suggestion: force peace with warleader as possible peace negotiation term

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

kneville01

Corporal
12 Badges
May 2, 2014
49
6
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
Playing as Hungary, I allied Ragusa. Serbia declared on them, I honored the alliance, beat up the Serbs and took a couple of provinces to make the peace (before Ragusa screwed me by making a white peace, and all my conquests are for nothing). Then Venice declared on Ragusa, I honored the alliance and went into debt to hire mercs, eventually beating up the Venetians and taking couple of provinces.

Ragusa now hates me more for the "separate peace" penalties than they like me for bailing their arse out against two superior foes. This doesn't seem right. They weren't winning against Serbia or Venice, not remotely, they should have welcomed any chance to get out the war intact. And I should have been able to make it so, as a condition of my peace with beaten-down Serbia or Venice, that they also make peace with the original war target Ragusa.
 

bbqftw

banana vendor for unhuman entities
2 Badges
Jan 18, 2014
5.394
6.187
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
Stuff like this is why I liked the old warleader system, though I guess it is a sentiment not shared by many.

On the other hand, the change essentially made all wars cleansing of heresy wars. And there were a ton of stupid tricks you could pull with that warleader lock.