Even those who like the basic idea of coalitions (such as myself) recognize that the mechanic needs work. The coalition mechanic has two basic components:
1) How coalitions form (i.e. how AE is distributed)
2) Restrictions on coalition peace terms (e.g. no separate peace with juniors).
Putting aside #1 (which has improved in the latest beta), below is a simple proposal fixing #2. The proposal would still allow for coalitions to serve as a roadblock to expansion, but would also provide a way to avoid fighting the same huge coalition war again and again for little gain.
Basic Proposal
Put simply, my proposal is to make coalitions less rigid by providing a mechanism for the target to break the coalition, or at least break certain members from the coalition. Under this system, the coalition target can make separate peace with any coalition member, but only for the member leaving the war and perhaps leaving the coalition for a set period of time. For example, the following unilateral warscores (between only target and junior member) might allow the following peace concessions:
-33% WS: Junior member exits war
-67% WS: Junior member exits war and leaves coalition for 7 years
-100% WS: Junior member exits war and leaves coalition for 15 years
Anti-Exploit: To prevent target from forcing junior member from coalition and then simply attacking them (without protection of coalition) shortly after, the mechanic would need one of two features:
(a) a truce between target and member for the duration of the member's ban from the coalition, or
(b) the member remains "in" the coalition (retaining protection of other members) but cannot join any coalition war where it is not the target
Extension #1: Full Break of Coalition
This is not the core of the proposal but is an additional feature that might be considered. If the target achieves a specific, high multilateral war score (so against the entire coalition), the target could demand that the coalition be "broken" for a set period of time, meaning that all coalition members involved in the war would exit the coalition (or, at least, remain as "defensive" members only, retaining the coalition's protection but unable to join a war where it is not the target).
Extension #2: Allow concessions
In the peace negotiations with junior member, the target would be able to offer limited concessions to member (such as returning core or releasing vassal) to secure their break from the coalition. For example, with target France and GB as junior member, if France has WS of +20% against GB (not enough with above numbers to secure exit), they could offer to return Calais to GB in exchange from GB exiting the war. (Note, this is a peace where both parties are making concessions: France returning Calais and GB exiting war. This also serves the main purpose of coalitions - slowing/reversing expansion of the target - while still allowing target to avoid fighting same huge coalition war again and again.)
Extension #3: Peacetime Appeasement
Allow coalition target to make concessions during peacetime to secure exit of member from coalition for set period of time. Example: Again, France is target and GB is member. France holds Calais and is allied to enemy of GB. GB wants Calais and wants to break alliance. France offers to cede Calais to GB and break alliance with British enemy in exchange for GB exiting the coalition for set period of time.
I think implementing the basic proposal and perhaps some of the extensions:
1) is feasible in terms of development without a major overhaul of the engine and could be handled by the AI
2) would fix a lot of the current problems with coalitions
3) would make coalitions (and the game in general) more fluid, realistic and strategic, and thus more fun
4) would still allow coalitions to serve as roadblocks to blobs, and would not represent a "nerf" or coalitions
Open to suggestions. Opinions?
1) How coalitions form (i.e. how AE is distributed)
2) Restrictions on coalition peace terms (e.g. no separate peace with juniors).
Putting aside #1 (which has improved in the latest beta), below is a simple proposal fixing #2. The proposal would still allow for coalitions to serve as a roadblock to expansion, but would also provide a way to avoid fighting the same huge coalition war again and again for little gain.
Basic Proposal
Put simply, my proposal is to make coalitions less rigid by providing a mechanism for the target to break the coalition, or at least break certain members from the coalition. Under this system, the coalition target can make separate peace with any coalition member, but only for the member leaving the war and perhaps leaving the coalition for a set period of time. For example, the following unilateral warscores (between only target and junior member) might allow the following peace concessions:
-33% WS: Junior member exits war
-67% WS: Junior member exits war and leaves coalition for 7 years
-100% WS: Junior member exits war and leaves coalition for 15 years
Anti-Exploit: To prevent target from forcing junior member from coalition and then simply attacking them (without protection of coalition) shortly after, the mechanic would need one of two features:
(a) a truce between target and member for the duration of the member's ban from the coalition, or
(b) the member remains "in" the coalition (retaining protection of other members) but cannot join any coalition war where it is not the target
Extension #1: Full Break of Coalition
This is not the core of the proposal but is an additional feature that might be considered. If the target achieves a specific, high multilateral war score (so against the entire coalition), the target could demand that the coalition be "broken" for a set period of time, meaning that all coalition members involved in the war would exit the coalition (or, at least, remain as "defensive" members only, retaining the coalition's protection but unable to join a war where it is not the target).
Extension #2: Allow concessions
In the peace negotiations with junior member, the target would be able to offer limited concessions to member (such as returning core or releasing vassal) to secure their break from the coalition. For example, with target France and GB as junior member, if France has WS of +20% against GB (not enough with above numbers to secure exit), they could offer to return Calais to GB in exchange from GB exiting the war. (Note, this is a peace where both parties are making concessions: France returning Calais and GB exiting war. This also serves the main purpose of coalitions - slowing/reversing expansion of the target - while still allowing target to avoid fighting same huge coalition war again and again.)
Extension #3: Peacetime Appeasement
Allow coalition target to make concessions during peacetime to secure exit of member from coalition for set period of time. Example: Again, France is target and GB is member. France holds Calais and is allied to enemy of GB. GB wants Calais and wants to break alliance. France offers to cede Calais to GB and break alliance with British enemy in exchange for GB exiting the coalition for set period of time.
I think implementing the basic proposal and perhaps some of the extensions:
1) is feasible in terms of development without a major overhaul of the engine and could be handled by the AI
2) would fix a lot of the current problems with coalitions
3) would make coalitions (and the game in general) more fluid, realistic and strategic, and thus more fun
4) would still allow coalitions to serve as roadblocks to blobs, and would not represent a "nerf" or coalitions
Open to suggestions. Opinions?
