So I just discovered this little gem. There's no longer a penalty for a war that's 60 days or longer old when giving a Call to Arms. This becomes increasingly annoying when AI nations can also form alliances while at war. Three years into a war with the Ottomans, If I start to win they call in Timmurds, and if I start to win that, they call in Crimea and Golden Horde. Why was this penalty removed?
Why was the length of war penalty removed from a Call to Arms?
- Thread starter The Cue
- Start date
-
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.
Because it's historical. It also goes the other way; you can call in your allies well after 60 days.
With the removal of cascading alliances, I'm more than happy to adjust to AI wandering into wars later.
They do need to fix the "would be called to multiple wars" bug though. That modifier should only apply when they'd actually be called into multiple wars.
They do need to fix the "would be called to multiple wars" bug though. That modifier should only apply when they'd actually be called into multiple wars.
This isn't restricted to AI nations, you can do the same thing.
It's the attacker who gets a penalty towards forming new alliances.
You can do it as defender, but usually humans aren't WL defenders.
lol... you caught my stupidity before I had a chance to delete it. Just noticed this penalty isn't applied to the defender. Need to read more carefully. Anyway... seems fair enough.
Is there any way to turn on a notification of someone joining the war? A few times I've been in a war and didn't realize Ottomans or Austria has joined until I notice their hostile troops.
You're probably right about why, but I feel the game gets cheapened constantly by the call for things to be historical over balanced. This is a great example of it.
He seems to have deleted his post, but I haven't been able to find a way to be a defender in this war, short of not having any manpower. If I war dec The Mamluks and burn all of my manpower on them, then I can usually get the Timurids to wardec me. Unfortunately, that brings in half of India, The Ottomans, and most of the Hordes.
How does this cheapen the game? If anything this makes gameplay richer. The only drawback in the current system is that non-warleaders cannot request the warleader to call them into the war.
Last edited:
it appears in the blackbox in the lower right corner that I can't remember the name for. If you click on it in there you can add it to being a popup instead of showing there.
Because there's no longer any strategic value behind waiting for a powerful ally of your target to be at war, or even make it matter. Using the console I've played this war out even longer to see what happens if by some miracle I can beat the Ottos+Timmy+Hordes, and the Ottomans simply ally and call in Poland, Lithuania, and Hungary. How is this richer gameplay? It seems to me, it's just making another country unplayable. Maybe it's richer gameplay if you're playing Ottomans.
The ... Ottomans ally who what now ? I've never seen the Ottos ally those 3 particular countries. Like .. is it even .. possible. 99% of the time they are either rivals or hostile to eachother.
Of course there is still value in doing so. If they are being savagely beaten in a war, they're not going to honor the initial call, and it will take years of recuperation for them to get the manpower / cash recovered in order to honor it later.
Even last patch the Ottomans allied Timurids in my Najd experiments. They are quite likely to ally Tunisia and Crimea as well, with a possibility of another horde.
There are ways to deal with that of course.
I there a way to turn off or mod away the requirement to join an AI in a defensive war? I'm Rival with Persia and they are attacking a moderately sized country in India but if I click on Persia and try to diplo them for a white peace for which they'd refused so I could join into the war it says I can't do it since I need an absurdly high opinion modifier of India. Very STUPID that I can't project my power over a rival by joining against them in a petty war, better the defender whom I don't care 2 cents about wins rather than a rival!!! Am I missing something here, like is there any other way to join into ongoing wars?
Edit: I can obviously increase their opinion of me but that's not where the restraint is, it lays in my country not having a positive opinion of the defender while in fact my opinion of them is far greater than that of my Rival whom I trying to join against! I think the game should compare the two modifers and if you have a -170 for example on your rival and the defender is a -30 yeah you don't like them, but you like them ore so than your rival which should be reason enough to join in their defense!
Edit: I can obviously increase their opinion of me but that's not where the restraint is, it lays in my country not having a positive opinion of the defender while in fact my opinion of them is far greater than that of my Rival whom I trying to join against! I think the game should compare the two modifers and if you have a -170 for example on your rival and the defender is a -30 yeah you don't like them, but you like them ore so than your rival which should be reason enough to join in their defense!
There is still tons of value in doing that: drained manpower, WE, and other things that make them a weaker ally or can prevent/further delay them joining in the war.
Say what now? The number of times I've seen AI Ottomans ally either Poland or Hungary in about 1,000 hours of game-play is exactly 0.
Ah...so it prevented you from using a cheesy byz strategy. This thread makes more sense now.
It makes day 1 DoW on minors much less useful. RIP Albania into Urbino or any chance of early expansion with M'zab. 
I love the assumption, but no. I'm simply attempting a QQ play through, no cheesy strats(unless you consider rushing govt reform a cheesy strat), no game breaking bugs.
It makes day 1 DoW on minors much less useful. RIP Albania into Urbino or any chance of early expansion with M'zab.
anything that kills the "miugrate elsewhere/become HRE as whoever" strats is a good thing in my eyes
Byz needs no cheese with all the money they fed the Constantinople node this patch; it's pretty easy to just build 20+ galleys nonstop from day 0 then declare the instant Ottos go for anybody in Anatolia or join a Crimea war. It's Albania that got its pants pulled down
.