Just curious what other players are encountering. I play on prince and have about a 70% victory rate.(with no tech brokering) I find that the ai is going overboard on vassal states. Every game i play as soon as vassal is available the top 2-3 ai civs vassal the rest of the civs, clearly giving them a huge points advantage. Is it me or is the ai to ready to become vassal states. In various instances i have had civs voluntarily vassal and stay vassals to the end of the game. Personally i think this needs to be nerfed to some extent. I find it's basically to the point that I am forced to get a vassal state just to keep up with the stronger ai civs. It seems like the top 2-3 ai civs just vassal everyone else right from the get go. Curious if anyone else is running into the same thing

Indeed, I do think it is important to gain vassals in the game. It's not necessary, but if you're aiming for a domination victory, a vassal is pretty darn important. I don't think it needs to be nerfed at all, I like that the AI gets vassals.

It doesn't need a nerf and is working as intended. If you don't like vassals, turn them off. Then you can play without feeling the need to have a vassal since no one will have them.

Indeed, I do think it is important to gain vassals in the game. It's not necessary, but if you're aiming for a domination victory, a vassal is pretty darn important. I don't think it needs to be nerfed at all, I like that the AI gets vassals.

I don't disagree that vassals are important. My point is that the ai seems to ready and easy to vassal . Like in every game i play the top couple civs control the rest of the ai through vassalage. I am simply saying that the ai should be more selective on vassalage. Ie gain vassals through conquest, but this does not seem to be the case. They simply fold at the drop of a hat

It doesn't need a nerf and is working as intended. If you don't like vassals, turn them off. Then you can play without feeling the need to have a vassal since no one will have them.

SwordofStiker. I did not say that vassals were bad. I like playing with vassals on. My point is simply that the ai is to quick to vassal for no reason to other ai civs

I wasn't saying you said they were bad, just offering an alternative.

AI civs that that have a good relation with you and who are significantly weaker than you will offer to become your vassal if there is a stronger threat to them who is not friendly. That's why it seems they vassal easily without a fight. The way I see it, that's the smart thing to do.

Other times, the AI simply will not agree to capitulate even if you have conquered 90% of their empire AND burned their capitol. It seems to me that sometimes the AI refuses to capitulate and forces me to destroy their civ when I would have accepted a surrender long before it ever got to that point (and I was asking every turn towards the end of the war).

I agree with u i find the same thing. I have been forced to wipe a civ down to one city to get them to capitulate. But that just further proves my point. Ai civs to easily vassal to other ai civs. Its almost a given now that the dominate ai civ will get atleast a couple vassals without even having to go to war. And there in is were i see the problem. You just said yourself the difficulty human players have in getting civs to vassal ....yet in my experience the weaker ai civs will just vassal on a whim to the stronger ai civs.

Why i turn vassals off, they seem broken or biased towards other AIs

You can destroy 80% of a civ and they refuse, a AI takes 1 city from another AI and they capitulate.

I quit a game where it was crazy, civ with 14 cities, lost 1, became vassal, then the Master declared war on another civ, 5 turns later without any cities being taken he had another vassal.

AIs should be less willing to become anyones vassal, no matter how powerful, AI or player unless they have taken major damage and lost most their Army/power.

think hes saying they vassalize to anyone. I had a game where I just met Mansa Musa after placing a city on his continent... He vassalized to me 10 turns later. I only traded maps with the guy.

think hes saying they vassalize to anyone. I had a game where I just met Mansa Musa after placing a city on his continent... He vassalized to me 10 turns later. I only traded maps with the guy.

Crazy civs. Why, back in my day, civs wouldn't vassalize until after they were in a defensive pact.

think hes saying they vassalize to anyone. I had a game where I just met Mansa Musa after placing a city on his continent... He vassalized to me 10 turns later. I only traded maps with the guy.

Mansa Musa along with Wang Kon have very small thresholds for vassalization. Often, because they build small amounts of military compared to other civs, they often vassalize themselves to a stronger military power for protection.

I'd concur. Many leaders will bow to you easily if you have a strong military and good relations. I'm currently playing a world map as Darius and my wife as Stalin (Noble Level).

I built up my military to take out the Arabs to take Mecca, holy city to most dominant religion...after converting myself; Gandhi, Suryavarman, Zara Yaqob, Ramesses, and Mansa (who wasn't even the same religion) asked to become vassals...meanwhile my wife fights lengthy wars of attrition with Bismarck, Napoleon, and Sulieman.

SwordofStiker. I did not say that vassals were bad. I like playing with vassals on. My point is simply that the ai is to quick to vassal for no reason to other ai civs

I've found that in BTS. It's also a lot more willing to offer itself as a vassal to the human player.

You have to be careful because AI could end up vassalizing a lot of civs and becoming too powerful.