Discussion idea: Capturing a capital releases all Vassals?

[LukaSlovenia29]

Hello.

I've been playing a game where I'm one capital short of winning a Domination game with Morocco. I have just captured Warsaw, and Poland is the master of Spain, with Madrid being the only remaining free capital. However, Poland still is the master of Spain, meaning that I have to fight my way through Poland to get to Madrid. That got me thinking that perhaps it'd be worthy of discussing that conquering a capital of a Civ would lead to all its vassals being immediately liberated WITHOUT entering a war with its former master.

Looking forward to your replies.

 

[Txurce]

Hello.

I've been playing a game where I'm one capital short of winning a Domination game with Morocco. I have just captured Warsaw, and Poland is the master of Spain, with Madrid being the only remaining free capital. However, Poland still is the master of Spain, meaning that I have to fight my way through Poland to get to Madrid. That got me thinking that perhaps it'd be worthy of discussing that conquering a capital of a Civ would lead to all its vassals being immediately liberated WITHOUT entering a war with its former master.

Looking forward to your replies.

This sounds like a lot of fun. It's reminiscent of the old Civ "capture the capital of the largest empire, and it goes into civil war." But it might be too late for such a change, given Gazebo's timetable.

 

[Randomsheep]

I like the idea.

Perhaps with a random element so some will be liberated and some wont.

 

[Enginseer]

Except it'll be just a game where everyone focuses on the capital of the largest master.

 

[Txurce]

Except it'll be just a game where everyone focuses on the capital of the largest master.

If I have the power to take the capital of a civ powerful enough to have multiple vassals, I probably should -- regardless of what happens to the vassals. But I wouldn't decide to do it, just to cost the civ its vassals.

 

[Randomsheep]

Except it'll be just a game where everyone focuses on the capital of the largest master.

Hardly.

In the grand scheme of things it would just be another strategic consideration.

 

[Tekamthi]

master losing a capital should probably be a heavy influencer, but I'd rather it not be an automatic vassal liberator... makes things too gamey & predictable. Also, what happens if player lost capital before taking vassal?

 

[Gazebo]

master losing a capital should probably be a heavy influencer, but I'd rather it not be an automatic vassal liberator... makes things too gamey & predictable. Also, what happens if player lost capital before taking vassal?

It already is in some ways, as the AI evaluates it’s desire to remain a vassal based on relative strength and prosperity.

G

 

[CppMaster]

Instead I would like if you could vassalage a civ that already has a vassal. Their vassal either becomes yours or it's just freed. It's really annoying that you cannot vassalage a civ, which you are clearly stomping at 100 warscore, just because they have a vassal, so I just eliminate them instead.

 

[Enginseer]

That's on Putmalk's development who.. somewhat been stagnant on his development.

 

[Aristos]

Too harsh. Such a game changer cannot, and should not, be binary.

 

[CppMaster]

Too harsh. Such a game changer cannot, and should not, be binary.

What are you referring to? Capturing the capital or capitulation?

 

[Aristos]

What are you referring to? Capturing the capital or capitulation?

Losing Capital == losing all vassals. Too binary.

 

[CppMaster]

Losing Capital == losing all vassals. Too binary.

Agree, but what if you lose capital and the enemy holds it until end of the city resistance?

 

[Enginseer]

I think a good compromise to this discussion is that vassals are able to declare independence if their master's capital is not owned by their master(overriding the 300% pop, or 150% city whichever I couldn't get a grasp idea on). It means you still have to wait 50 turns or 20 now(I forgot), but it means vassals can immediately start declaring independence if they deemed it it in their best interest(they already do when their master is too weak to revassal them).

 

[BiteInTheMark]

In EU4, liberating a vassal from a master can be a peace deal. It costs a lot in most cases, but this would be a better solution than to conquer everything from master or a big part and wait till the vassel get free by its own decision. It also gives a huge political boost to friendlyness to the liberated nation, which make sense.
The decision process of friendly vasselage should be checked too. In my last game, weird things happend. The zulu with only their capitol (100 turns military units production but no settling.....) flipped 6 times their master. Mongolia, Denmark, Mongolia, Netherlands, Mongolia and now Denmark......

 

[CppMaster]

In EU4, liberating a vassal from a master can be a peace deal. It costs a lot in most cases, but this would be a better solution than to conquer everything from master or a big part and wait till the vassel get free by its own decision. It also gives a huge political boost to friendlyness to the liberated nation, which make sense.

Great idea!