Hive said:
Hive, in many MP games, three or for colonial Western nations, unchallenged, steal COTs from backwards and unresisting AI countries, then sit around with their five COTs each, make trade agreements, and dominate world trade for 250 years, with no competition. This game's different, because the colonial powers would need to launch a focused and intense military campaign to dominate half a continent's trade, instead of just waltzing in and taking it. There's no free ride for the colonisers. It makes things much more even and more competitive.
As for the Ottomans, I decided it was in my interest to befriend Persia rather than war them, because I suffered early on against a powerful Austrian-Persian coalition, who hit me hard twice over the course of a couple of decades. Since then, I've had a few 1 vs 1 wars against Austria which have been very hard-fought. I've appreciated that Persia hasn't stooped to opportunistically backstabbing me during them (like some other players would have), and it would be stupid for me to war Persia, that would destroy the trust on which the relationship between our two countries is founded. It hasn't been for the whole game, and I don't think it will continue for the rest of the game either.
As for the Mughals, Persia, and China, I haven't got involved in their own foreign policy debates, but I think it suffices to say that not having a Russia has put a damper on the action over there.
I also should make the comment that countries are not likely to go to war if peace is more beneficial to the both of them, and there are no points of cotention between the two countries. This reflects the fact that, in most cases in the east, the border provinces for the Mughals, Persians, and Chinese aren't really all that valuable compared to more central provinces. (Why for example would the Mughals and Chinese fight over Tibet? The provinces are more trouble than they're worth).
I don't know what the solution to this is, without perhaps finding a way to reward players for genuinely struggling to expand. Ultimately, I think the problem is related to the fact that in EU2, economic damage by wars (loss of opportunity to research and inflation) is permanent. In real history, that damage is temporary (pretty much). Because of the 'play long-term' mantra, experienced EU2 players (such as myself) will strive to avoid economic damage where possible.
