You cannot negotiate a separate peace with someone who is the target of a war goal

[corwin]

Hi there,

playing as Bavaria, I DoW the Palatinate for Heidelberg because that's the mission (yes I want it too ;-) )... Their allies, most notably Bohemia & Austria join in, Bohemia is the War leader. The war is going well. However, I cannot negotiate with the Palatinate for getting the war goal because "you cannot negotiate a separate peace with someone who is the target of a war goal". Which to be honest I find really weird. But ok. Moving on to the boss. I cannot get any provinces by negotiating with Bohemia either for some reason... I conquered 2 of 3 provinces from the Palatinate (non-capital), and the Bohemian capital. Why doesn't the negotiation screen enable me to ask for those 2 non-capital Palatine (sp?) provinces? I mean I conquered the war goal and more, I put pressure on the war leader by conquering their capital, I have their armies on the (eternal) run... Yet there is no possibility to even ask for the war goal?
Is this WAD, am I missing something?

 

[johnlukeg]

Perhaps some glitchiness related to the 'Leader may/may not negotiate for us' checkbox. Are they a subject to another country by chance? Just trying to think of what might be causing this.

 

[Hawkiee]

Perhaps some glitchiness related to the 'Leader may/may not negotiate for us' checkbox. Are they a subject to another country by chance? Just trying to think of what might be causing this.

As far as I know there seem to be a new feature/bug that when you have a wargoal, and the holder of the wargoal is not the warleader you actually have to negotiate trough him (Bohemia) in this case.

Heads up though, I have experienced a weird bug/occurance that when you dow a lesser partner in union or a vassal they become warleder nomather how much stronger their liege is, this leaves you with a warleader you can't negotiate with so be careful.

 

[corwin]

No the Palatinate is not a vassal or member of a union... Hmmphh I think I think I'll be heading over to the bug section to browse a bit.

 

[armzngunz]

Yeah, I find this extremely stupid, when I attack someone who is allied to some strong power on the other side of the continent which is landlocked and impossible to attack, then what am I supposed to do? Paradox should really fix this/remove this...

 

[TheMeInTeam]

This is one of the more odd messages in the game. Usually, the ONLY person you can negotiate with is the target of a war goal, and then this message says the opposite with no explanation or logical reason as to why that is.

 

[Bibor]

I cannot get any provinces by negotiating with Bohemia either for some reason... I conquered 2 of 3 provinces from the Palatinate (non-capital), and the Bohemian capital. Why doesn't the negotiation screen enable me to ask for those 2 non-capital Palatine (sp?) provinces?

Perhaps it wasn't you who sieged down the provinces? The provinces might be sieged down by another power, your ally perhaps, or a third party from another war Palatinate is in?

 

[SweetHalcyHS]

I really wish this would be changed for protectorates, especially considering a protectorate treaty cannot be broken by any means.

 

[armzngunz]

I mean, seriously, why is this even in the game?

 

[grommile]

I mean, seriously, why is this even in the game?

I'm tempted to say "because they botched the translation of Victoria II's wargoal system" - where, indeed, if there's only one wargoal currently active then the target of that wargoal cannot be negotiated with unless they are also their side's warleader. It's not a problem in Victoria II, because you can add wargoals to a war in progress.

I prefer that explanation to "they think that having an inaccessible 70-province blob as an ally giving you a magic anti-annexation shield is an actively desirable result".

 

[unmerged(804580)]

I'd think you should be able to demand Palatinate proinces through Bohemia, otherwise it must be some kind of glitch.

There are two ways to get around this, though.

1. Use one of the following CBs: Revolution/Counter-Revolution, Cleansing of Heresy, Revoke Electorate. These three do not allow change in war leader, which effectively prevents cascading alliances.
2. Use no CB. You can choose "no CB" as an option even when you have other CBs. This of course leads to a stability hit and war exhaustion, and in OP's case Bohemia will still assume war leader.. but you can peace out any non-subject nation separately, including the Palatinate against whom you declared on. But the war will not be over until you peace out the enemy war leader.

 

[Soft Rabbit]

1. Use one of the following CBs: Revolution/Counter-Revolution, Cleansing of Heresy, Revoke Electorate. These three do not allow change in war leader, which effectively prevents cascading alliances.

Actually, Cleansing of Heresy no longer locks the war leader. I haven't really seen anyone mention it anywhere, but the CB definitely has been changed.

 

[Schmoekoeksklok]

Actually, Cleansing of Heresy no longer locks the war leader. I haven't really seen anyone mention it anywhere, but the CB definitely has been changed.

Can you please share how you came to this conclusion? It has indeed not been mentioned before and definitely works the same way it always did in 1.4.1, but I'm not on the beta, so maybe you know more about that.

Just saying it without any back-up information only works if it's common knowledge, which this definitely isn't.

 

[unmerged(804580)]

Actually, Cleansing of Heresy no longer locks the war leader. I haven't really seen anyone mention it anywhere, but the CB definitely has been changed.

Ouch..?

Can you please share how you came to this conclusion? It has indeed not been mentioned before and definitely works the same way it always did in 1.4.1, but I'm not on the beta, so maybe you know more about that.

Just saying it without any back-up information only works if it's common knowledge, which this definitely isn't.

Hopefully...

 

[Gamera]

While I find that feature quite annoying (because controlling the OPM you started the war for is barely a percent in the warscore of the warleader), to me it means that you can't continue a war once you achive your wargoal... so that also means you can't peace out that country if it's not the warleader...because then, you'd be in a war while the target of your war isn't in it anymore. That makes a lot of sense...at least to me ^^"

One of the best way to avoid that, is to declare war on another allies for a fallacious CB and then go for your real wargoal that joined the war

 

[Golladan]

A screenshot would be helpful so we can see what is going on.

Also, are you in a coalition?

 

[mgoetze]

I mean, seriously, why is this even in the game?

Because if I guarantee the independence of a OPM, that shouldn't be circumventable by assaulting their province and peacing them out before I can get there. The mechanic makes sense. The problem is just that it is surrounded by bugs and also the general crumminess of the peace negotiation system.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Because if I guarantee the independence of a OPM, that shouldn't be circumventable by assaulting their province and peacing them out before I can get there. The mechanic makes sense. The problem is just that it is surrounded by bugs and also the general crumminess of the peace negotiation system.

No, it doesn't make sense. You should be able to separate peace that target, and the war leader should be able to force you to give it back up if you can't get the war score for a white peace or something.

When you "guarantee" someone, that means you actually protect them, not hiding 100's to 1000's of miles away and expecting that your mere word will protect them magically. It's beyond comprehension that you think it's OK to manipulate war score without contributing.

 

[mgoetze]

No, it doesn't make sense. You should be able to separate peace that target, and the war leader should be able to force you to give it back up if you can't get the war score for a white peace or something.

When you "guarantee" someone, that means you actually protect them, not hiding 100's to 1000's of miles away and expecting that your mere word will protect them magically. It's beyond comprehension that you think it's OK to manipulate war score without contributing.

When I said "crumminess of the peace negotiation system", did you not realise that I meant that to include the way war score works? What did you think I was talking about?

 

[SweetHalcyHS]

I'd appreciate something like the Vicky2 system; that you can annex, but the opposing WL can just release it back, and will actively try to do so.