In other topics, I think I can now predict what the next BYZ nerf is going to be.
- 1
Making Coalitions Interesting Again
- Thread starter Grubnessul
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
In other topics, I think I can now predict what the next BYZ nerf is going to be.
Yeah, because they have it so much worse than Albania <.<
- 1
An attempt for BYZ to form a new coalition against the Turks sounds like a better simulation of what happened in history. Also, I did add a suggestion for a "beg for protection" action.
I think coalitions should be re-worked into some kind of "balance of power" mechanic. Basically, the top 5 countries in a region (you could have big regions and small regions, like Europe as a big region and just Italy or the HRE as small regions, then by late game the world counts as a region), compare themselves to each other. If the largest country in a region is in danger of becoming larger (in terms of total development) than the bottom 4 combined, then the bottom 4 form a coalition against the top 1. Then the coalition can either, intervene in any offensive war by the top country against any other country in the region, or declare an offensive war against the top country with the goal of making it release countries, break a union, or release vassals. No taking land though, unless it's returning cores.
I think this would be more fun than simply burning off AE, because if you are getting close to a coalition forming, what you can do is ally the country at rank 4 or 5 and help them expand. As they get bigger, the threshold for the coalition forming gets higher. Of course, this means that if the coalition does form, you made it harder on yourself by helping your enemies. Then once the country you helped gets to rank 2 or 3, you break the alliance and start helping the country at rank 4 or 5 again. Eventually, there are only 5 big countries left in a region, and then its "Napoleonic Wars" time until the game ends.
I think this would be more fun than simply burning off AE, because if you are getting close to a coalition forming, what you can do is ally the country at rank 4 or 5 and help them expand. As they get bigger, the threshold for the coalition forming gets higher. Of course, this means that if the coalition does form, you made it harder on yourself by helping your enemies. Then once the country you helped gets to rank 2 or 3, you break the alliance and start helping the country at rank 4 or 5 again. Eventually, there are only 5 big countries left in a region, and then its "Napoleonic Wars" time until the game ends.
- 2
That's exactly what I've been thinking of alliance system ever since I've started playing EU4! Most of big European conflicts were closer to balance of powers kind of thing, where 3 or more participants were continiously fighting for dominance over the rest - e.g. Sweden, Poland and Russia, which were fighting each other for decades during the timeline, or France, England and Burgundy a little bit before the game's start - in both those cases there were series of wars, in result of which the countries had been maintaining a sort of balanced status - minor land exchanges, very short period of one side's dominance etc, until one of them went over(in our timeline - France and Russia). This shows how not only were the alliances flexible, but so were rivalries - rival of my rival is my friend after all, this is currently impossible to represent in game, as you can't ally your rival, even if you have another, common one. If I am Poland and I fight Sweden for Pomerania and Livonia, and suddenly Russia sneaks up and steals Smoleńsk and Kursk from me and Livonia and Neva from Sweden, I would stop fighting with the Scandinavian blob and gang up the Russians with him.
It might become a little bit more problematic with the little countries though, especially in regions like HRE.
Then, what about the historical friends or situations in which I'd really like to ally someone? Well, since this system abandons the alliances as we know them, trust mechanic seems useless at first sight - unless we let everyone increase it with everyone, by some new diplomatic and trading actions, being in wars together and whatnot. Then, when the trust is increased to e.g. 80, the countries could create stronger bound/alliance.
Whew, our ideas really deserve a suggestion thread! Unfortunately, as someone's mentioned - no one, maybe besides devs and a few wackos, reads the forum.
Regards, a person who's posted 9 suggestions as of now.
You can't make coalitions interesting again because they were never very interesting to begin with. The system has improved over the years, but it has retained some of its original "entering a precision shooting competition with a shotgun" approach to things.
Make alliances and coaltions a balance of power mechanic. Alliances switched all the time. There was no "trust" per se. If a neighbor gets too large (sweden) the large countries band together to stop the rise of that country (Great Northern War) and bring it down to size.
Other examples of this are the Napoleonic wars, where the bigger countries ganged up on france to return the balance to europe.
Coalitions in this game should be large vs. large countries. If you are a smaller country... Other nations shouldn't care.
But a medium sized one like Prussia, trying to be big might form resistance. A coalition war can fire to see if Prussia will make the Large country stage.
Allies should switch often like the 7 years war (with prussia and france). If one alliance is too big, or strong, some members flip or join to balance the scale.
Time and time again stuff like this has happened. War of the Spanish Succesion is an example of other countries joining against austria and spain to bring the balance of power to europe.
(you could say that the crusade of varna was trying to reduce the size and strentgh of the ottomans but failed. Once a coalition that tries to bring balance fails, The winning country expands and becomes more powerful)
All of europe shouldnt care if an hre minor conquered too much. AE should be confined to regions, so that ridiculous coalitions dont happen.)
To stop the blobby nature of the HRE, let the Holy Roman Emperor be more proactive against it. Once the emperors authority falls, more countries in the HRE gobble up each other, like it did historically.
Other examples of this are the Napoleonic wars, where the bigger countries ganged up on france to return the balance to europe.
Coalitions in this game should be large vs. large countries. If you are a smaller country... Other nations shouldn't care.
But a medium sized one like Prussia, trying to be big might form resistance. A coalition war can fire to see if Prussia will make the Large country stage.
Allies should switch often like the 7 years war (with prussia and france). If one alliance is too big, or strong, some members flip or join to balance the scale.
Time and time again stuff like this has happened. War of the Spanish Succesion is an example of other countries joining against austria and spain to bring the balance of power to europe.
(you could say that the crusade of varna was trying to reduce the size and strentgh of the ottomans but failed. Once a coalition that tries to bring balance fails, The winning country expands and becomes more powerful)
All of europe shouldnt care if an hre minor conquered too much. AE should be confined to regions, so that ridiculous coalitions dont happen.)
To stop the blobby nature of the HRE, let the Holy Roman Emperor be more proactive against it. Once the emperors authority falls, more countries in the HRE gobble up each other, like it did historically.
- 4
What do you mean? IIRC they have just regular alliances, same as EU4. Plus you can explicitly ask for attack someone.
I'm playing Portugal.. I take 5 provinces in India for first time... nek minute. Persia has joined coalition, Tumirids have joined, Super sized Delhi and half of india have joined.
I get wiped clean then ottomans attack me and my empire is gone. And none of my European ally help because ya know its not in Europe. WTF? OH SORRY I DIDNT KNOW ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO GET ON A BOAT.
MEAN WHILE... Supersized Delhi took the whole of Persia.. After eating bangal everyone's cool wit that. no coalition. Actually they allied with Ottomans.. who's allied to super sized France. whelp that's 7 hours wasted.
Update: It's okay guys Delhi got a slap on the wrist from Russia.. and the Ottomans got half of Russia in return. YEA cause that's historical.
I get wiped clean then ottomans attack me and my empire is gone. And none of my European ally help because ya know its not in Europe. WTF? OH SORRY I DIDNT KNOW ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO GET ON A BOAT.
MEAN WHILE... Supersized Delhi took the whole of Persia.. After eating bangal everyone's cool wit that. no coalition. Actually they allied with Ottomans.. who's allied to super sized France. whelp that's 7 hours wasted.
Update: It's okay guys Delhi got a slap on the wrist from Russia.. and the Ottomans got half of Russia in return. YEA cause that's historical.
Last edited:
its amazing how people complain about that start when one can name like 10 worse starts in the BYZ neighborhood
I actually lvoe the ideas of the OP.
My two cents: if you ask for protection there should or could be a price (like transfering trde power, revoking cores, money or war reps)
My two cents: if you ask for protection there should or could be a price (like transfering trde power, revoking cores, money or war reps)
Why would any major do this, though? If I'm playing say Serbia, why would Hungary protect me from the Ottomans instead of eat me? Why would the Ottomans protect me from Hungary instead of eat me?
The list of easier nations in the region is much shorter, and is mostly limited to the Ottomans themselves unless you start counting Hungary/Mamluks/QQ. Other than Ottomans, the other nations starting around the Ottomans are all harder than BYZ, with the arguable exception of Bosnia which as a Catholic I think can join HRE now (haven't tried them in like a year).
Because you've gained high trust and relations with them. It could also add a smaller country into the bigger one's sphere of influence, making it easier to vassalise.
Well, they probably would, but the idea was when there was a really big country so that everyone would have to band together. Honestly though, you are pretty right about small countries getting recked sooner or later.
Trust doesn't increase as a result of having good relations. It increases as a result of having an alliance, spending favors, and doing peace deals that favor them; under OP's suggestion of 'begging for protection', small nations have no ability to raise trust values to actually want to protect me instead of just eating me for lunch.
As for spheres, it would be easier for a nation to force vassalize, especially since the negatives for diplo vassalizing increase exponentially due to a nation's development.
Of course, it works like that with current version. But without alliances the trust system would have to be redesigned so that you could influence your trust with everyone. Otherwise it would be just another trashed mechanic, DLC one, on top of that.
caucasian 3 +honorary caucasian (theodoro) + all 4 beyliks + serbia + albania
Gazi, Shirvan, Circassia, and Georgia are 4x Caucasian, unless you don't want to count Georgia now that hordes units drop their weapons like live ferrets when fighting in mountains.
You forgot Wallachia too, so more than 10 easily
.