Civilization V - The one thing I honestly miss from Civilization 4!

[Morpheas]

I seriously miss being able to have a civ be my vassal state.

It added a huge part to the military part of the game. Instead of a civ giving you all of their cities and destroying your happiness+economy, you could just have them be your vassal state.

Is there any mod that adds this from Civ4?

 

[General Tso]

I don't know the answer to your mod question, but I have found that puppeting cities is the Civ5 works pretty well. Another thing you can do to get around the problem of having to many cities is to become allies with as many city-states as possible.

 

[dilettante]

I thought vassalization was built in Civ4 Warlords and Civ4 BTS, no mod necessary. I don't know if Civ5 has a mod for that.

On a tangent, OP's point is something I've thought about as well in coming from Civ4.

When will Firaxis bring back factional alliances?

There's been two consistent things people have complained about in Civ5, AI warfare and diplomacy. (quality MP is also on the wish list but I'm a single player, but Firaxis should fix that as well)

The former is a much harder task based on re-programming the AI to recognize rules of combat (like not leading with siege).

The latter should just be a cinch since it was done before with vassals, temporary alliances, and world war alliances in Civ4. They have the script and coding, why not just implement it (and no I don't want to hear Shafer's min-max diplomacy argument again. I thought he was dumb for saying that and even dumber for taking away one of the best features of civ4, factional warfare)

If Firaxis even fixes one of these two things I mentioned above in their upcoming x-pak, then you have at least one guaranteed sale from this civfanatic, Firaxis.

 

[trueblue]

Instead of a civ giving you all of their cities and destroying your happiness+economy, you could just have them be your vassal state.

ah so you just want the perks from having the cities and not the cons? in essence making the game easier? like getting units for nothing!


ach.

 

[Morpheas]

ah so you just want the perks from having the cities and not the cons? in essence making the game easier? like getting units for nothing!


ach.

Lol. have you ever played civ4? Vassal States don't give you units. You simply recieve tributes and like 50% of their gold, I believe. They have no diplomacy, and they will go to war when someone Dow's you. But you will go to war with anyone who Dow's them too. The income you recieve from them isn't really the point. The real point is that you don't have to destroy an entire civilization in a war. Quite simply it'd be to have other civs have more to think about when declaring war on you. And it gives you time to organize your army while your vassal state takes the brunt of the attack. As far as "free units" I suppose being permanent allies is considered free units, but with the poor state of the AI's skills in combat, it's not like they are anywhere close to being as useful as your own units.

Please refrain yourself from posting with such livid ignorance and arrogance.
Moderator Action: Please refrain from posting such stuff.

It's like a protectorate. Much like after World War 2 when the former Soviet Union wanted eastern European countries for "protection"

I'm just speaking about the lack of a "surrender" mechanic that is the very core of wars in the real world. When a country realizes they cannot win a war, they surrender. But in Civ5, you just try to bribe your way to a peace treaty, then hope you can build up enough defense when they DoW you to finish you off.

Although if a country surrenders and becomes a countries Protectorate/Vassal State, they would lose rights to victory, and other civ's opinions of that civ wouldn't apply to you, just hurt THEIR trade chances.

 

[Morpheas]

I don't know the answer to your mod question, but I have found that puppeting cities is the Civ5 works pretty well. Another thing you can do to get around the problem of having to many cities is to become allies with as many city-states as possible.

While puppeting cities works, if you are working on the edge of unhappy/happy, the extra 5+ unhappiness from puppet cities can destroy your economy.

A population would happy when finding out they just acquired a vassal state, I think.

 

[mo123567]

I miss vassalage as well. I used to love when a few civs would start to emerge as leaders with vassals behind them, either through friendship or war. Then usually there would be a point where there is a huge world war between two huge alliances, with the loser's empire often crumbling as vassel states start two withdraw from the pact.

Civ 5 has huge world wars when every ai continually declares war on the weakest, 1 city, civ they can find. This is just somehow not as exciting.

 

[Morpheas]

I miss vassalage as well. I used to love when a few civs would start to emerge as leaders with vassals behind them, either through friendship or war. Then usually there would be a point where there is a huge world war between two huge alliances, with the loser's empire often crumbling as vassel states start two withdraw from the pact.

Civ 5 has huge world wars when every ai continually declares war on the weakest, 1 city, civ they can find. This is just somehow not as exciting.

This is exactly what I am saying! Vassal states added so much depth to the diplomatic and political situations in the game.

It's just so simplistic in Civ5, but I can't bring myself to play Civ4 because of the stack'o'doom. (Hate that. I'll sacrifice the good parts of Civ4 for better graphics, better UI, and no stack'o'doom.

 

[trueblue]

Lol. have you ever played civ4? Vassal States don't give you units. You simply recieve tributes and like 50% of their gold, I believe. They have no diplomacy, and they will go to war when someone Dow's you. But you will go to war with anyone who Dow's them too. The income you recieve from them isn't really the point. The real point is that you don't have to destroy an entire civilization in a war. Quite simply it'd be to have other civs have more to think about when declaring war on you. And it gives you time to organize your army while your vassal state takes the brunt of the attack. As far as "free units" I suppose being permanent allies is considered free units, but with the poor state of the AI's skills in combat, it's not like they are anywhere close to being as useful as your own units.

Please refrain yourself from posting with such livid ignorance and arrogance.

Lol. no i havent played civ4. but you post proved my point.

tributes and 50% of gold = units = a pro = a bonus

permanent allies = might aswell be part of your Civ if they are giving you free stuff

sounds much better than teh Civ5 way of having to puppet or annex and take a happiness hit.... sounds easier.


bye.

 

[Morpheas]

Lol. no i havent played civ4. but you post proved my point.

tributes and 50% of gold = units = a pro = a bonus

permanent allies = might aswell be part of your Civ if they are giving you free stuff

sounds much better than teh Civ5 way of having to puppet or annex and take a happiness hit.... sounds easier.


bye.

Units you have no control over? Either way, the tributes can be refused, and after reviewing the article on wikipedia, there is no 50% of gold.

The new Vassal States feature allows players to take up other empires as "vassals," the game's equivalent of protectorates. When an empire becomes a vassal, it loses the ability to declare war and make peace independently, and may be called upon to pay "tribute" in the form of game resources to its "master" (suzerain) state in return for the promise that its master will protect the vassal. Players can use Vassal States to achieve a Domination Victory, since half the vassal's land and population count towards a domination victory for the master, but not vice versa. Similarly, if the master goes to war with another civilization, the vassal too has to go to war. However, other countries' opinions of you will worsen if you have a vassal they dislike. The vassal may still reject trades for gold and technologies.
During peacetime, civilizations can offer their vassalage in return for protection from an enemy, but it may be ended if the state's relative land and population statistics change. Vassal agreements signed in a state of mutual war, as part of a peace treaty, are considered capitulation and bind both parties. The agreement is terminated, however, if the vassal acquires 50% more land area than the master or the vassal loses half of the land it held when the agreement was signed. The only way a master can terminate the agreement is if the vassal refuses to pay tribute. The master can then choose to declare war.

You are wrong. Deal with it. Be a man and own up to it. If it is so unbalanced, why is Civilization IV considered one of the best in the series?

Vassal States are balanced by the fact they were/are incredibly hard to obtain. It's not like you can offer the AI 1000g and become your vassal state. Typically the only time a civ would agree is if you boxed them in, and you have an immense advantage over them. Military wise, the AI would often prefer being destroyed and taken over instead of becoming one. Although I think it depended on the leaders personality.

But overall, you don't think a civilization should get something, a bonus, for beating another country so badly in a war they agree to be their subordinate? I think accomplishing that merits the rewards that it does.

 

[Babri]

Vassal states was a neat idea though its implementation in cIV had some flaws. Still I would like them to be back. I think accepting vassalage is better than 'gifting major cities & most of the gold in a severely loosing condition', the typical behaviour of ciV AI.

 

[Morpheas]

Vassal states was a neat idea though its implementation in cIV had some flaws. Still I would like them to be back. I think accepting vassalage is better than 'gifting major cities & most of the gold in a severely loosing condition', the typical behaviour of ciV AI.

Yeah. If I get their cities and I am happy with my own expansion, I will just sell the cities strategically, placing my allies on my direct borders, and my allies enemies on their borders to make my enemies focus on anyone but me, while I advance my tech or build my military up.

On top of that though, I feel like it just ruins some of the realism of the game. Without an effective means of surrender the warfare feels very artificial. I know Civ5 games aren't really about realism, but its so glaring I can't help but ignore it.

 

[Mesix]

I also liked how you could create a Vassal State colony on another continent (think the American colonies when playing as a European power). Having to actually take over the entire world is somewhat unrealistic and can also create a micromanagement nightmare on larger maps which makes it less fun to finish those games. On a side note, having to only take over all the capital cities makes Domination VC much easier than the Conquest VC in Civ 4.

 

[Blackucard]

OMG OP I know

I LOVED the vassal option in Civ4

It was so great. Like an AI backstabs me, I destroy them, take only some cities, then demand every single resource they have and make him/her my !

 

[Steelyglint]

Units you have no control over? Either way, the tributes can be refused, and after reviewing the article on wikipedia, there is no 50% of gold.

I don't know for certain (because I'm not trueblue), but from my reading of the post he meant if you get more gold (like you said before), then you can maintain more units.

But Wikipedia's always right so you proved yourself wrong anyway. Even if you did say it like you heard it from someone else.

Please refrain yourself from posting with such livid ignorance and arrogance.

I think you mean, 'Please refrain from posting du du du du du...'

He wasn't being arrogant, merely sharp. And witty, I lol'd. Also, I believe the good poster wrote 'like getting units for nothing' to illustrate how bad he thought the idea was. As he didn't actually attempt state any 'facts', his post can't possibly have been ignorant.

^^

Moderator Action: Please don't answer such provocative statements, report them.
And don't answer in such a way.

 

[Morpheas]

I don't know for certain (because I'm not trueblue), but from my reading of the post he meant if you get more gold (like you said before), then you can maintain more units.

But Wikipedia's always right so you proved yourself wrong anyway. Even if you did say it like you heard it from someone else.



I think you mean, 'Please refrain from posting du du du du du...'

He wasn't being arrogant, merely sharp. And witty, I lol'd. Also, I believe the good poster wrote 'like getting units for nothing' to illustrate how bad he thought the idea was. As he didn't actually attempt state any 'facts', his post can't possibly have been ignorant.

^^

Either way he was wrong. I was mistaken about the 50% of their gold, which disproves his entire point. Also, still ignorant because he's never even played Civ4, and is trying to comment on how bad of a system it is. Seems like ignorance to me.

If he wants to comment on how vassal states actually work, then he may. But as of right now, both of you are flaming, and I'd rather you just GTFO Moderator Action: Such statements are not appropriate for this site.

 

[lucashp]

Either way he was wrong. I was mistaken about the 50% of their gold, which disproves his entire point. Also, still ignorant because he's never even played Civ4, and is trying to comment on how bad of a system it is. Seems like ignorance to me.

If he wants to comment on how vassal states actually work, then he may. But as of right now, both of you are flaming, and I'd rather you just GTFO

You are wrong. Deal with it. Be a man and own up to it.

Please refrain yourself from posting with such livid ignorance and arrogance. [/QOUTE]

Please read all of this again. This is exacly the reason why I can't post on these forums since Civilization 4 was out. This use to be a place where we could comment and express freely. Mods never seem to be on, people are being flamed left and right and get away with it with nothing counted against them.

Now look at all the comments that he had placed against you. Has he ever once counted you as an Idiotic, self absorbed barnacle? I think with every comment he has made, He had never once tried to offend you in any matter.

 

[Steelyglint]

Either way he was wrong. I was mistaken about the 50% of their gold, which disproves his entire point. Also, still ignorant because he's never even played Civ4, and is trying to comment on how bad of a system it is. Seems like ignorance to me.

If he wants to comment on how vassal states actually work, then he may. But as of right now, both of you are flaming, and I'd rather you just GTFO

You called him ignorant before you knew he'd never played. -.-

Me, flamin? I post before reading all the time (and it's really annoyin) but I don't often flame.

 

[The_J]

Moderator Action: No offtopic bickering, and no flaming anymore.
Please stay civil!

This is exacly the reason why I can't post on these forums since Civilization 4 was out. This use to be a place where we could comment and express freely. Mods never seem to be on, people are being flamed left and right and get away with it with nothing counted against them.

Moderator Action: @ everyone: The "report post" button is your friend.
If you feel someone is trolling, or you see somewhere a flame, then report it, and don't answer.

Now back to topic.

 

[Morpheas]

<snip>

Moderator Action: Unhelpful comment removed. No need to get in the last word.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

BUT Back on topic.

Is it possible to mod vassal states, or a similar function, into Civ5?