Obliteration vs Vassal

[JeebusGreen]

So you're decimating a neighbour city by city, and let's say he's only got a few left.

What do you find governs the decision between making the effort to finish him off and making his things yours, and having him become your vassal?

 

[Mesodius]

For me it largely depends on how far along the game is, who my neighbours are and how they feel about me, my military strength, and the direction I want to take my empire.

Generally:

-If I do not have a very powerful military, I am more likely to vassalize so that I can conserve units, and to reduce the chance of someone else attacking me while I am busy. ALSO, I find that if I do not vassalize at the quickest opportunity, and my military isn;t overwhelming, the Civ I am attacking will often become the vassal of another Civ, who will then also be at war with me. I hate this when resources are already stretched thin.

-If I have powerful neighbours that are on my continent, and especially if they aren;t happy with me, I'm more likely to vassalize, to prevent the scenario I listed above, and to conserve units to prevent attack in general.

-If it is late in the game, I have to consider if there are one or more Civs that need crushed to prevent them from achieving a space or culture victory. If there are more than one, I will vassalize the Civ I am currently warring once they are knocked out of the running, so that I can sooner get to other Civs that may need attacked.

-If I have an overwhelming military and/or there are no dangerous Civs nearby, and I have no other Civs I need to attack, I'll simply crush any Civ I am attacking completely. No need keeping them around. Obviously I'll also simply crush any Civ I'm at war with before I have the tech to vassalize.

Anyway, there are a few other considerations too, which arise on a case-by-case basis. I just consider where I need to go with my empire, and what is best to achieve that. These are just my personal tastes, I don;t know what considerations others make.

 

[Tephros]

If there is a powerful empire, especially if they're pleased or friendly with the civ I'm fighting, I carefully consider whether I can afford getting stuck in a war with both of them for awhile longer if the other AI vassalizes them.

If the remaining cities have a 3rd party's culture that I would rather not attack in the near future I tend to vassalize, as they'd just revolt and join the 3rd party if I take them, and the land will just go to the third party anyway if I raze them.

This is especially useful if those cities can serve as a buffer zone between you and potential enemies. Better that they damage your vassal's cities while you move your SoD to assist, or it at least creates a smaller border for you to defend.

If I already have vassals, I tend to add more. The diplo penalties don't seem to increase linearly, and having multiple vassals helps offset the motherland penalty. Also, at that point I already have reached the -7/city number of cities maint. cap.

 

[Turquoiside]

Also, note that vassals add to maintinence. This probably contradicts the fact that conquering two or three could sink you if you don't have a high gold per tern ratio

 

[Cutlass]

If I plan to use the territory, because it's early game and they can be real productive cities, then I may want to destroy them in order to not have to fight their culture. If it's later, or if they are between me and someone culturally strong, I may want to vallasize them as a cultural buffer between me and the other civ.

 

[Xellos-_^]

So you're decimating a neighbour city by city, and let's say he's only got a few left.

What do you find governs the decision between making the effort to finish him off and making his things yours, and having him become your vassal?

it depends.
1. when during the game
2. how many cities
3. what does my economy looks like

i usually vassel them as i can add thier army units to mine. but if it was early in the game and i don't have that cities i will crush them and add his cities to mine.

Also, note that vassals add to maintinence. This probably contradicts the fact that conquering two or three could sink you if you don't have a high gold per tern ratio

but it will cost you money conqueror and maintain a city anyway.