Slitherine

According to the latest update, players can now abandon newly captured regions. What are the procedures for this? How long does this option remain available? Thanks in advance.

you need an army in the region - it has to be pillaged or 'under conquest', on the army tab click abandon and move your army out of the region.

It can cause a really painful hit to your govt age and thus decadence

How does officially abandoning it hurt compared to letting them sit until someone else or rebels conquer them?

SirGarnet wrote: ↑Fri Aug 02, 2019 10:05 am How does officially abandoning it hurt compared to letting them sit until someone else or rebels conquer them?

badly, but it has the advantage of certainty.

there's an image in my Epirus AAR that shows this, i added 3500+ decadence in a single turn due to how this inflated my govt age.

In the same game I took a region by accident - my intent was to move in, whack a Roman army and retreat - but the damn place surrendered. I've looted it, have the pop starving, disbanded key buildings and the locals are clearly masochists. last time i checked loyalty was up to 70%

but if it simply rebelled or was retaken by Rome then clearly no impact on me

So, I gather, the smart play when you take a region you don't wish to keep, is to loot it, destroy all buildings, move the pop to making money, and wait for it to eventually rebel. An additional tactic that worked for me was to raise 1 unit and attack a neighboring neutral region. This will raise the local units which kill yours and, shortly thereafter, invade and take your unwanted region.

I think Pocus said this is just a short-term fix because clearly there needs to be a way to prevent AI from DOWing you and forcing you to increase decadence by taking their land, since that's the only way to beat them in a war.

Bamilus wrote: ↑Fri Aug 02, 2019 5:14 pm I think Pocus said this is just a short-term fix because clearly there needs to be a way to prevent AI from DOWing you and forcing you to increase decadence by taking their land, since that's the only way to beat them in a war.

Well I don't think the issue lies in AI behavior, we just need to *not take* regions we don't want... And a huge decadence cost for this makes not much sense.

The cost is one government age per population of the region.

PDiFolco wrote: ↑Fri Aug 02, 2019 5:34 pm

Bamilus wrote: ↑Fri Aug 02, 2019 5:14 pm I think Pocus said this is just a short-term fix because clearly there needs to be a way to prevent AI from DOWing you and forcing you to increase decadence by taking their land, since that's the only way to beat them in a war.

Well I don't think the issue lies in AI behavior, we just need to *not take* regions we don't want... And a huge decadence cost for this makes not much sense.

I agree 100%. There should not be a penalty for making a choice you never actually made.

Just as there are Raids, there could be punitive expeditions as larger temporary incursions that do not conquer or occupy and directed solely to military targets

Why was it combined with government age? I think the effect can be really hard and it also does not make sense from a "role play" perspective. Why should the whole state increase strongly in decadence when you abandon a remote region? Why not combining it with a legacy hit?

If you see an enemy stack building up across the border it seems it should be wiser to cross the border, destroy it and return, rather than wait for it to invade and ravage a region first. The current decadence penalty reverses this reasoning - surely this can't be right?

SirGarnet wrote: ↑Sat Aug 03, 2019 5:51 am Just as there are Raids, there could be punitive expeditions as larger temporary incursions that do not conquer or occupy and directed solely to military targets

I agree wholeheartedly. In "defensive" wars, you should be able to take the fight to the aggressor without ending up with half of it's regions. I like the term punitive expedition

Even more so, there should be room for an "offensive" war in which you don't aim to conquer the territory of the opponent, but be able to turn a client state out of it.

Client States are friendly realms with good relations that are also tributaries.

I think you are suggesting forced satellite or puppet relationships as the price of peace in a war. I'd wager that was considered but tabled as adding unnecessary complexity to warfare, diplomacy, legacy and decadence effects.

SirGarnet wrote: ↑Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:43 pm Client States are friendly realms with good relations that are also tributaries.

I think you are suggesting forced satellite or puppet relationships as the price of peace in a war. I'd wager that was considered but tabled as adding unnecessary complexity to warfare, diplomacy, legacy and decadence effects.

I personally doubt that. This game seems to be built around different elements and factors interacting in complex ways, creating difficult to predict ripple effects. There are very few things you can do that will only one factor in a vacuum. Furthermore, the game does not seem to be aimed at a casual gamer in the mood for a simple game of military dominance and conquests.

If the developers see away to add complexity to warfare, diplomacy, legacy and decadence through one mechanic, I for one would love to see them jump at it.

You are right about the approach, but some ideas are not worth the resulting time, trouble in game development, and effects on the players and their expectations. Paradox can afford bloat and disconnects but a small development house needs to keep focus on a clean and playable result. Having an array of options for hegemonic inclinations does the job without creating discord.

loki100 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:33 pm you need an army in the region - it has to be pillaged or 'under conquest', on the army tab click abandon and move your army out of the region.

It can cause a really painful hit to your govt age and thus decadence

Oh really ? Okay...so as PTO I did that quite a lot to avoid over-extension and to liquidate some annoying neighbors (hello Nubia, welcome Ethiopia it is your turn very soon), I am a glorious monarchy but for too long and a crazy decadence ratio/ age, thought it was a good idea but no. Hum, rather counter-intuitive then.

basically : conquer, because well you need to destroy an over-bellicose neighb, but over-ext issues
abandon, but gov aging fast and decadence.

I already have my fair chunk of "unproductive provinces" as Pto so I am not looking for more crap land...but aging is an issue and I will probably have to go old around turn 130. (Awesome game otherwise)

a marvelous realisation but i think too that a peace treaty must be signed after war events, so that regions must be "occupied" since that treaty...