If guaranteeing now requires being stronger than the target...

[Freudia]

My experience proves otherwise. Every time I see a dow, the relation meter has reached hostile by several issues (wants provinces bla bla bla), granted eventually it will result in the same reaction, but there is a build up of reasons in it. Relations is one of them.

My experiences have indicated that the only thing that stops a nation from declaring on you is allying them. Putting that aside, the AI then looks through all possible targets it can declare on that it isn't allied to, determines the ease of the war vs the cost of the provinces it wants, determines the ease:cost ratio, and then goes for it. This is why hostile core creation cost serves as a deterrent for being declared on, to a degree. So basically, things like army size, hostile core creation cost modifiers, and alliance webs serve as much bigger deterrents than relations do, so long as you're not allied to them. A -10 modifier does not affect this in the slightest.

Also, do me a favor and don't attribute things I didn't say to me. I'm pretty sure it was an honest mistake, so I don't hold it against you, but it just looks weird when I see you attribute a quote to me and I scroll up one post and see it said by someone else instead.

Edit:

EDIT2: And ofc I over wrote the save game....Anyway what I wanted to post was this: I released an OPM from Quara Quiowhatever (lets call them the mustard horde ok?). Immediately after, the mustards form a coalition that is been Joined by the Mams, Lithuania (!?!?!?!!?) and the little OPM. So yes they do join.

This is due to a bug in the game's clearing of relation modifiers when a nation gets annexed, though. Often times, when a nation is annexed, only about half the modifiers are removed instead of all of them. As a result, if that nation returns to the map later in the game, it's very possible for that nation to still have AE from when it was still alive.

 

[Thesian]

The fact that Trebizond is effectively speeding up its death sentence by doing something that can be akin to a suicide action by inflicting itself a relations penalty to the guy who doesn't want to mess with, is ok to you? Well now we might as well as code it to insult them as well just because.....or even dow them to get to the end result one day later.

Sure it's okay to me. As a souvereign nation Trebizond can do as it pleases. Game mechanics don't prevent it from allying Byzantium or Georgia and answering a defensive CTA nor from simply declaring on the Ottomans, do they?

The AI doesn't shy from handing out insult CBs to stronger neighbors. Probably it's just the stab-hit or CB event, but if we accept the premise that the wrong insult could be suicidal, shouldn't the AI be coded to take the stab-hit? Also, I've seen OPM East Frisia (not an HRE member) DOW into the HRE.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Also a medium power is lot different than an OPM which was our starting argument. I still fail to see how an OPM will make a difference between two super powers colliding.

Then you failed to read my post, where I gave one example where I did exactly that in a war between two of the strongest nations in the region as an OPM with 5 units. Also, warning/guarantees can occasionally be legit backed even by minors, and it's up to the player to determine when that is. Removing strategy does not make a better game. If the "problem" is +relations, remove the +relations, don't remove a good mechanic.

The fact that Trebizond is effectively speeding up its death sentence by doing something that can be akin to a suicide action by inflicting itself a relations penalty to the guy who doesn't want to mess with, is ok to you?

The problem is that the player now suddenly can't make warnings even if they deem it beneficial, next guarantees. You *are* allowed to insult the Ottomans as anybody, declare war on them too...both far more suicidal than guaranteeing Mamluks or warning Ottos (not that such would cover a lot of nations as Trebizond anyway). So again, why are we removing good features with few, if any, actual flaws in allowing small nations to do it?

I'm still waiting for the answer to that with warnings, and now guarantees also, because there is none that makes sense.

 

[Pilot00]

Ok guys, you have you own way of thinking I have mine, there really is no benefit in continuing this debate