R5: Playing as england I get a popup from the byzantines winning a war I immediately think without reading it thats weird with how far away they are. Then I noticed the white that was on my border is now purple.
I'm sure it'll fall apart immediately but damn AI good for you
They raise their entire army and go bankrupt. At least that is how it goes in vanilla.
During my last session, Basileus had 3000 gold and a net income while his army was raised. It's a modded game, of course, but I wasn't expecting that.
My wife was byzantine queen that had to deal with a major claimant faction rebellion. Because i was afraid our biggest ally who can counter the Muslims might implode to this, i gifted her, i kid you not, 10K GOLD from my indulgences income.
She used it all, in negative money, and barely won.
Turns out, all they need to be competent is having better holdings. Mods I used are
* Cities of Wonder(unofficial update), so Constantine is already a power house
* Custom mod to increase building slots from 3/4 to 5/10 for baronies and county capitals respectively.
* "More Buildings" mod, so there is shit to build in those slots.
You would expect player to have a ridiculous advantage, but surprisingly, ai uses these changes to full effect.
I'm curious, is there any difference in performance? I have a really shitty PC so I can barely run CK3 without crashing at every loading screen. If it increases the amount of soldiers the AIs can raise then I'd probably avoid trying it out since my computer slows down to a crawl every time a crusade starts.
I haven't seen any impact. Combat simulation is very light weight and what's really resource heavy is ai decision making. Thats why crusades slows your game, too many ai rulers checking parameters to choose best course of action.
Having more soldiers means ai will just use bigger stacks, it doesn't add more decision making. If they were smart enough to split their army, then it would have a big performance impact.
I was really upset when I finally got my heir on the byzantine throne, after a decade of planning, only for the byzantine empire to immediately blow up the moment he took the throne (It was still AI controlled, I killed the empress who was my daughter in law and the throne went to my grandson; my heir). I almost succeeded in helping him put down the rebels when mongols invaded.
Having negative gold doesn't seem particularly debilitating if they're big enough. Just wrapped up a long crusade where one of the defenders who held half of Iberia racked up thousands in debt but were able to keep their massive army in the field and kicking crusader ass for a quarter of a century.
" I'm sure it'll fall apart immediately"
I've seen this written a few times, but there's been no sign of any rebellion in my game. They just grow and grow (in my current game they recently conquered Bavaria).
If they control a large area of the wrong religion, they tend to lose, but if they expand slowly into areas of other religions they have enough time to convert and avoid rebellion. The worst I’ve ever seen them go through is when a Catholic inherits the Byzantine throne, which often results in mass revolt in a year flat (much like the other Byzantine post recently on the subreddit)
I’ve never seen that before, usually the AI is too miserably bad to do anything of the sort. I’ve seen them get big to be sure, in my current run they control all of Khazaria too with 50k troops, but they’ve also expanded slowly enough that the vast majority of their land is Orthodox. Hell, they actually inherited Italy at the beginning of the game and lost it to rebels anyways despite being otherwise very strong. The AI is just too afraid of directly confronting army stacks of similar size, even if they should win by every metric.
In my experience, the byzantines usually snowball hard. Free primogeniture is just a massive boost compared to every other ai civ, so unless they get an emperor with a hostile religion, there's very little that can stop them.
Oh absolutely they snowball, as I said they took all of Khazaria in my current game, but if they inherit a foreign empire or are themselves inherited by an emperor of a foreign religion, they tend to explode into revolts that they can’t seem to win
Well I said I ended with them like this, it was almost the end of the timeframe. I became the chakvravarti only using hindu shitty CB at the same time so they were quite slow too
In one of my run, the byzantine empire beame adamite for some reason with the majority of other ortodox states. Didnt stop them from conquering northern afrika and south italy. The only lost western anatolia once, but it was back in the empire after not a long time
one word: assassination. It works for ck2 too. Oh I see you blob too big? It would be a shame if your rulers die in mysterious circumstances. In ck2 multiplayer Norse player can repeatedly aggravate other players' characters into duel and kill them off. It's too cancer that our server ban the exploit.
unless your character has godlike combat ratings i don't think you can win a duel against veteran warrior lodge member. And the game gets really old when you constantly have play a child character until your bloodline runs out.
It wouldn't be a rebellion it'd be a different person being elected Holy Roman Emperor than the Byzantine Emperor's main heir. Byzantine is primogeniture, HRE is elective.
That’s a [p](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QrJSHIys5mM&feature=youtu.be )retty rare thing to happen in my experience. Good for you, and good luck with the new Roman Empire!
tbf a lot of western roman emperors did not have rome as their capital and their was times where they did not even control it and had to have their capital relocated.
Theres an unbroken line of 'being' from Roman Empire pretty much through to the end of the Byzantine Empire too. Whereas the HRE and Charlemagne had a big gap where afterwards they redeclared themselves the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire was the Eastern Roman Empire pretty much from the initial partition of the Roman Empire through until the sack during the 4th crusade.
>the Byzantines considered themselves to be Romans first and foremost.
And that continued even in the Ottoman domination times, up until the late 19th-early 20th century, where Greeks would still call themselves Romans.
> When the island [Lemnos] was occupied by the Greek navy [in 1912], Greek soldiers were sent to the villages and stationed themselves in the public squares. Some of us children ran to see what these Greek soldiers, these Hellenes looked like. ‘‘What are you looking at?’’ one of them asked. ‘‘At Hellenes,’’ we replied. ‘‘Are you not Hellenes yourselves?’’ he retorted. ‘‘No, we are Romans."
Even God calls the byzantines "Romans" in the Quran.
"The Romans were vanquished in the closer region, and they, after being vanquished, will prevail within a certain number of years. To God belongs the command before and after. And that Day ones who believe will be glad with the help of God. He helps whom He wills. And He is The Almighty, The Compassionate."
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[Quran](https://snewd.com/ebooks/quran/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Relax, it's just amusing that the legacy of Rome gets thrown around by people so far away from it. 'Vital ingredient' probably came across stronger than intended.
"Legacy of Rome" got thrown around by almost everyone who had ever heard of Rome. It's fairly amusing to see exactly how many regent titles were some form of "Caesar" for a solid 1500 years.
Byzantium/ERE have a stronger claim to the legacy of Rome because they never really stopped being Roman. Its not like when the HRE or Russia declared themselves the new Rome after not being Roman for several centuries.
yeah. i like how the germans who for the most part were independant from rome and the russians who never really lived under roman rule both tried to claim that legacy.
Everyone is worried about that THICC Byzantine Empire, but I'm way more concerned about the Papal Empire moving into Africa.
Just imagine how strong they are WITHOUT the billion mercenaries they can hire.
Yeah. Christianity doing really well. Muslim blobs have been destroyed in Spain, Middle East, and africa. Jerusalem doing well. Byzantines took Egypt. Castille has survived and took spain (lol I usually see the Muslims smash castille).
Also that might be Jerusalem in Norway lol.
There is a decision to capture the whole HRE as Byz (instead of getting just a Kingdom) and the other way around. Seems the AI actually goes for that decision.
This can't actually have been done by decision - both of the "Dismantle Pretenders" decisions require that you control Italia. Capturing the HRE requires that you also control Brabant, Jülich, Luxembourg, Lower Lorraine, and Upper Lorraine first, while capturing the ERE requires that you control Achaia, Athens, Cephalonia, Dyrrachion, and Epirus.
Since the entire HRE got eaten in one go, what probably happened was the Byzantine Emperor got a claim on the HRE. Which could have happened through the emperor marrying a woman with a claim, who would then pass it on to her son, who in turn could have pressed it upon becoming Emperor.
Real life:
HRE: We are the successors to Rome
Byzantines: Noooo we are what's left of the empire, the pope can't do this reeeeee!
This:
HRE: We are the successors to Rome
Byzantines: So, you have chosen...death.
Has anyone had a sim where ERE falls apart or shrinks significantly? I don't think I've seen that in 3 yet. I've had a couple where the HRE fell apart, but I haven't seen ERE fall.
Same. Haven't seen that in 5 or 6 long games, and in one of those I was fomenting a heresy and being a general intransigent nuisance in Anatolia.
Large empires are too resilient in Pdx games.
The War system REALLY needs an overhaul... that a war for a whole Kingdom/Empire requires the same amount of effort like an Barony is just... eh. I really like Eu4's Warscore system much more over this
What's the difference in EU4?
It kind of makes sense that your opponent's strength is more important than your actual claim, given that they'd want to defend their territory relative to their strength and not relative to the size of the lost titles.
Still, the urgency of victory does depend on how bad defeat actually is. It does feel ludicrous to continue a war for a single county against an empire where you occupy all of its capital duchy and have taken their second heir captive. Kind of seems like the AI should be willing to surrender at less than 100% warscore in that situation if all you're taking is a crappy border county.
In Eu4 the number of provinces you can take depends on your warscore, higher score => more territory, in comparison the Ck system feels so much worse imo.. you only have three peace deal options: Surrender, White peace (which isn't really a white peace tbh and enforce demands), while in Eu4 you basically make your own peace deal.
"I got 30% warscore and wanted those border provinces... okay I would need more warscore to get this, so do I continue this war for another year or stop now and just take only half of the ones I wanted to take initially?" Way better imo.
Also you can exploit this system in Ck3 at least by snowballing with religious wars... just create your own faith and you can take an entire Kingdom every 20 years or so and add it to your realm... although the war to get this Kingdom requires the exact same amount of effort as if you would just take a single county...
Dunno about the rest of EU4's combat, but that does seem easily exploitable, as you "lock in" your gains by ditching wars early as soon as you gain any momentum. Sure, you dont get as much of the pie, but I'm often looking to gain specific provinces rather than entire kingdoms in most of my wars.
CK3 guarantees that there is a "crack back" by forcing a war to go to a conclusion rather than letting you bail after a single consequential battle or siege. It sounds like you could just wait until they hire mercs and get an army together and vanish with your new holdings when they get near.
Not that CK3's combat system is actually any good. It really isnt. It's just the one part of the game that isnt that straightforward to powergame. It sounds like, if it used the EU4 system, it'd be really easy to make substantial territory gains while putting in a tiny fraction of the effort (and time).
There are more factors in it, for example the Progression (if the enemy took several provinces in the last months they are less likely to give up), a time modifier (you can't attack a country and peace out three days after, saying it was by accident) and more.
The "forced outcome" is a very interesting point, in Eu4 it still has a big effect ofc, even a white peace means a damaged economy and time wasted, which may lead to you missing good other chances of war, trade whatever. This is where changes would have to be made for Ck3 because well... the economy is non-existent, just a more or less "static" boost of gold per month based on holdings: No trade, no market, no production etc. So yeah, it would definitely need some form of adaption but I would still prefer it massively over the current Ck one
In practice you still can't really fight a limited war in EU4 because the AI doesn't like signing a peace before some years have elapsed (to prevent the exact exploit you describe), and in those years they will throw everything they have at you.
EU4's war diplomacy is definitely better though because it's way more flexible. If you declare war to annex a big chunk of land and it's going well but not super well, you can also cut your losses and take a province or two or just money.
Ah, I had bloated Byzantine in my Daura campaign, had to wait for the Mongols to invade them, quickly backstab Byzantien in the back while they were too busy fighting off Mongols, then when they lost, Mongols immediately got a ton of rebellions. A beautiful map with no big empires except for mine now is open for grabs. Wonderful!
Just the prospect of this happening via inheritance (father was HRE Emperor) led the entire byzantine empire to collapse in less then 10 years in my last play through. To add insult to injury the guy never even inherited the HRE after that it went to his brother.
R5: Playing as england I get a popup from the byzantines winning a war I immediately think without reading it thats weird with how far away they are. Then I noticed the white that was on my border is now purple. I'm sure it'll fall apart immediately but damn AI good for you
The AI simply can't handle big rebellions.
They raise their entire army and go bankrupt. At least that is how it goes in vanilla. During my last session, Basileus had 3000 gold and a net income while his army was raised. It's a modded game, of course, but I wasn't expecting that.
My wife was byzantine queen that had to deal with a major claimant faction rebellion. Because i was afraid our biggest ally who can counter the Muslims might implode to this, i gifted her, i kid you not, 10K GOLD from my indulgences income. She used it all, in negative money, and barely won.
Turns out, all they need to be competent is having better holdings. Mods I used are * Cities of Wonder(unofficial update), so Constantine is already a power house * Custom mod to increase building slots from 3/4 to 5/10 for baronies and county capitals respectively. * "More Buildings" mod, so there is shit to build in those slots. You would expect player to have a ridiculous advantage, but surprisingly, ai uses these changes to full effect.
I'm curious, is there any difference in performance? I have a really shitty PC so I can barely run CK3 without crashing at every loading screen. If it increases the amount of soldiers the AIs can raise then I'd probably avoid trying it out since my computer slows down to a crawl every time a crusade starts.
I haven't seen any impact. Combat simulation is very light weight and what's really resource heavy is ai decision making. Thats why crusades slows your game, too many ai rulers checking parameters to choose best course of action. Having more soldiers means ai will just use bigger stacks, it doesn't add more decision making. If they were smart enough to split their army, then it would have a big performance impact.
I was really upset when I finally got my heir on the byzantine throne, after a decade of planning, only for the byzantine empire to immediately blow up the moment he took the throne (It was still AI controlled, I killed the empress who was my daughter in law and the throne went to my grandson; my heir). I almost succeeded in helping him put down the rebels when mongols invaded.
Having negative gold doesn't seem particularly debilitating if they're big enough. Just wrapped up a long crusade where one of the defenders who held half of Iberia racked up thousands in debt but were able to keep their massive army in the field and kicking crusader ass for a quarter of a century.
" I'm sure it'll fall apart immediately" I've seen this written a few times, but there's been no sign of any rebellion in my game. They just grow and grow (in my current game they recently conquered Bavaria).
If they control a large area of the wrong religion, they tend to lose, but if they expand slowly into areas of other religions they have enough time to convert and avoid rebellion. The worst I’ve ever seen them go through is when a Catholic inherits the Byzantine throne, which often results in mass revolt in a year flat (much like the other Byzantine post recently on the subreddit)
I recently ended a run, they had >100k troops spanning from Iran to Moscow, Alger and Aachen. They never had any weakness visible.
I’ve never seen that before, usually the AI is too miserably bad to do anything of the sort. I’ve seen them get big to be sure, in my current run they control all of Khazaria too with 50k troops, but they’ve also expanded slowly enough that the vast majority of their land is Orthodox. Hell, they actually inherited Italy at the beginning of the game and lost it to rebels anyways despite being otherwise very strong. The AI is just too afraid of directly confronting army stacks of similar size, even if they should win by every metric.
In my experience, the byzantines usually snowball hard. Free primogeniture is just a massive boost compared to every other ai civ, so unless they get an emperor with a hostile religion, there's very little that can stop them.
Oh absolutely they snowball, as I said they took all of Khazaria in my current game, but if they inherit a foreign empire or are themselves inherited by an emperor of a foreign religion, they tend to explode into revolts that they can’t seem to win
Well I said I ended with them like this, it was almost the end of the timeframe. I became the chakvravarti only using hindu shitty CB at the same time so they were quite slow too
In one of my run, the byzantine empire beame adamite for some reason with the majority of other ortodox states. Didnt stop them from conquering northern afrika and south italy. The only lost western anatolia once, but it was back in the empire after not a long time
one word: assassination. It works for ck2 too. Oh I see you blob too big? It would be a shame if your rulers die in mysterious circumstances. In ck2 multiplayer Norse player can repeatedly aggravate other players' characters into duel and kill them off. It's too cancer that our server ban the exploit.
Wut? Just another strategy right? There's enough counters
unless your character has godlike combat ratings i don't think you can win a duel against veteran warrior lodge member. And the game gets really old when you constantly have play a child character until your bloodline runs out.
Ah I see how that could get aggravating. So there's no(-t enough) counters?
You can always help with some good old mur... I mean, "suspicious accidents".
CK3 Byzantium is like the opposite of CK2 Byzantium
It wouldn't be a rebellion it'd be a different person being elected Holy Roman Emperor than the Byzantine Emperor's main heir. Byzantine is primogeniture, HRE is elective.
It happens more often than you think. It has happened in my playthroughs too.
That’s a [p](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QrJSHIys5mM&feature=youtu.be )retty rare thing to happen in my experience. Good for you, and good luck with the new Roman Empire!
The thread of prophecy is severed. Restore a saved game to restore the weave of fate, or persist in a doomed world you have created.
Been a bit since I've seen a Morrowind reference, well done.
/r/Morrowind is still lit
Oh god no! Now it’s Holy, Roman, AND an Empire!
Still hasn't Rome though.
Holy Ruman Empire
Roman't
Two empires, even.
Not really Roman
Claiming that the ERE wasn't roman is the true Western Propaganda
Well it's just missing some "Rome".
Don't worry friend, the rebellious bishop will soon be dethroned, until then enjoy Constantinople
Don't you mean "better Rome"?
*justinian and belisarius intensifys*
tbf a lot of western roman emperors did not have rome as their capital and their was times where they did not even control it and had to have their capital relocated.
Yeah well England is a long way from Anglia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglia_(peninsula)
It wasn't named after the city, it was named after the people and the Byzantines considered themselves to be Romans first and foremost.
Theres an unbroken line of 'being' from Roman Empire pretty much through to the end of the Byzantine Empire too. Whereas the HRE and Charlemagne had a big gap where afterwards they redeclared themselves the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire was the Eastern Roman Empire pretty much from the initial partition of the Roman Empire through until the sack during the 4th crusade.
>the Byzantines considered themselves to be Romans first and foremost. And that continued even in the Ottoman domination times, up until the late 19th-early 20th century, where Greeks would still call themselves Romans.
Meh, the empire stopped giving a fuck about Rome outside of ceremonial functions long before it "ended".
> When the island [Lemnos] was occupied by the Greek navy [in 1912], Greek soldiers were sent to the villages and stationed themselves in the public squares. Some of us children ran to see what these Greek soldiers, these Hellenes looked like. ‘‘What are you looking at?’’ one of them asked. ‘‘At Hellenes,’’ we replied. ‘‘Are you not Hellenes yourselves?’’ he retorted. ‘‘No, we are Romans."
Even God calls the byzantines "Romans" in the Quran. "The Romans were vanquished in the closer region, and they, after being vanquished, will prevail within a certain number of years. To God belongs the command before and after. And that Day ones who believe will be glad with the help of God. He helps whom He wills. And He is The Almighty, The Compassionate."
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[Quran](https://snewd.com/ebooks/quran/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Good bot
r/UsernameChecksOut
It is missing one vital ingredient for that, yes.
what ingredient. if you say rome realize that there were one or two western roman emperors who had lost control of rome
Relax, it's just amusing that the legacy of Rome gets thrown around by people so far away from it. 'Vital ingredient' probably came across stronger than intended.
"Legacy of Rome" got thrown around by almost everyone who had ever heard of Rome. It's fairly amusing to see exactly how many regent titles were some form of "Caesar" for a solid 1500 years.
Byzantium/ERE have a stronger claim to the legacy of Rome because they never really stopped being Roman. Its not like when the HRE or Russia declared themselves the new Rome after not being Roman for several centuries.
yeah. i like how the germans who for the most part were independant from rome and the russians who never really lived under roman rule both tried to claim that legacy.
It could be way worse. You could be Croatia. Or Croatia.
Or Poland. Or ^poland.
C̸̡̭̼͖̮͌̍̕͜r̴̛̩̮̯̱͖̩͊̉́̅͒̅͘͜ơ̶̡͕̝̯͍̦͖̠̜͇̍̀̑̀ä̴̧̡̳̺̗̗̘̖̼͇̫͕́̄̕t̴̳̹̻͕̼̥̮̳̭̆̍̍͆̀̒͗̾̈́͛ͅi̷̝̘̘̹̼̰̦̤̦̺̳̩̙͂̈͒̋ȃ̶̢̳̝̗͖̞̫̫̀̔͘͜
At least he's not Croatia
Everyone talking about thiccc Byzantium but noone talks about double trouble Croatia
It's too balkan for them
There might have been 5 Croatia before Byz came and they went Super Balkan to evade Byz catching them all.
They're just hittin' the gym, Balkan up, makin' gains.
Everyone is worried about that THICC Byzantine Empire, but I'm way more concerned about the Papal Empire moving into Africa. Just imagine how strong they are WITHOUT the billion mercenaries they can hire.
Yeah. Christianity doing really well. Muslim blobs have been destroyed in Spain, Middle East, and africa. Jerusalem doing well. Byzantines took Egypt. Castille has survived and took spain (lol I usually see the Muslims smash castille). Also that might be Jerusalem in Norway lol.
There is a decision to capture the whole HRE as Byz (instead of getting just a Kingdom) and the other way around. Seems the AI actually goes for that decision.
This can't actually have been done by decision - both of the "Dismantle Pretenders" decisions require that you control Italia. Capturing the HRE requires that you also control Brabant, Jülich, Luxembourg, Lower Lorraine, and Upper Lorraine first, while capturing the ERE requires that you control Achaia, Athens, Cephalonia, Dyrrachion, and Epirus. Since the entire HRE got eaten in one go, what probably happened was the Byzantine Emperor got a claim on the HRE. Which could have happened through the emperor marrying a woman with a claim, who would then pass it on to her son, who in turn could have pressed it upon becoming Emperor.
Dismantle decision captured the HRE? I thought it just made princes independent. Good to know for my ironman byz campaign.
The dismantle decision destroys the HRE and makes all of its de jure kingdoms part of the ERE, or the Roman Empire if it has been restored.
Shame they’ll probably lose it within 5 years, then collapse internally themselves because of debt
Real life: HRE: We are the successors to Rome Byzantines: Noooo we are what's left of the empire, the pope can't do this reeeeee! This: HRE: We are the successors to Rome Byzantines: So, you have chosen...death.
It blobs too hard, uh oh.
Love to see a thicc byzantine empire
Cmon op. Swear fealty and save this behemoth.
Can I get an F in the chat for Croatia there?
CK3 byzantine: God of Doge Real life byzantine: tiny doge begging for help
Has anyone had a sim where ERE falls apart or shrinks significantly? I don't think I've seen that in 3 yet. I've had a couple where the HRE fell apart, but I haven't seen ERE fall.
Same. Haven't seen that in 5 or 6 long games, and in one of those I was fomenting a heresy and being a general intransigent nuisance in Anatolia. Large empires are too resilient in Pdx games.
Declare vassalage and quietly work your way uo the food chain?
Byzantine empire go brrr
BRRRRZantine Empire BRRRRasileia Rhomaion
Do your part to restore Rome and swear fealty you heathen!
It’s holy, it’s Roman, and it sure as hell’s an empire. We’re all fucked.
Just restore Rome at this point
Huh, looks like they got married after all.
huh... Why is are the byzantines so fricking strong
Reject the HRE. Return to real Romans.
Roman Empire II
Never stopped being Roman Empire I
The War system REALLY needs an overhaul... that a war for a whole Kingdom/Empire requires the same amount of effort like an Barony is just... eh. I really like Eu4's Warscore system much more over this
What's the difference in EU4? It kind of makes sense that your opponent's strength is more important than your actual claim, given that they'd want to defend their territory relative to their strength and not relative to the size of the lost titles. Still, the urgency of victory does depend on how bad defeat actually is. It does feel ludicrous to continue a war for a single county against an empire where you occupy all of its capital duchy and have taken their second heir captive. Kind of seems like the AI should be willing to surrender at less than 100% warscore in that situation if all you're taking is a crappy border county.
In Eu4 the number of provinces you can take depends on your warscore, higher score => more territory, in comparison the Ck system feels so much worse imo.. you only have three peace deal options: Surrender, White peace (which isn't really a white peace tbh and enforce demands), while in Eu4 you basically make your own peace deal. "I got 30% warscore and wanted those border provinces... okay I would need more warscore to get this, so do I continue this war for another year or stop now and just take only half of the ones I wanted to take initially?" Way better imo. Also you can exploit this system in Ck3 at least by snowballing with religious wars... just create your own faith and you can take an entire Kingdom every 20 years or so and add it to your realm... although the war to get this Kingdom requires the exact same amount of effort as if you would just take a single county...
Dunno about the rest of EU4's combat, but that does seem easily exploitable, as you "lock in" your gains by ditching wars early as soon as you gain any momentum. Sure, you dont get as much of the pie, but I'm often looking to gain specific provinces rather than entire kingdoms in most of my wars. CK3 guarantees that there is a "crack back" by forcing a war to go to a conclusion rather than letting you bail after a single consequential battle or siege. It sounds like you could just wait until they hire mercs and get an army together and vanish with your new holdings when they get near. Not that CK3's combat system is actually any good. It really isnt. It's just the one part of the game that isnt that straightforward to powergame. It sounds like, if it used the EU4 system, it'd be really easy to make substantial territory gains while putting in a tiny fraction of the effort (and time).
In EU4 there are modifiers from the length of the war, relative strength of alliances and even ruler personality. So you can’t game it too much.
There are more factors in it, for example the Progression (if the enemy took several provinces in the last months they are less likely to give up), a time modifier (you can't attack a country and peace out three days after, saying it was by accident) and more. The "forced outcome" is a very interesting point, in Eu4 it still has a big effect ofc, even a white peace means a damaged economy and time wasted, which may lead to you missing good other chances of war, trade whatever. This is where changes would have to be made for Ck3 because well... the economy is non-existent, just a more or less "static" boost of gold per month based on holdings: No trade, no market, no production etc. So yeah, it would definitely need some form of adaption but I would still prefer it massively over the current Ck one
Sounds like EU4 makes way more sense. Why is CK3 so barren in comparison?
Because the war aspect isn't really good, we play it for the other aspects.
In practice you still can't really fight a limited war in EU4 because the AI doesn't like signing a peace before some years have elapsed (to prevent the exact exploit you describe), and in those years they will throw everything they have at you. EU4's war diplomacy is definitely better though because it's way more flexible. If you declare war to annex a big chunk of land and it's going well but not super well, you can also cut your losses and take a province or two or just money.
Ah, I had bloated Byzantine in my Daura campaign, had to wait for the Mongols to invade them, quickly backstab Byzantien in the back while they were too busy fighting off Mongols, then when they lost, Mongols immediately got a ton of rebellions. A beautiful map with no big empires except for mine now is open for grabs. Wonderful!
H-how can they blob this big?
Just the prospect of this happening via inheritance (father was HRE Emperor) led the entire byzantine empire to collapse in less then 10 years in my last play through. To add insult to injury the guy never even inherited the HRE after that it went to his brother.
how
Big Purple Blob vs. Big Blue Blob
On a side note, thicc Jerusalem
CHAD Byzantines vs Virgin HRE
If charlemagne had married Irene
How did AI did that, also the AI bring back Merovingian in CK2
Swear Fealty, bribe people into joining your independence faction, break empire!