Military Access is still the worst mechanic in the game and the #1 problem to be fixed.

[Soulburger]

I don't know which is more annoying: the inability of the AI to manage invasion logistics without requiring MA through everyone resulting in the current meta or the perfect troll logic for the AI to cancel MA when absolutely needed. Multiple times I've had losing AI enemies with full access until I start marching to their capital. Pathing will be locked in but once I hit that border province the AI will perfectly time the MA cancelation. I will even be able to reroute through other countries and each one will be perfectly timed to cancel. Amazing that it can handle something as complex as that but can barely function in other areas.

 

[Jihem]

One of the issues with military access is that it renders a decent war-time fleet useless.

What's the point of investing my treasury in galleys as Byzantium if the Ottomans have allied Gazikumukh and therefore have access through the whole Caucuses?

The problem is that this is not easy to fix. If you remove military access all together, what do you do if you're say France attacking Brittany who has allied Aachen and can't get military access anymore?

One idea I've had, but not sure how it would be implemented, is that attrition is extremely heavy the further away you get from your 'home' provinces. Walking through the Caucuses, Crimea and then round the Balkans should kill a lot of men with attrition.

This proposal is perfectly logical, it is aberrant to see dozens of units frolicking in Siberia while suffering minimal losses. It seems to me that several modders have programmed severe attrition. I've never uploaded their work, but it shouldn't be hard to get bits of info on the state of the game and wars with these mods.

This problem of MA largely ruins the playful and strategic interest of wars, victory, especially in late game, is only a question of numerical superiority - provided there is no technological delay.

 

[Pandrea]

The problem is that this is not easy to fix. If you remove military access all together, what do you do if you're say France attacking Brittany who has allied Aachen and can't get military access anymore?

Easy: Britanny should pick an ally who can actually join his wars with zero-to-one MA. We already have a distance modifier for vassal requests, so I think it's possible to make a hidden modifier for alliances

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

One of the issues with military access is that it renders a decent war-time fleet useless.

What's the point of investing my treasury in galleys as Byzantium if the Ottomans have allied Gazikumukh and therefore have access through the whole Caucuses?

The problem is that this is not easy to fix. If you remove military access all together, what do you do if you're say France attacking Brittany who has allied Aachen and can't get military access anymore?

One idea I've had, but not sure how it would be implemented, is that attrition is extremely heavy the further away you get from your 'home' provinces. Walking through the Caucuses, Crimea and then round the Balkans should kill a lot of men with attrition.

Like the idea.

Though the AI has massively reduced attrition numbers since they don't understand how attrition works. I hope this will be changed for EU5.

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

Easy: Britanny should pick an ally who can actually join his wars with zero-to-one MA. We already have a distance modifier for vassal requests, so I think it's possible to make a hidden modifier for alliances

That result in many landlocked countries having no allies and also any coastal nation be incredible overpowered, because they can ally other coastal nations for protection.

 

[Pandrea]

That result in many landlocked countries having no allies and also any coastal nation be incredible overpowered, because they can ally other coastal nations for protection.

Sounds realistic to me, approved!

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

Sounds realistic to me, approved!

Yeah makes much more sense.

Example 1 Switzerland wants to get some provinces from Burgundy, so does France. They both want different provinces and have rivalled Burgundy. According to you they can't all each other because they can't reach each other.

 

[Pandrea]

Yeah makes much more sense.

Example 1 Switzerland wants to get some provinces from Burgundy, so does France. They both want different provinces and have rivalled Burgundy. According to you they can't all each other because they can't reach each other.

Thanks, "you can reach each other or both can reach a common rival" would be perfect. Nice tip!

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

Thanks, "you can reach each other or both can reach a common rival" would be perfect. Nice tip!

What if one nation is to small to rival another nation but you want to Ally them to prevent them for example to obtain a set province because that will now allow them to ally some insanely big that you don't want them to ally?

What if only one has rivalled the nation inbetween but you both have provinces as vital interest?

In other words how many special rules are you willing to implement and how will anyone be able to remember all these factors?

 

[LukasYork]

Strictly not allowing alliances makes no sense but one could introduce more reasons to ally when being threatened/hostile/rivaled/domineering towards common enemies.
Less reasons for having none common enemies
Increase distance penalty slightly
Make it so without specific effort it would be harder to ally just anybody a few countries away but after improving relations to max and maybe investing in some diplomatic influence it would be possible

 

[necro84]

@LukasYork you'll need to change all relations modifiers for that. Royal marriages and religion have big influence on relations. Just look at Novgorod - they don't have any strong neigbours with their religion and can't RM anyone. How they can find any allies after such change?

 

[LukasYork]

@LukasYork you'll need to change all relations modifiers for that. Royal marriages and religion have big influence on relations. Just look at Novgorod - they don't have any strong neigbours with their religion and can't RM anyone. How they can find any allies after such change?

Of course it would require quite some rebalancing - to be honest I wouldn't touch alliances at all and just rework MA but if it had to happen it would model it the aforementioned way.
For the Novgorod issue: First thing that comes to mind is that rivalries and mutual threats should be much bigger reason to ally, even across religions. So Novgorod should be able to ally the Hordes after improving relations a bit I'd say. Maybe even PLC if rivaled to Muscovy.