Ok, I'm tired of complaining about Coalitions, but really???????????????????

[giovdb]

I had quit playing the game for several months because I greatly dislike the coalition system. i think it's a good idea, but it's not executed well at all. Here is what just happened to me and I think it's total bull. I was playing as Austria. I did not have ANY Aggressive Expansion at all with ANY country. I then declare war on Venice with an Imperial Ban Casus Belli. I then take over 3 provinces (all of which gained claims due to casus belli). Let me repeat that.... I took ONLY 3 out of thousands of provinces in the game. I then got a huge coalition against me of about 20 countries, including France, Sweden, and many others. I still won the war, but it's extremely frustrating that I declare war once in several decades and end up with a huge coalition against me. To make matters worse, coalitions don't dissolve in war time, so even though I peaced with France, I then was at war against Muscowy protecting my allies. when I was about to peace with them, the truce was up and France declared war on me again.

So, in other words, what the f**k.

 

[Xara]

Imperial Ban is 100% AE rate and it only gives you claims after the fact, which will do nothing except decrease coring cost and coring time.

That means you took 3 provinces at full AE, for a base AE gain of 45, which will be multiplied by any number of relative factors. That is far and away more than enough to get quite a few people ticked off at you.

You need to start smarter wars, not simply annex a neighbor at full aggression.

 

[giovdb]

Im taking provinces away from a non-imperial country and adding it to the empire. I don't see how that's not smart. The HRE shouldn't get upset if the Emperor is doing that. Most other casus belli would only reduce AE by 25%, which shouldn't have mattered too much anyways. AE is simply set WAY too high. I understand that I could mod and make AE less, but that's not the point. It's only 3 provinces. If I can't take 3 provinces then why even play? (Im sure some smart ass will reply with "don't play then" but thats also not the point. Just trying to make this game better).

 

[nossnahoj]

From your original post it was not the empire that was upset with you? is it strange that France and Sweden dislikes the growth of that sacrilegious monstrosity that calls itself holy?

 

[Pandadan]

AFAIK, Imperial Ban is best used to return cores to HRE nations, or force a non-HRE nation to release an annexed HRE nation. It's terrible for direct conquest.

 

[Xara]

Im taking provinces away from a non-imperial country and adding it to the empire. I don't see how that's not smart

"Smart" has nothing to do with it. You are being aggressive. Emperor or not, other nations care about your power relative to theirs. If they didn't, why would there even be elections, or any form of power struggle for leadership? You also managed to tick off quite a few non-HRE members.

The HRE shouldn't get upset if the Emperor is doing that.

You could have returned Brescia to Milan. You could have taken one province from Venice yourself and demanded they released nations and cancelled vassals.

Most other casus belli would only reduce AE by 25%, which shouldn't have mattered too much anyways.

But it does matter. 25% is not insignificant. Two provinces at 100% is 30 AE base, enough to get nations into coalitions. Two provinces at 75% is 22.5 AE base, which can usually slip by, or maybe get just one or two nations into a coalition.

AE is simply set WAY too high.

Well, that's opinion. There's a limit to what you can take in direct, unreduced conquest. This is why a large part of the game involves the vassal relationship and manipulating things such that you can claim and take territory at reduced cost rather than full price. You were Austria. You were Emperor. You have multiple relations increases. Use subjugations. You should be building authority to place the HRE under your iron grip, not ticking off the world to seize a few personal acquisitions. Take things in measured grasps, don't get greedy. In time, you'll recognize and play to the strengths of various areas such that you can predict the reactions that will ensue.

If I can't take 3 provinces then why even play?

To be succinct : because that's how the designers want it. If that isn't how you want it, you can mod it. If you don't want to mod it, wait and see if they agree with you enough to change it. If they don't, and you won't mod it, then - *ahem* - what else is there to say?

 

[the343danny]

The problems you listed are easily "fixable" by tweaking things already in the game. I think the real problem with coalitions is that coalition only combats aggressive expansion. In my current game, when Russia PUs and integrates Poland who had previously done the same to Sweden. When France began annexing northern German lands, the AI only cared for the first thirty years. They then integrated Norway who also had parts of Canada colonized, promptly making them the biggest country in the world with the mightiest army. Then Spain managed to get them under their PU, creating an unstoppable blob. Nobody batted an eye at all of this yet when I finish uniting my country as the Dutch, suddenly I had a Spain (with France PU'd) and Russia, along with others, in a coalition against me. Cleves declares war and I get caught in a decade long war which I painstakingly win.

My point is, coalitions should exist to protect against those with power, not just those who recently expanded via war. Its simply frustrating when everybody allies against me over conquest of a few provinces when nobody seems to care when Russia inherit two whole countries at once and France has been slowly eating up a quarter of the HRE.

@Xara - No kidding he can mod it. Thats not the point. You are telling him to comply with the game mechanics better when his entire point is that he DOESN'T want to comply with them, given how they currently are. If you are tired of these kinds of threads, you'd be better off letting it die faster by not responding.

 

[trojan1234]

Look at bleakie's thread. http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...1-A-test-on-how-number-of-provinces-affect-AE
If you are of province +50 and took 3 province (base 45), you would get huge aes like 100 something.

EDIT : you can mod this ae modifiers by setting AE_ATTECKER_PROVINCE in define.lua to be 0.

 

[giovdb]

But it does matter. 25% is not insignificant. Two provinces at 100% is 30 AE base, enough to get nations into coalitions. Two provinces at 75% is 22.5 AE base, which can usually slip by, or maybe get just one or two nations into a coalition.

It's not 2 nations. It's about 20. If it was 2 I wouldn't be complaining.

Well, that's opinion. There's a limit to what you can take in direct, unreduced conquest. This is why a large part of the game involves the vassal relationship and manipulating things such that you can claim and take territory at reduced cost rather than full price. You were Austria. You were Emperor. You have multiple relations increases. Use subjugations. You should be building authority to place the HRE under your iron grip, not ticking off the world to seize a few personal acquisitions. Take things in measured grasps, don't get greedy. In time, you'll recognize and play to the strengths of various areas such that you can predict the reactions that will ensue.

If not sure if you read what I posted, but I had zero AE. The whole game I was just doing it through diplomacy. One war that i take 3 provinces shouldn't cause a world war.

To be succinct : because that's how the designers want it. If that isn't how you want it, you can mod it. If you don't want to mod it, wait and see if they agree with you enough to change it. If they don't, and you won't mod it, then - *ahem* - what else is there to say?

Exactly my point and that's why i'm writing this. If everybody just follows blindly the way something is programmed there won't be change. It's through discussion that progress is made. I know how to play the game the way it's been programmed. What I don't agree with it's the way it's programmed.

 

[giovdb]

Look at bleakie's thread. http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...1-A-test-on-how-number-of-provinces-affect-AE
If you are of province +50 and took 3 province (base 45), you would get huge aes like 100 something.

EDIT : you can mod this ae modifiers by setting AE_ATTECKER_PROVINCE in define.lua to be 0.

I understand the math and how that works. I just don't agree with it or think it's realistic. Please name one war in this time period that involved over 20 countries... Oh, and please name one of such magnitude that originated because one country decided to take 3 small provinces and then got ganged up by 20 countries.

All the big wars in this time period involved super powers doing a lot more than just that.

Also on a side note, how does a native american tribe join a European coalition???? Does not make sense...

 

[roman566]

Also on a side note, how does a native american tribe join a European coalition???? Does not make sense...

What is it Shaman?
Chief, I have used my divination to find out about Evil Spirit called Player Nation, said evil spirit conquers the land and enslaves the lesser spirits to it's cause so it can conquer more land.
What do you propose?
We should join a coalition of good spirits that swore to fight against that evil.

 

[Anthropoid]

I understand the math and how that works. I just don't agree with it or think it's realistic. Please name one war in this time period that involved over 20 countries... Oh, and please name one of such magnitude that originated because one country decided to take 3 small provinces and then got ganged up by 20 countries.

Thirty Years War. Fourteen Protestant states and allies (notice the 'unlikely' reality that Ottomans allied with Protestants vs. Catholics?) versus ~20 Catholics (depending on how you count the "HRE").

Eighty Years War Not as many combatant nations, but involved "worldwide colonial warfare."

Bit later we got the Seven Years War which involved about eight versus seven, but is widely regarded as the "first World War" because the conflict occurred on at least three continents and in sea battles in multiple corners of the globe.

The Seven Years' War was a war that took place between 1754 and 1763 with the main conflict being in the seven-year period 1756–1763. It involved most of the great powers of the time and affected Europe, North America, Central America, the West African coast, India, and the Philippines. In the historiography of some countries, the war is alternatively named after combatants in the respective theatres: the French and Indian War (North America, 1754–63); Pomeranian War (with Sweden and Prussia, 1757–62); Third Carnatic War (on the Indian subcontinent, 1757–63); and Third Silesian War (with Prussia and Austria, 1756–63).

Also on a side note, how does a native american tribe join a European coalition???? Does not make sense...

See above. Iroquois were a major player in the Seven Years War as it occurred in the 13 colonies and Canada, etc.

The coalition system isn't perfect. But it is perfectly historical that the AI has a 'short fuse' when it comes to coalescing into punitive blocs whenever a particular nation expands too much.

Do you think you would've had the same problem had you only annexed one province but used up the rest of your WS on other "non-AE" concessions? (Trade Power, release nations, revoke cores, annul treaties, etc.)? I rarely ever take two provinces in one war, and every time I do, even if I start out with zero AE and I have cores or claims on both, I DO get a coalition formed. Maybe it only gets two joiners and then it dissolves afterward (because I proclaim guarantees like mad and use my diplomats to improve relations AND I engage in no further aggression for a good 5 to 10 years). That is evidently how the designers intended conquest to be carried out: slowly over decades and with lots of non-annexing peace treaties.

 

[unmerged(184583)]

That is evidently how the designers intended conquest to be carried out: slowly over decades and with lots of non-annexing peace treaties.

Yes, in europe completely agree. If you want to land grab 20 provinces at a time go over to asia or america. My current Aztec game, allied with GB and France, just took like 15 provinces from Spain in a single peace deal, nobody cared because it was all colonial. Not a single point of AE from what I can tell, but of course all the other natives are either my vassal or already annexed, and the only colonial powers are either my ally or rival.

 

[AJ2009]

I had quit playing the game for several months because I greatly dislike the coalition system. i think it's a good idea, but it's not executed well at all. Here is what just happened to me and I think it's total bull. I was playing as Austria. I did not have ANY Aggressive Expansion at all with ANY country. I then declare war on Venice with an Imperial Ban Casus Belli. I then take over 3 provinces (all of which gained claims due to casus belli). Let me repeat that.... I took ONLY 3 out of thousands of provinces in the game. I then got a huge coalition against me of about 20 countries, including France, Sweden, and many others. I still won the war, but it's extremely frustrating that I declare war once in several decades and end up with a huge coalition against me. To make matters worse, coalitions don't dissolve in war time, so even though I peaced with France, I then was at war against Muscowy protecting my allies. when I was about to peace with them, the truce was up and France declared war on me again.

So, in other words, what the f**k.

The important questions is - did you have fun fighting the war and winning?

Edit: I think you just have to learn the rules about AE, they do make sense when you think about it (as people have already explained). There is a reason why war exhaustion shoots up quickly and manpower doesn't fill up when you disband troops. Warfare in this age was a long and hard slog and the modern state was not fully born yet.

Look how long some of the wars were and note how some are 'Wars (little wars that formed one overall theme or objective).

The Hundred Years' War (1337-1453)
The Wars of the Roses (1455-1485)
The Italian Wars (1494-1559)
The Valois-Hapsburg Wars
The Eighty Years War
The Wars of Religion [Huguenot Wars] (1562-1598)
The Thirty Years War
The English Civil Wars
The Anglo-Dutch Wars
The War of the League of Augsburg
The Great Northern War
The War of Spanish Succesion
The Jacobite Wars

 

[Xara]

@Xara - No kidding he can mod it. Thats not the point. You are telling him to comply with the game mechanics better when his entire point is that he DOESN'T want to comply with them, given how they currently are. If you are tired of these kinds of threads, you'd be better off letting it die faster by not responding.

I'll reply where I please when he decides to phrase it with a title like he chose and ends with "what the @#$#" as his stunning argument.

I know how to play the game the way it's been programmed.

Clearly not, if you decide to earn what must have been 60, 70, 100+ AE in one peace deal and come here to act indignant about the consequences, which you must have known about, given they were your reason for "quitting several months ago".

Pure conquest at 0% AE reduction slams you into a brick wall very quickly. That it why, I repeat, a good portion of the game is about manipulating takedowns and vassalizations using other devious means.

 

[jafloresl]

Stupid question, where can I see how is my AE?.

 

[Jaol]

Stupid question, where can I see how is my AE?.

Go into the coalition mapmode for a quick overview. If you click on a nation, you see everyone else's views regarding its aggressive expansion.
If you just care about your AE vis a vis a specific nation, it's visible as a modifier of their opinion of you..

 

[jafloresl]

Go into the coalition mapmode for a quick overview. If you click on a nation, you see everyone else's views regarding its aggressive expansion.
If you just care about your AE vis a vis a specific nation, it's visible as a modifier of their opinion of you..

Thanks man.

 

[giovdb]

Thirty Years War. Fourteen Protestant states and allies (notice the 'unlikely' reality that Ottomans allied with Protestants vs. Catholics?) versus ~20 Catholics (depending on how you count the "HRE").

Eighty Years War Not as many combatant nations, but involved "worldwide colonial warfare."

Bit later we got the Seven Years War which involved about eight versus seven, but is widely regarded as the "first World War" because the conflict occurred on at least three continents and in sea battles in multiple corners of the globe.





See above. Iroquois were a major player in the Seven Years War as it occurred in the 13 colonies and Canada, etc.

The coalition system isn't perfect. But it is perfectly historical that the AI has a 'short fuse' when it comes to coalescing into punitive blocs whenever a particular nation expands too much.

Do you think you would've had the same problem had you only annexed one province but used up the rest of your WS on other "non-AE" concessions? (Trade Power, release nations, revoke cores, annul treaties, etc.)? I rarely ever take two provinces in one war, and every time I do, even if I start out with zero AE and I have cores or claims on both, I DO get a coalition formed. Maybe it only gets two joiners and then it dissolves afterward (because I proclaim guarantees like mad and use my diplomats to improve relations AND I engage in no further aggression for a good 5 to 10 years). That is evidently how the designers intended conquest to be carried out: slowly over decades and with lots of non-annexing peace treaties.

None of these wars were coalition wars. Some were religious and others were about trying to expand a whole lot more than 3 provinces.

 

[giovdb]

The important questions is - did you have fun fighting the war and winning?

Edit: I think you just have to learn the rules about AE, they do make sense when you think about it (as people have already explained). There is a reason why war exhaustion shoots up quickly and manpower doesn't fill up when you disband troops. Warfare in this age was a long and hard slog and the modern state was not fully born yet.

Look how long some of the wars were and note how some are 'Wars (little wars that formed one overall theme or objective).

The Hundred Years' War (1337-1453)
The Wars of the Roses (1455-1485)
The Italian Wars (1494-1559)
The Valois-Hapsburg Wars
The Eighty Years War
The Wars of Religion [Huguenot Wars] (1562-1598)
The Thirty Years War
The English Civil Wars
The Anglo-Dutch Wars
The War of the League of Augsburg
The Great Northern War
The War of Spanish Succesion
The Jacobite Wars

Again, I repeat, none of these were coalition wars. Please name ONE coalition war.