Hello friends,Since our esteemed community seems intent on clogging up the bug report forum with things like "Jharkand's capital is misspelled" and "this dude was a different religion IRL", and since none of these issues affect the typical dev MP so it doesn't matter, none of these are getting fixed anyways, I decided to start collating some of the more obnoxious/long-standing bugs. For fun? For some masochistic urge? I don't know.In any case, enjoy. It serves as a nice lesson for what happens when game mechanical creep greatly exceeds motivation to do core bugfixing. I can think of two mechanics in particular -- tributaries and Cossacks promise land mechanic that you could write PAGES on detailing all the screwed up stuff that happens. On and on, to the next immersion pack (I still bought Rule Britannia, so clearly the model still works).Most of these issues have been around for months, or even years. Some might even be said to significantly affect gameplay. Meanwhile, hotfixes release with urgent bugfixes like "merc maintenance modifiers reduced." A sane man would give up trying, but you're stuck with me.This is not a comprehensive list and we can probably come up with 30+ more. Stay tuned for part 2 in case I feel like wasting another evening. By the way I have experienced every single one of these in my own playthroughts though many of these were reported by others to little effect.Explanation:Historically military access in EU4 has not always been symmetric. However, this was changed the introduction of conditional military access which grants military access to all parties in a single war. Thus the assumption is the design intent is that military access should be symmetric, with no country able to "hide" its armies in other countries. However there are multiple cases where military access becomes asymmetric.As Bengal, I declare war against Kedah which is allied with Malacca (Ming tributary)Since Malacca is a Ming tributary, he has access to Ming lands:However, Bengal does not have access to Ming lands:Suggested resolution: Propagate military access to tributary overlord to all parties involved in a war containing a tributaryExplanation: France is currently at war with an HRE prince and the emperor, thus he has military access to all the HRE:England subsequently declares war against France, however he does not have access to all the HRE:This potential scenario involving asymmetric military accesses applies to any situation where a country is involved in multiple wars! This is particularly obnoxious when the second war is vs. HRE since it basically gives enemies a large space to hide in.You might think you could partially offset the annoyance for such a situation due to the "gives military access to enemies +200" modifier, but this does not apply to conditionally gained military access, see:Suggested resolution: Propagate conditional military access given to one party to give conditional military access to all countries at war with said party. @TheMeInTeam favorite bug!Explanation: When declaring an offensive war, it states that all the members of coalition will be considered cobelligerent, but cannot call in allies:However you get mega-bamboozled when you actually declare the war as they do not have co-belligerent status:This is in contrast to defensive wars, where the involved coalition has cobelligerent status.Suggested resolution: Correctly designate coalition members co-belligerents during offensive declarations vs coalition.Explanation: The notification for truce expiration will often appear up to 2 months before the displayed truce expiration date, specifically the displayed truce date here:Suggested resolution: See below, but honestly you guys are more suited to figuring out what's wrong than I am.Explanation: Even after truce expiration popup appears, you can go to the declare war screen and still receive a -3/-5 stab penalty for trucebreaking, clearly indicating the truce isn't actually over.Yet often if you pause-unpause day by day, this allows the target nation to join a coalition before you can declare on them without trucebreak.Suggested resolution: Uh...I do not wish to stare upon the horror of the code that governs truces because there's LITERALLY four dates for this mechanic which should be the same, but they can seemingly all be different for a single truce! 1) Displayed truce date, 2) Truce expiration popup date, 3) Nations eligible to join coalition date 4) You are eligible to declare war without trucebreaking penaltyIf you consider trucelocking an exploit, hit me up and I can give you some suggestions for nerfing it that don't involve doing a war atrocity to the truce code.Explanation: Let's take our favorite fort setup – Pirineo / Valencia / Rousillon. With Rousillon sieged down, moves to Pirineo or Valencia are legal:Even though movements through Barcelona are normally inhibited by Pirineo, since Valencia is a fort, this is a legal move. Lets say we siege down Valencia. Then move to Barcelona. You then realize that Pirineo now blocks you:And thus the entire French army was lost due to the successful siege of Valencia.Suggested resolution: revert back to old forts + attrition system (with new QoL options like being able to demand unoccupied provinces). Can a man dream?Let's return to our example above, with Valencia sieged down. Let's imagine the Aragonese siege Valencia, surely we can bring troops from Rousillon to break the siege. Nope:Remember, BEFORE Valencia is sieged down, Rousillon -> Girona -> Barcelona -> Valencia is a legal move.AFTER Valencia is sieged down, Rousillon -> Girona-> Barcelona -> Valencia is now an illegal move.This is because the "can move from ZoC-projected province to any fort" rule only applies to hostile forts, leading to very degenerate outcomes.For the most ridiculous part, realize that if we send a move order FROM VALENCIA, that moving BACK to Valencia is an illegal move, requiring a naval transport move!Suggested resolution: see #7Explanation:This probably requires a video:It's technically explained here, but nevertheless the fact that even without game-state change you can have different sets of legal moves depending on whether you stopped in each province is just gigantically problematic (in my opinion): https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/presenting-schrodingers-zoc-video.1060190/ Suggested resolution: see #7Explanation: Most temporary influence modifiers have a specific date of expiration. However, the influence value is NOT correctly updated after the date of expiration of the modifier. This requires a lot of cumbersome math, especially since pulse events for estates will often fire the month a modifier is due to expire. Resulting in some very nasty influence spikes sometimes.Here is an example, the +15% influence value for minister expired April 20th 1475. After this date, the itemized influence values are correctly displayed, but the totaled value is not (20+22% does not equal 57%)Suggested resolution: Immediate update and correct summation of estate influence values upon expiration...?Explanation: In any defensive war where your tributary overlord defends you, any peace deal you make taking land will have the accumulated aggressive expansion incorrectly displayed as zero, when in fact you gain AE from the war:Suggested resolution: …Explanation: If you have a vassal subject while you are a tributary, your vassal can reject land when you transfer occupation to them:Suggested resolution: Correctly make the game realize that a vassal is your subject (presumably game perceives it as subject of Ming subject, and thus doesn't allow free-freeding?)Aside: I like how fixed the exploit where you didn't get aggressive expansion for feeding vassals of tributary, but for this closely related issue, nothing. What, was the dev MP that day?Explanation: Even though becoming a tributary doesn't cancel your vassals, it DOES cancel your diplo-annexations. Why? Who even knows?Suggested resolution: Becoming tributary no longer cancels progressing diplo-annexations.Explanation: At the introduction of MoH, practically the only condition where Ming broke tributary status was low (<30) trust (typically due to refusing to send tribute). This is no longer the only condition – even at high >80 trust Ming will now break your tributary status.This is typically correlated with having high development. It occurs even at positive relations (previously, even –200 + outraged status was not enough for Ming to break the tributary).Further discussions here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...breaking-tributary-for-no-reason-bug.1061005/ This seems too intentional to be a bug, but this was not mentioned in the patch notes.Explanation: When you become a tributary after being allied to Ming, you get a truce with Ming. However during this truce you are barred from making OTHER alliances while you have a truce with Ming. That's a pretty nonsensical restriction even though this game is full of them:Suggested resolution: I suspect the issue is the game is interpreting this truce as some sort of failed independence war attempt. If this is the root cause, well—this is what happens when tributaries are coded as kind of subjects/not subjects.Explanation: During war, you are not able to re-assign occupied land that is assigned to a colonial nation. This seems like a big inconsistency since you are able to re-assign land occupied by your vassals.Suggested resolution: Let us reassign CN occupations