The wonderful cascading alliances

[unmerged(215997)]

Interesting idea Falc.
Even with the possibility of long list of changing warleaders, guessing that these changes would take at least a couple of months each, it could actually work.
By that time many countries involved would want to peace out allready.

 

[maniac112]

I have to say this is quite a funny occurrence, nobody in europe can field an army over 50,000 because whenever they try to expand they get ganked and destroyed. I've never seen so many German OPMs still around by 1490.

At one stage I saw pretty much Austria + vassals vs all of the HRE. During the war most of the HRE was occupied by somebody who didn't own the provence. By the end Austria was down to 4 provences and now Brandenburg is taking the same fast route to destruction.

 

[KGrob]

They need to figure out a way to stop them from snowballing. Make AI ignore most calls for example. Lower the cost of ignoring, especially if it's an offensive war.

Ya, I'd like to see something like this. Make it so the penalty isn't nearly as great if your ally was the one who declared war.

 

[tului]

This has pretty much broken being able to join an alliance as any OPM. Especially if you're near France or someone who is/will be HRE. Just disable it until you can figure out how to fix it? I glanced in defines and stuff but didn't see anything readily apparent. Anyone figured out how to disable it?

Its so sad, I had to switch to playing Semper Fi, Vicky 2 and Lionheart KC(with crash bugs) instead. Everything else is awesome or just needs some tweaking, but the alliance thing borks it. Hence me playing Semper Fi as the Germans, since its pretty much the same thing as being HRE just with better logistics ;-)

 

[Poh]

So im France fighting Burgundy due to Austria joining the war as HRE they get the leadership of the war and ofc call in their allies which is no biggy. Now a year into the fighting Burgundy calls in their new ally Cleves. Is this WAD or should only austria be able to call in allies now?

 

[tului]

They got the code for their upcoming WW1 simulation game mixed up with the EU3 alliances code.

 

[unmerged(92043)]

I love the development of games. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

First people were clammoring for this to be put in, and now people want it scaled back drastically.

 

[Zenith Darksea]

It's not an either-or question - it's a matter of getting it right. It's not just troublemakers, either; people have legitimate concerns here.

 

[fatrobin]

hmmm maybe make it less likely for people (decrease the instability for not joining in, reduce diplomatic chances etc) to join in unless the person calling you up is same culture group or within your sphere of influence (maybe a small bonus if it is within your potential sphere but not fully in it) or if you border / have claims on the nation(s) which the side calling you up

so you might see people like Luxenbourg, Lorraine the Dutch minors help if burgundy attacked liege... but less likely to see poland, denmark, england, spain or people like that.

obviously relations, BB, war exhaustion would all have to effects on joining in

 

[Steph]

So, there should be a kind of "War interest", beside the War Exhaustion, to determine how likely the ally is to answer positively.
Actually, this probably already exist : the chance of a country DOW by itself. It probably already factors boder, sphere, claims, relative strength, religious difference, infamy, etc. If you call an ally that is likely to attack your ennemy by itself, it will answer positively. If it would not (this include being already ally or friendly) then it is unlikely, and the penalty for refusing should be reduced.

 

[Steph]

And this could also be factored in the chance of success of an alliance. If you figthing a natural ennemy of country A, then country A should be more likely to join and alliance, and then join the war.

 

[vintis88]

Cascading alliances led to TO getting provinces in North Africa in my initial DW game. Not ok...

 

[GaiusC]

I love the development of games. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
First people were clammoring for this to be put in, and now people want it scaled back drastically.

What people wanted was a Call-to-arms so that the attacked or defender could decide if he wanted to call his allies or if he could deal with the war all alone - if you're France fighting Osnabruck, you don't need to call your allies, with the risk of some defecting and leaving the alliance.

This has nothing to do with this. For a starter, the mere fact that war-leader can change months into the war is silly, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[e_quality]

After some more playing around with different European nations I have come to actually enjoy the new system a lot. Initially I was a bit skeptical but this is actually more fun! I do not care that much if it is all that historical or not, though the thirty years of course comes to mind, but it is simply funnier gameplay.

It adds a little bit of surprise and randomness, which is integral to good gameplay. And it adds depth to the diplomatic game. It is now much more necessary to keep track of other nations’ relations, guarantees and royal marriages etc, before launching that expansionist war of aggression.

It might perhaps need some tweaking but the “cascading alliances” is a good, fun system. Kudos to PI!

 

[Gauge]

Another problem with the system is that it is incredibly unenjoyable to sit for ever (sometimes 20 minutes) trying to find the end of all the chains of the country you want to attack. Can we get a tree or something that does this for us. It is incredibly tedious.

 

[Arizal]

Another problem with the system is that it is incredibly unenjoyable to sit for ever (sometimes 20 minutes) trying to find the end of all the chains of the country you want to attack. Can we get a tree or something that does this for us. It is incredibly tedious.

You are right. I love the cascading alliance, that force us to be cautious, but like I would like to have a familly tree, you have a good idea by demanding an alliance tree. Hurray for environment, we love trees!

 

[Dafool]

Cascading alliances led to TO getting provinces in North Africa in my initial DW game. Not ok...

Heh, I had this too. They ended up being the first colonizers too, due to that province. It's ridiculous, since I was Brandenburg and when I went to annex them it was only some 50%. I looked at Brazil and they had more provinces there than all the other colonizers combined. I had to drop out of the war and force a PU a few years later, since there was no way I was ever going to sail to South America to fight the Prussians. Just plain weird.

 

[unmerged(76082)]

I'm literally seeing French and English provinces in Italy before 1410. This never happened prior to DW.

 

[Alerias]

Im getting angrier at this "feature" the more I play Divine Wind.

Funny how its NEVER the crappy nerfs that gets advertised in the Dev Diaries. If this 'mechanic' had been explained honestly in the CtA Dev Diary I would never have brought this expansion.

I hope Paradox fixes it real good or give us the modding ability to disable CtA entirely if its the only way.

This is not cool. I want a playable game back.

I'm glad for those who don't find this a total game-breaker, but masochism isn't for everyone.

 

[delra]

Im getting angrier at this "feature" the more I play Divine Wind.

Funny how its NEVER the crappy nerfs that gets advertised in the Dev Diaries. If this 'mechanic' had been explained honestly in the CtA Dev Diary I would never have brought this expansion.

I hope Paradox fixes it real good or give us the modding ability to disable CtA entirely if its the only way.

Stop raging already. It's obviously a bug, not an intentional design choice. It'll be fixed in the first patch.