The single thing I hate the most about EU4

[gothos]

Well, rebels are tedious as hell, I can attest to that. In my Extended Timeline game as Japan I started westernizing when my empire stretched from Honshu to Moscow and Libya and Ethiopia (2600 points needed). I've culture converted pretty much everything that's outside my culture group. ~98% religious unity (Arian, and japanese provinces keep flipping to Shinto -_-). Enter -30 legitimacy events dumping my legitimacy to 0. 3-6 new rebel stacks every month. At this size I can only really use autonomous rebel suppression in Japan, as in the rest it would mean an army would start marching from Georgia to Korea and back even though the rebels are being taken care of by an army closer by. There's no difficulty defeating them, but spending NINETY in-game years pausing every month to give orders to move between provinces... not even close to anyone's idea of fun.

Oh and yeah don't get me started on "We need a shakeup!" while I'm still coring conquests from my previous war, or Incident at Honnoji...

 

[asgersikker]

IMO rebels should be removed entirely as they add nothing to immersion.

Instead rebels should be replaced by more severe penalties based on revolt risk on both a province and national level.

So the more revolt risk you have the less tax and man power you get (as it is now). But I'd also like to see armies becoming more expensive and you should also have a lower land force limit to resemble that more citizens join rebel forces and you have to pay your forces more to stay loyal.

Though no rebels, new nations should still be able to pop, provinces flip and so.
If e.g. a province has more than 5% RR for 3 years the MTTH for province flip, nation pop and such should start counting. A small MTTH at start but as the months progress the MTTH should increase.

I would find this a lot more interesting than the constant rebel bashing that is nothing but tedious at best.

 

[Iche_Bins]

For myself, what grieves me most are these random events: Peasants are unhappy -> option 1: rebels spawn (yay), option 2: lower tax or however these events are designed.

The problem for me is here, even you are a stable country whitout OE, at peace fo years and stuff, all of a sudden you have to face ridicoulous masses of rebels, while you didn't have any chance to circumvent that!
Did something "wrong", bad governcance? Yeah, punish me, no problem! But even I did it all the best possible way, the game makes me believe that the state of my nation is desolate and throws some BS events at me. So, why?

There are no internal mechanics there to represent "governement" etc., so technically I cannot inluence stuff like wellfare, taxes for my citizens, social spending, political improvements etc etc.
As a substitute, I constantly get bad events to proof that I am a evil ruler and my people or whoever is suffering. Yay.

Well you are not the ruler of your country. You are a bigger entity behind your ruler and influence his behaviour in certain aspects of his country, like war and colonization. You have no influence (and almost no knowledge) what so ever over internal governing. If you happen to get a useless king who screws up all the time you have to live with it.
I wouldn't mind having a better flashed out internal politics in future versions of EU4, but EU4 is just not about that.

 

[Bragi]

Well you are not the ruler of your country. You are a bigger entity behind your ruler and influence his behaviour in certain aspects of his country, like war and colonization. You have no influence (and almost no knowledge) what so ever over internal governing. If you happen to get a useless king who screws up all the time you have to live with it.
I wouldn't mind having a better flashed out internal politics in future versions of EU4, but EU4 is just not about that.

I agree with the statement that EU4 is currently not about that. It is a great game to me anyway, just to make it clear. I love it.

But specifically for the mechanics around rebels & stabilty: You have to face the consequences and you are forced to take action, almost without any possibilites to prevent such an outcome like uprisings and stab drops. That feels illogical and inconsequent, at least for me.

Like said before, consequences which result of actions performed by myself, like OE or AE or most cases related to war, decisions, diplomacy and trade, are most welcome and, obviously, the core of the game. Events that happen out of the blue without connection to my behavier or the state of my nation are neither rewarding nor fun. Of course positive events are included as well.

I want a stability gain as a reward for my efforts, for example for maintaining peace or good relations with my neighbors. I want worrysome nobles being tightend to my behavior in diplomacy or decisions, or even in taking specific ideas, which could be unconvenient to said social group etc.