Confusing game mechanics with war/diplomacy

[Greyson]

I love and hate this game. After 500+ hours I still find myself coming up against mechanics that just don't compute and break the game's fun factor.

Example, I launch a war of vassalization against a king level neighbor (I'm emperor). during that war, my ally attacks my target to conquer the kingdom in a separate war (I thought you couldn't do this??) My target only owns a few counties, but holds the crown. I win the war and vassalize my target, but all of a sudden my stronger ally is at war with me. this doesn't make sense, there should be some sort of peace conference at the conclusion of my war AND/OR there should be choices that pop-up that inform me that if I take the vassal, that I will be forced to goto war with my ally and break contracts.

Instead I'm just thrust into a war with my ally (who is still shown as my ally on the map and in diplomacy). They have a superior army to me (hence why they are my ally) so they win easily and the best part they don't just get the few states I vassaled. They get my other lands and vassals that were already in my control??

AND I'm still their ally so I cannot attack back? lol wtf.... This is just dumb. It's poor game mechanics, and it's poor info tools that don't explain any of this. Plus it's just not realistic with the ally/marriage mechanism.

Yes I will "rebound" and do better. Yes, I'll bide my time and use marriages to get the lands all under my control eventually... but still, this setback shouldn't have happened. It leaves a sour taste and reminds me why I don't invest in DLC and eventually uninstall this game after I get my fix.

I would love CK3 to be on my rotation but for reasons like this I find myself walking away from the game after a few sessions.

This is just an example, pretty much ever play session I have involves counter-initiative logic and mechanics that are immersion breaking. I just swallow it until I have enough. Do better Paradox :)

[Razorblade]

You seem to actually understand the mechanics perfectly. Wars against a title are inhereted if you takes/vassalize that title. Alliances prevent declaring war, but don't prevent being in a war with an ally.

As for why you lost more than you gained, your enemy, by your description, was seemingly using a Subjugation CB, which takes all of a target's top level titles, and vassalizes them. When you vassalized that ruler, you became the target. The tooltip for this CB is not in any way ambiguous.

Pro tip: don't get into wars that will get you into other wars that you can't win. Problem solved. Moreover, don't play Ironman if you don't fully understand the game's mechanics; you could have just loaded a save and white peaced the original war.

[Greyson]

I hear you, but I digress, there was no clarity on this outcome. I would have chosen a white peace if there was any red text indicating I would be in a war with my stronger ally when I won my war and was pressing peace at 100%

This should have been communicated to me.

Regardless, I'll come back. Get the land and control back eventually. It just sets back plans. I play Ironman to overcome adversity. Part of the game, I just like the reality clearly laid out my "advisors" failed me.

[armyissue69]

Well, sadly I understand your frustration. In the future, you could white peace it (first battle). Then come back later on an heir.

I do wish you could cancel an alliance....IF your ally murders your kid...sleeps with spouse...bleh bleh bleh.

Secondly yea...a war should auto end in white peace IF other war completion pits 2 allies against each other.

Just yesterday I was called to war before a crusade got started up (which I was a part of) and once the crusdade kicked off...everyone I was on the team with (initial call to war) was now my enemy. Well hell...

Good Luck!