's composition- if you had defensive ideas, for example, there would be fewer war hawks and more opposition to declaring war. So you would have to be careful about your idea selection.

So this doesn't turn into micro, you be able to only pay attention to the assembly when a faction sends a request to you. To prevent this from becoming useless, there would be bonuses for having specific dominant factions *and* significant bonuses having a balanced, somewhat neutral style of government - perhaps these bonuses would be scaled to the percentages held by each faction.

Each faction could have an opinion, a percentage, and a section for any possible demands, which can be accepted at any time, unless one has accepted an opposite demand. If the opinion dropped beyond a specific point, the faction would begin to build a revolt, appearing in the stability tab with other revolts.

This way, other revolts (democratic, nationalist, etc.) could request to be represented in the assembly. Optionally, to prevent player cheese, the assembly would have to approve this request in addition to the player, and, due to factions being triggered by idea groups, it would only be possible/far easier for certain idea groups (Humanist, Administrative, etc.). If the request is rejected, the revolt surfaces in the violent revolution tab.

I think this is a nice system, aye?

 

[Freudia]

This way, other revolts (democratic, nationalist, etc.) could request to be represented in the assembly. Optionally, to prevent player cheese, the assembly would have to approve this request in addition to the player, and, due to factions being triggered by idea groups, it would only be possible/far easier for certain idea groups (Humanist, Administrative, etc.). If the request is rejected, the revolt surfaces in the violent revolution tab.

I'm glad you said optionally, because I like the idea up until the "prevent player cheese" part. Problem with having the game also approve the request is then you turn the player's actions at attempting to appease his people's desires into RNG coinflips, and that's just awful.

 

[al-Aziz]

I'm glad you said optionally, because I like the idea up until the "prevent player cheese" part. Problem with having the game also approve the request is then you turn the player's actions at attempting to appease his people's desires into RNG coinflips, and that's just awful.

I know this is a very divisive issue so I tried to appeal to everyone. Ergo, I get bonuses from both.

But more seriously, I don't mean to make this random. Rather, factions, as created by the selected idea groups over time, would vote as a homogenous bloc to approve/disapprove. I dislike hard limits as much as the next person, so if the assembly disapproved (?) there would be certain factions that would revolt. This is to prevent situations where an aristocrat, with their power deriving from ideals held and developed by the nation, would accept the lower serfs as equal assembly members with nary a whisper of protest, or that religious fanatics encouraged by the government for centuries would be pleased to cede power to a heretic.

The anti-anachronists would murder me if there was no check on the player's actions, and honestly, fighting a small noble revolt in order to change government seems a fair and accurate price. However, remember that this revolt can be completely avoided if the player selects idea groups which encourage democracy or nationalism or etc.

Does this work? This modification actually sounds like fun, at least to me, and that's a good thing. It adds flavor and political intrigue and rewards long-term planning without using hard limits to restrict the player. Most importantly, it adds enjoyable things to do in peacetime. Aye?

 

[saegoto]

I agree with the idea behind this, but your examples seem to focus on *not* doing things. I'm not sure how to make things more interesting- perhaps you could have an assembly of nobles, less like in CK2 and more like the houses in Victoria II, and you would have to manage their clashing interests? This is already somewhat represented by the faction mechanic, but maybe the decisions you make will actually have an effect on the game. If you annoyed the (collective) "stronger military" faction through ignoring their demands, they could withhold good generals, lowering your military tradition. However, if you satisfied them, the "decentralization" faction might protest and demand you raise autonomy as recomsense for this. Obviously these aren't really balanced, but they're just examples.

Your national ideas would interact with the assembly's composition- if you had defensive ideas, for example, there would be fewer war hawks and more opposition to declaring war. So you would have to be careful about your idea selection.

So this doesn't turn into micro, you be able to only pay attention to the assembly when a faction sends a request to you. To prevent this from becoming useless, there would be bonuses for having specific dominant factions *and* significant bonuses having a balanced, somewhat neutral style of government - perhaps these bonuses would be scaled to the percentages held by each faction.

Each faction could have an opinion, a percentage, and a section for any possible demands, which can be accepted at any time, unless one has accepted an opposite demand. If the opinion dropped beyond a specific point, the faction would begin to build a revolt, appearing in the stability tab with other revolts.

This way, other revolts (democratic, nationalist, etc.) could request to be represented in the assembly. Optionally, to prevent player cheese, the assembly would have to approve this request in addition to the player, and, due to factions being triggered by idea groups, it would only be possible/far easier for certain idea groups (Humanist, Administrative, etc.). If the request is rejected, the revolt surfaces in the violent revolution tab.

I think this is a nice system, aye?

I like it.

 

[Diogeneticist]

The only problem with this idea, which sounds like a great system, is that it seems to require a lot of additional features. I'm trying to suggest ideas which piggyback on the already present mechanics so there isn't such a jump to implement them. I guess to make peace interesting there need to be more mechanics. Peace in CKII and Vicky 2 are both interesting and tense, I haven't played HOI at all so I don't know. Hopefully paradox might release a DLC focussed on peacetime. I would buy that in a heartbeat!

 

[lolada]

This is a good idea but its probably DLC material. It would also require major balancing, since giving bonuses to nations in peace would completely change the game compared to what we have now. Its a great idea for new peacetime DLC, most of people would like it.

 

[darthfanta]

I think you should actually be encouraged to have better relations with nations you aren't at war with by things like increasing trade power in certain nodes.

 

[Krajzen]

I think the thread should mention not BENEFITS but ACTIVITIES.

Ya know, what does it change if during peace you got X gold or whatever? Nothing. You sit bored at peace and now you wait not only at manpower regenerate and truce cancel but also bonus to amass. Currently peacetime already has obvious benefits - no WE, fully enabled diplomacy and trade, not necessary full unit maintenance, manpower regenerates - but adding more static modifiers or even worse: penalties to war isn't going to bring more fun.

Instead I support any sophisticated peacetime system such as this brilliant one mentioned above. Something cool, active, developed and constant. In the end war will be always more interesting but peace can be cool to as seen in many strategy games.
Suggestions:
- Developed faction system for all nations (different for monarchies, republics, pagans, buddhists etc)
- Adding Intellectual Life, Science, Art and such other ways for achieving national glory: bring back and reinvent Cultural Tradition, allow on arts patronage, fund research, create academies of science, solve religion vs science dilemmas, or

- National Identity Meter. Devs mentioned that the main theme of eu4 is colonization and establishment of national states - the second thing is absent. Reinvent cultural acceptancr and such stuff in National Identity.

Essentially National Identity represents how people of your state identify themselves with country, are they willing to live in it and die for it, the ultimate goals for eu4 empire is not only establish geopolitical power but construct a nation. There are many ways to improve National Identity or ruin it. Opressive Muslim despotic sultanate governing Hindu masses and conquering random stuff has horrible NI. However there are many ways to build common identity:

- Religion. Establishing certain rites and powerful spiritual bond can forge a nation - historical examples: Sikhism, Judaism, Islam->Arabs, Hinduism, Orthodox Church-> Mother Russia, Church of Ethiopia, Shinto, Buddhism in Myanmar and Tibet. Unite your people under banner of Truth. And spread it to faraway lands along with your philosophy of life, thou shall bring harmony and meaning to the world.

- Ethnicity. Influence and shape cultural bonds to emerge as united nation and unite your perceived 'ethnic lands' and finally become (relatively) united nation state while trying to assimilate other cultures; examples: France, Japan, China, Spain, England. Spread your lingua franca until people will adopt it. Defend Motherland. Historically Poland was going this route via Commonwealth quite succesfully in 16th century but screwed it up at 17th, still Belarus and Lithuania were heavily polonized for centuries. Make people care about the glory of a nation' make nation their source of imperial proud.

- Prosperity. Unite people of many cultures and religions basing on rational human interest, on will to live freely and decently - forge common interest and tolerant way to include Other into it and emerge as melting pot. Examples: United States, generally various colonial nations, maybe Netherlands, modern Singapore. If we are trying to put all countries in these categories, Hordes and many confdderations could fit here because for example khanates were united basing on the prospect of loot and glory.

This is a great triumvirate. You can don't care about it and emerge empirr with steel, blood and personal wishes of god-king but sooner or later you will face an inevitable fall of society where people don't care what banner are they living for. This happened to many ephemeric states born from bloody conquest and fallen via bloody internal conflicts. You can create your private property, mr Tyrant, but prepare for war with your own society... War which will eventually lead to the fall.

So, there are three ways to achieve National Identity. National Identity serves both as meta-goal of the game - as a target and source of reworked Score system - and as base mechanic of the game, as society with bad NI is a revolt waiting to explode and civil war ready to attack after death of every monarch. There are three separate meters: Faith, Nation and Prosperity, and you slowly gain higher levels of them enabling stuff from somethint resembling 'tech tree'. System is fluent but usually you have to choose from conflicting options - assimilating 'lesser cultures' is radically different from buying them with prospect of better life or uniting under banner of religion. You constantly make choices when you manage cultures from new Culture interface - cores, converting culture and religion, humanism and tolerance, diplomacy and economy, evrything affects National Identity. Pursuing NI gives you awesome stuff and unlocks special 'powers' available only from particular paths, such as unique governments and decisions.

National Identity system is connected to factions: Nobility, Priesthood, Medium Class and Peasantry. Each of them desires other things and you have to balance among them while using them to spawn National Identity. Nobility prefers Ethnic Glory, medium class Prosperity, priesthood Faith, peasants are the most flexible. It is possible for all of them to have high willingness to cooperate with You but it is not easy to achieve and maintain.

 

[Diogeneticist]

I definitely support the sort of intricate systems you suggest Krajzen. In my original post I was trying to offer simple activities people could do to add a little more variety during peace, I probably didn't express myself well however, the focus was 'more things to do during peace'. What I am suggesting is for there to be challenges you can accept while at peace which are similar in engagement to declaring war against another nation and which give you benefits which boost your nation without the need for expansion.