Why can't I turn down a personal union especially with a really strong nation.

[CaptainChiatrol]

I have a Prussia game I was playing and I was in a delicate situation with a pretty large kingdom and trying to calm things down and suddenly I ended up with a personal union with France.

I didn't want this. I was using them as an ally while I ate everyone else and suddenly they were in a union with me and had firehatred on me.

I put a diplomat on them the very second they turned and got them to liking me about 130 and they still revolted with several allies. (they had positive like to me but I guess the -1000 likes leige doesn't apply to the AI)

This through everything apart and when France attacked with allies for independence that I wanted them to keep in the first place every coalition on me also fired.

Why did I have to rule France in the first place? I really really didn't want that while I was trying to stabilize the situation for my well fed Saxony vassal before taking the rest of austria to stop him from doing his HRE things.

This basically is an end situation while everyone in the world is attacking me just because I couldn't back out of a personal union with france.

Why would a lesser partner even revolt at over 100 positive opinion?

Maybe I'm just so mad because I was almost eating all of the HRE and almost ready to form germany, but why is this a thing at all?

 

[uwor]

If you really din't want them, why didn't you just set them free? This should have given you a huge opinion boost and your dynasty stays on their throne, so you can claim them when they have no/a weak heir/regency.

But OK , it is France as lapdog. I'm pretty sure, I wouldn't set them free, without a huge war against me.

I still would like to have at least an event popping that asks you whether you want them or not if their king just dies. With the options:

1. PU them
2. Put another member of your dynasty on their throne.

In my opinion this would even make sense. You normally don't really rule two countries on your own. Normally you had someone else ruling the other country. The person ruling the other country had just a bit limited possible actions. And I think this would represent this at least up to a certain point. (OK, it's only a black and white decision. Take them or don't.)

The only thing I'm not sure about is, whether this option would be too strong. But I think you get the same behavior by getting the PU and just setting them free immediately.

 

[Gnomi]

I am pretty sure people had been asking for the ability to reject getting into succession wars since the release of the game, as well. I am surprised they haven't changed anything about this, given that it shouldn't be difficult to implement.

 

[henzington]

Yeah especially as Prussia I have had several games break bad because I got a succession war over a OPM. Which always breaks my alliance with Austria and generally leads to me being forced to spit out all of the territory I have gotten.

 

[uwor]

Succession wars is another point. I totally agree. Their should be an option to not take part in the succession war. But the problem is, how to solve the succession war scenario?

I have three scenarios in mind.

1. Decline the succession war but get someone of your dynasty on their throne. -> Easily exploitable. Decline the war and claim immediately afterwards. -> No succession war, but still the PU. You don't have to fight the other contestant, but only them plus allies.
2. Decline the other contestant puts his dynasty on their throne. -> Habsburg already spreads like a disease, you really don't want to make them even stronger.
3. Some random person gets the throne. -> Doesn't really make sense. I mean where does this guy come from? How can he get to rule without anyone backing him.

On topic: I think the OP got France without a succession war. (Pretty unlikely, but possible.) They declared independence after a while. (Seems to be around 2 years later, if they had a negative opinion at the start of the PU.) In his case he could just have released them. But still I would like to see a popup with 2 options here.

 

[Opiu18]

1. Decline the succession war but get someone of your dynasty on their throne. -> Easily exploitable. Decline the war and claim immediately afterwards. -> No succession war, but still the PU. You don't have to fight the other contestant, but only them plus allies.

Well perhaps add a truce timer and make it so you can only claim a throne if you do not have have a truce

 

[Gnomi]

Succession wars is another point. I totally agree. Their should be an option to not take part in the succession war. But the problem is, how to solve the succession war scenario?

I have three scenarios in mind.

1. Decline the succession war but get someone of your dynasty on their throne. -> Easily exploitable. Decline the war and claim immediately afterwards. -> No succession war, but still the PU. You don't have to fight the other contestant, but only them plus allies.
2. Decline the other contestant puts his dynasty on their throne. -> Habsburg already spreads like a disease, you really don't want to make them even stronger.
3. Some random person gets the throne. -> Doesn't really make sense. I mean where does this guy come from? How can he get to rule without anyone backing him.

On topic: I think the OP got France without a succession war. (Pretty unlikely, but possible.) They declared independence after a while. (Seems to be around 2 years later, if they had a negative opinion at the start of the PU.) In his case he could just have released them. But still I would like to see a popup with 2 options here.

1: If you decline, there's good chance someone of your dynasty would not end up on their throne. Hypothetically, the event could goes like this.

The computer picks the first candidate and the second candidate.
The both get to choose from pressing the claim and backing off.
If both press their claim, it will be a war.
If only one party presses the claim, that party gets the throne.
If both parties back off, the member of the dynasty from the first candidate takes the throne.

2: I don't see any issue here; the succession war as it is doesn't help with this anyway.
3: Support of the local nobles; which really should be necessary for the most personal unions.

 

[NotConforming]

Succession wars is another point. I totally agree. Their should be an option to not take part in the succession war. But the problem is, how to solve the succession war scenario?

I have three scenarios in mind.

1. Decline the succession war but get someone of your dynasty on their throne. -> Easily exploitable. Decline the war and claim immediately afterwards. -> No succession war, but still the PU. You don't have to fight the other contestant, but only them plus allies.
2. Decline the other contestant puts his dynasty on their throne. -> Habsburg already spreads like a disease, you really don't want to make them even stronger.
3. Some random person gets the throne. -> Doesn't really make sense. I mean where does this guy come from? How can he get to rule without anyone backing him.

On topic: I think the OP got France without a succession war. (Pretty unlikely, but possible.) They declared independence after a while. (Seems to be around 2 years later, if they had a negative opinion at the start of the PU.) In his case he could just have released them. But still I would like to see a popup with 2 options here.

You could also just disable succession wars between allies...
Be it France, Austria, Spain or some other big power. Succession wars over minors always trigger player vs his strongest ally wars. Some time ago succession wars were between player and his strongest rival, which is the most sensible way imo.
I hope they just forgot that rival thing when changing the PUs to be christianity exclusive.

 

[Lemont Elwood]

As Scandinavia, I somehow got a union over Bavaria (whom I had NEVER married into; it might have been a bug), and then - BAM! At war with Spain. I just offered them what they wanted straight up, and only took an eight prestige penalty. I like to think of it as one country backing down in a diplomatic crisis. It wouldn't hurt, though, if there were a Crisis system where a nation could strong-arm another nation into surrendering whatever it is they want without a fight… it would also help with the Wants Your Provinces malus.

 

[Illianor123]

As Scandinavia, I somehow got a union over Bavaria (whom I had NEVER married into; it might have been a bug), and then - BAM! At war with Spain. I just offered them what they wanted straight up, and only took an eight prestige penalty. I like to think of it as one country backing down in a diplomatic crisis. It wouldn't hurt, though, if there were a Crisis system where a nation could strong-arm another nation into surrendering whatever it is they want without a fight… it would also help with the Wants Your Provinces malus.

You marry someone and they get your dynasty. They marry Bavaria and then Bavaria gets your dynasty. Bam, your dynasty on their throne. And you get the option to PU them etc.

 

[CaptainChiatrol]

If you really din't want them, why didn't you just set them free? This should have given you a huge opinion boost and your dynasty stays on their throne, so you can claim them when they have no/a weak heir/regency.

Because I'm dumb and didn't seee that this was possible. When their opinoin of me changed to a fireball from a heart I would of given them independence immediately if I knew it was possible. With all the world in a coalition against me I didn't want to two strongest nations in the world to stop being bffs.

Well i'm not playing ironman because I don't have an SSD yet and monthly saved but I may go back to a previous save with the knowledge that I can do that because it shouldn't fall apart just because I couldn't find an option in diplomacy.

Such an annoying mechanic. if france could just ask nicely or if I saw the button I'd of taken them out of the personal union.