Limiting multiple wars mechanics

[SHADOW-XIII]

I think there's some way to abuse by calling a war on a country that's already in war,
The attacker is having fair amount of significant advantage on the target

Suggestion:
- attacking country that is already defensive target in a war should cause some prestige impact (ie. -30)
- attacking country that is in war as ally of a defensive target, minor prestige impact (ie. -10/-15)
- attacking country that is attacker or ally of attacker in a war, no prestige impact
- some exceptions or prestige impact changes could apply depending on what type of CB new attacker chooses

This could potentially also delay 2nd/3rd (etc) coalition war to start while you are still at war (defender) in the first one.

How would one avoid prestige impact?
- Ally warleader and join existing war
- It would complete nicely with the other suggestion of: "continuing war when warlader declare peace" if the war you joined ends up not like you wanted

 

[Noel84]

Why though? Why should you be punished for being strategic?

 

[SHADOW-XIII]

While it is strategic approach to take on the weaker enemy, it's also bad publicity to take on weaken, already destroyed by multiple wars country
that's why the only impact I am suggesting here is prestige, nothing more, the values could be adjustable depending on current wars CBs or new war CB

 

[Noel84]

While it is strategic approach to take on the weaker enemy, it's also bad publicity to take on weaken, already destroyed by multiple wars country
that's why the only impact I am suggesting here is prestige, nothing more, the values could be adjustable depending on current wars CBs or new war CB

But it makes no sense. No one has EVER said "You declared war on a dying enemy, you unprestigious brute"

 

[BrokenSky]

I agree with the general principal, especially the attacking defensive vs. offensive, (except that attacking a rival should never cost anything) but the values would need to be altered. I would say at most 10 prestige? so beating them and then getting them to concede defeat balance, for example.

But it makes no sense. No one has EVER said "You declared war on a dying enemy, you unprestigious brute"

True, but generally if you win you don't get as much prestige and if you lose you look like a complete fool. It's just easier to have the prestige reduction/loss at at the start, as opposed to the end, of the war.