Events have balance issues

Contrary to Democracy 3, basically every turn a bad event happens, never a good one.
But the real problem is that the vast majority of those events alter the stats too dramatically and have costed me to lose the game multiple times even if i was doing pretty much good.

Many of them are also nonsensical, who would conduct an airstrike directly to US soil without risking WW3? And i cannot even retaliate. The economy has plummeted and the elections was lost.

And since they happen more or less every turn the cumulative effect is simply unbearable.


That’s because you defended your military.

1 Like

Defended my military?
In any case it really does not matter what i did, the US is not (yet) third world, it cannot be airstriked like that by a foreign power.

1 Like

What i believe is that the developer should work on these events, they impact too much and they happen too frequently.

1 Like

I meant that you defunded your military.

1 Like

Oh yeah, the president can’t decide ever to go to war, apparently, so watch out for the military.

No one attacks the US because the US is the biggest military in the world. Guess who has a small military? Ukraine. And we know what happened there. If the US reduced its military to one tenth its current size, you can bet China & Russia would start trying to push them around.

Without negative events arising from military cuts, everyone can win an election easily. Just totally disband the military and spend all the savings on public services or tax cuts :smiley:

And we can see what happens when a once powerful western state disarms. The UK de-funded our military massively from the 1960s-1980s. Argentina then invaded the Falkland islands.


China and Russia would still need to be very careful, remember that the major countries have nuclear
deterrence as of now. It was for this deterrence that the US and the Soviet Union didn’t fought directly in the Cold War but by proxies.

But then the game is just implying that the huge amount of taxpayers money that the US government spend for the military is vital for the survival of the country itself, which is not, everybody knows that, its not even a bias, and i was trying to correct that tort to the American people.

I didn’t even cut the military that much, not enough for useless foreign wars, just perfect for defending the country.

But i was just giving you an example, i believe that overall these events appear too often and the effects are too disruptive, they even tend to stack on top of each other.


Would you go to nuclear war over some airstrikes?

The event balwnce is currently being worked on.


The only thing i know is that if Russia or China would bomb the US directly, then WW3 can be a serious possibility.
And if WW3 is a possibility, nuclear war may happen.

1 Like

But in a world where the US has no military, why wouldn’t they bomb it? Keep in mind that, at least in the US, military and nukes are deeply intertwined. You assume that you cut it “just perfect”, but that’s opinion. What exactly did you reduce it to? You can reduce the military presence with minimal/no recourse other than a drop in Patriot opinion.


Did you eliminate nuclear weapons when you reduced the military expenditure?

No i didn’t.

Well, as in real life, if America had a diminished military, it’s not clear how much you reduced military expenditure by, China & Russia could calculate, that a precision strike on your warheads and delivery systems would be an acceptable risk that they would be willing to take. As it means fewer intercept planes, fewer RADARs, etc. Lower ability for you to react. They would count on you not firing your remaining nukes at them, and instead increasing your defence expenditures.