New casus belli

[Lerniss]

Hey.
Some of players who play byzantium use a tactic for beat ottomans easily.The tactic is surround ottomans balkan lands and let bulgarian rebels start and when it is complete eat bulgarians lands for free and in my opinion this is so broken and nonsense because the ottomans is most powerful country in the game and history on that time.So if we take this to reality they can not let that happen.So here is my idea.
Add a new casus belli named like 'connect the lands' and when the surround happened give this casus belli to country who surrounded by other country.I dont brainstorm for details but if it make sense you can think about it.
Kind regards.

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

Making an AI trucebreak sounds fun. It's gonna create an outrage that will make the leviathan launch seem like a nice family picnic.

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

On a serious note. As others have pointed out already they have a CB for attacking byz and the reason they are not is that they have a truce. Giving them a CB is nit changing anything.

Making them bit accept a peace if they get bisected sounds like a needlessly complex addition to a very minor problem. Like an easier solution would be to teach the ai to simply raise a mercenary stack have it avoid the rebels and then easily beat them.

 

[Loganplayseu4]

it's not about forbiding them from beating Ottomans, it's about making it harder + make Ottomans more likely to attack Byzantine first (before those small nations in Anatolia). Good player still will be able to beat Ottomans but it will be more challenging than it is now

Thing is, historically, the Ottomans DID target other countries before Byzantium:
Intervention in the Albanian-Venetian War: Here.
Second Battle of Kosovo (which left Constantinople open to take): Here.
The Ottomans also attacked Karaman in 1451.

 

[ValhallArchitect]

Creating exclaves and snaking through your enemy is a time honoured strategy in late game world conquests, I don't see the desire to rule it out. And once again if Byzantium just retakes its cores in the first war it bisects the Ottomans, and I don't think it's fair to forbid them from doing that.

I’m precisely arguing against doing this method in the first place.
This absolutely unrealistic behavior is only intended for a WC, that not every player enjoys, to the detriment of immersion and gameplay.
I believe EU4 being an history based game, it should aim at developing real or alternate scenarios but taking into consideration a realistic behavior.

I’m pretty sure not a single monarch in reality would have accepted a straight line cutting its country in two, and would have kept fighting longer if need be. Proof being that it actually never happened despite centuries of war and treaties

In fact, not even a single monarch would have proposed this kind of treaty anyway, as it was an absolute nonsense from a strategic point of view : more borders to defend, more border control to enforce (smugglers…) and a military weakness for the conquered territories

 

[zincpl]

I've seen a suggestion before to make the AI less likely to accept a deal which creates enclaves, I think that would be a good solution. Alternatively there could be a war score cost with enclave creation (though I think there's a risk of bugginess there.