Silly Holy Order exploit

[Patrask]

Maybe one solution could be to have the loser ask for peace and if the victor refuses a clearly advantageous offer, he gets some sort of penalty? Prestige hit? Revolt risk? Relations degrading? I seem to remember something of the sort in EU3, or am I wrong?

 

[Hamanu]

Peace should be automatic once you reach 100% just as defeat is.

Or you could be given the option to choose whether you want to enforce/white/surrender but without dragging it out indefinitely.

 

[merlin2199]

I thought you couldn't declare war if you had raised troops. Does this rule not apply to the Holy Orders?

 

[Hamanu]

All mercs are excluded from the rule

 

[siis]

We will probably just change it so that when you are an attacker in a war, you pay the upkeep, disregarding if you are also defending. That way only true defensive wars are possible with no upkeep.

But you can still exploid the fact that you gain a huge relation/opinion boost with your vassal when you defend against muslim. Just never make peace.

 

[Onedreamer]

Hm, I imagine the fix here would be easy to implement: Any war in which one faction has achieved 100% war score (total victory) should automatically end as soon as the defeated party capitulates. There are reasons to refuse an offer of capitulation if you're still fighting the war, such as weakening them further for your allies, but once it's over it's over. There's no reason the victor should have to agree at that point, as the only reason he wouldn't would be to game the system.

There'd still be the potential for exploitation, but at least at 99% war score the opposing side still gets soldiers from some holding, somewhere, however small, and could potentially get enough for a siege.

The funny part is that if your enemies get to 100% warscore the game ends immediatly and automatically, no peace offer. Even if you have a mighty ally who is marching at one month of your demesnes and is going to beat the crap out of your enemies...

 

[unmerged(164239)]

The funny part is that if your enemies get to 100% warscore the game ends immediatly and automatically, no peace offer. Even if you have a mighty ally who is marching at one month of your demesnes and is going to beat the crap out of your enemies...

I think, that's good thing. You've been outmanoeuvred.

 

[Hamanu]

And it should work the same the other waay around.

 

[Aquitaine]

FWIW, one vote not to change this, because the game can't possibly tell the difference between 'I'm maintaining this defensive war to keep my free army' and 'I am in a small offensive war for (out of the way place) and the Calpihate is coming for me, HELP'

Either that or just change the feature so that it's reduced cost based on the size of your opponent in the defensive war rather than free. Right now the feature is easy to understand. Adding conditions and exceptions may stop a handful of people from exploiting it but frankly I don't care if they exploit it.

 

[merlin2199]

All mercs are excluded from the rule

Extending the rule to mercs would solve the problem. It's the easiest way to stop this particular exploit.

 

[Laur]

I haven't played the game so I am not familiar with the game mechanics. But I was thinking that, in order to avoid this problem, when the original targeted infidels are defeated (i.e. the warscore is 100% in your favour), the order could sign peace on its own, claim some of the lands they've conquered (just as in CK1), and leave you waging the extra wars you were so imprudent to commence just with your own armies. Any further employment of that order's troops should be treated as mercenaries, unless sanctioned by the Pope by calling a new crusade.

 

[praguepride]

That is an interesting alternative. If the Holy Order is doing all the heavy lifting in the war, perhaps they decide "screw it, we're taking these lands"