Redesigning vassalage
- Thread starter Afforess
- Start date
konradcabral
Prince
Afforess, how the discussion at this thread affected your plans to implement the Redesigned Vassalage? Could you reflect it in your OP?
I really like this side of the game getting further development. My only criticism would be the idea that a puppet state - if resulting from a capitulated enemy - should automatically say - collapse.
After all you could imagine fighting a civ that might have existed for say a 1000 years, only for it to be beaten and forced to capitulate in a short war, well it just seems unlikely it would say automatically fall to other players.
If it could at least revert to a civ, but perhaps with a dangerous penalty to overcome? As many states that were once puppets of the Soviet Union as an example, retained there general borders and nation states.
I'm also wary that Colonies should go to war with who they like? Colonies were ruled by viceroys who took there orders more or less from on top - they especially would not have the power to declare war on say, great powers.
I think the idea of protecterate (terrible typo) allowing that kind of relationship where by you exert big influence (but they retain control of their foreign affairs) is more suitable than colony. The Puppet state, is in itself a form of neo-imperialiam really, an extension of the old imperial colony but combined with ideology. So definately transplanting civics onto them sounds good.
Anway great ideas
After all you could imagine fighting a civ that might have existed for say a 1000 years, only for it to be beaten and forced to capitulate in a short war, well it just seems unlikely it would say automatically fall to other players.
If it could at least revert to a civ, but perhaps with a dangerous penalty to overcome? As many states that were once puppets of the Soviet Union as an example, retained there general borders and nation states.
I'm also wary that Colonies should go to war with who they like? Colonies were ruled by viceroys who took there orders more or less from on top - they especially would not have the power to declare war on say, great powers.
I think the idea of protecterate (terrible typo) allowing that kind of relationship where by you exert big influence (but they retain control of their foreign affairs) is more suitable than colony. The Puppet state, is in itself a form of neo-imperialiam really, an extension of the old imperial colony but combined with ideology. So definately transplanting civics onto them sounds good.
Anway great ideas
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,928
But if the colony is powerful enough to declare war on a "great power" anyway, it shouldn't be a problem.
But the colony should ask for your permission before declaring war.
Also, why no "regular" vassal? If you're running monarchy, it would be pretty nice if you could grant a lord (if you're running the proper civics) to each city conquered. These vassals could go to war with whoever they wanted, including each other, but not with you. However, they will go to war with whoever you're at war with. There's also the chance that the vassal could grow powerful enough to challenge you some day.
It would be nice if Puppet States could go to war by themselves if you demand them to without you having to declare war. It should also be possible to create puppets without forcing an enemy to capitulate (but the puppet cities have to be recently conquered cities) It could lead to some nice Cold War situations.
Maybe a good other feature is the option for the player to limit/disable nukes buildable by the puppet/colony/etc. Diplomatically speaking, if your "vassal" is slinging nukes at another colony or even major power, that has the possibility of bringing in even more players because of the diplomatic penalties.
Finally, say that two powers with puppets/colonies go to war and one side loses, it should be possible for the victor to demand that he free his colonies and release his puppets.
Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
My tuppence worth (yes I am old enough to remember pounds, shillings and pence). These suggestions work well in the industrial era onwards but not so well for the earlier eras. The current vassal system works OK for the middle eras but not for the ancient or latter eras. The tribute trade is a system that works for all eras but is hidden and lasts a fixed period of time, I am not even sure that it scales with game speed or map size.
The reason I have not posted here is because I can not think of a better way of doing things. However I would suggest, if possible, that there be a latter tech requirement on some of these and that vassalage still be possible.
The reason I have not posted here is because I can not think of a better way of doing things. However I would suggest, if possible, that there be a latter tech requirement on some of these and that vassalage still be possible.
BlackZiggerat
Chieftain
oooo... I like it. A lot. A puppet state could be considered to b on the verge of barbarian state. Revolutions regular and always teeming w dissidence. And if a puppet is release, for any reason, all the composite city pieces could fall into barbarian states, or new civ states, or even collapse into ruins immediately.
konradcabral
Prince
I second that.
Well if its powerful to declare war on a great power its hardly a colony is it?
For gooods sake hehehe...
And um why?!
We shouldn't immediately percieve to create a narrative with whatever perception we think of for these new diplomatic / vassal options, they are governed really by circumstance. The circumstance is this.
A great power forces a nation to capitulate and or - releases its own territories (ruled directly) into an independent AI colony.
An Imperial power creates a colony in order to harness that lands resources yeah? Ie. The colonisation of North America by the European Dynastic Monarchies etc. The fact these places grew to become so powerful that they demanded independence - resulted noticeably in North America for 'new colonies' and colonies resulting from subjugated peoples (such as India, and other ethnic/cultural peoples' ruled over by the Europeans.)
Would Australia? the British Raj or the Belgian Congo declared war on other nations by themselves? No... because they ARE colonies - and there ruled by viceroys, administered directly.
At the very point where they could declare war or control there own foriegn affairs, they very rapidly ceased to act as colonies.
While a puppet state should certainly not be on the verge of a barbarian state? Like why make that assumption? Puppet states too are an extension of imperialism, which like colonialism sought to harness resources, land etc (with the exception that puppet states) allowed for the extension of prevailing political idelogies and geo-political balances. But any puppet state was useless to its 'imperial' master if it was just crap. So they all tried to make there puppet states decent 'for purpose' so for example, East Germany from the Soviet Union was a great deal more sophisticated than say Mongolia. Likewise with Western puppets (such as Pinochet in South America and so on) that we helped er install in the West.
However quite right, i think the puppet states should have 'considerable' but not ridiculous penalties in the rev / revolt index. Its about striking the right balance.
We know wars were often fought over protectorates/colonies/puppet states etc but its the rare exception to the norm, that these states themselves directly initiated conflicts by themselves to bring great powers to war.
Just to add - what i think would be fun, is certainly if civic options opened up new possibilities with vassals (like the feudal lord suggestions, or others) that could add to the role playing experience. Personally I find that part of the diplo relationships the most interesting.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,928
Touche.
Which is why I suggested that the colony be forced to ask the motherland before thinking of such things.
Plus, it makes sense to establish a puppet state with captured territory instead of a vassal or colony when you're running more modern civics.
If the feudal lord idea is used, it would be simple. Just run the Power Civic, Vassalage.
Puppet states would probably requires any idealology but to group some ideas together so they fall in the same camp (Marxism-Proliterate and Bourgeois-Free Market-etc).
Colonies are simple.
Iceciro
Special Ability: Decimate
I would absolutly love this, to an insane degree. I always want more ways to extend "power" in civ without having to overtake the enemy completely, and puppet states would do it well. Hmmm. Is there any way you could have the willingness of the puppet state to respond (wether disbanded or just having revolutions) based on your military presence? If I have a Patrol III infantry in a city, it should assist in keeping it under my hand versus just leaving it out there to do whatever.
os79
Deity
I notice in my games when I conquer a civ until they have about 3 or so cities. Well, the AI doesn't know how to "cry uncle" and vassalize itself to me. I don't want to have to go into diplo screen and demand vassalage, always. Sometimes, I just like to continue to conquer until AI begs with a small voice for mercy and surrender to me 
.
.
Iceciro
Special Ability: Decimate
I've had Vassalge off for so long I just barely remember how irritating it was that the AI would Vassalize to anybody except whoever was currently punching them, resulting in either really wierd power blocs or neverending wars.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,928
I was thinking about the Puppet State idea for a while and I came up with this (strange) idea.
Ok, let's say that a war breaks out between you and another nation and you capture one of their cities. Now, what if you were given a choice there to establish a puppet state which would be the same nation but with your civics.
For example, China and Vietnam are neighbors in a game. China has a civic that allows it to establish puppet states and China takes its first Vietnam city.
Now, instead of just the "Keep" and "Raze" options, there's also the option to "Establish Puppet".
So, you click establish puppet and now there's a new Vietnam but its Fascist or whatever your China is.
Now, everytime you take another Vietnamese city, you're given the option of turning the city over to your Vietnam or, if you capture a city that has a majority of another culture, you can establish another Puppet State.
Of course, the only way this could possibly make sense to use is if you get rid of the "Capitulate" option in the Diplomacy screen. I was thinking of maybe having "Unconditional Surrender" there instead.
It's like capitulating but the civilization just becomes a vassal and the deal lasts 50 turns (scaled to game speed). During this time, the civilization has to give you whatever resource you want, and as much gold as you want.
Sorry if this idea is coming too late. Just popped in my head clearly tonight.
Also, civics should greatly influence how having puppet states and sits with your people.
Finally, there should be a diplo penalty for establishing a puppet with the guy whose losing the cities.
Ok, let's say that a war breaks out between you and another nation and you capture one of their cities. Now, what if you were given a choice there to establish a puppet state which would be the same nation but with your civics.
For example, China and Vietnam are neighbors in a game. China has a civic that allows it to establish puppet states and China takes its first Vietnam city.
Now, instead of just the "Keep" and "Raze" options, there's also the option to "Establish Puppet".
So, you click establish puppet and now there's a new Vietnam but its Fascist or whatever your China is.
Now, everytime you take another Vietnamese city, you're given the option of turning the city over to your Vietnam or, if you capture a city that has a majority of another culture, you can establish another Puppet State.
Of course, the only way this could possibly make sense to use is if you get rid of the "Capitulate" option in the Diplomacy screen. I was thinking of maybe having "Unconditional Surrender" there instead.
It's like capitulating but the civilization just becomes a vassal and the deal lasts 50 turns (scaled to game speed). During this time, the civilization has to give you whatever resource you want, and as much gold as you want.
Sorry if this idea is coming too late. Just popped in my head clearly tonight.
Also, civics should greatly influence how having puppet states and sits with your people.
Finally, there should be a diplo penalty for establishing a puppet with the guy whose losing the cities.
Killtech
Discutator
do you plan to add war-coalitions be added to the vasall system?
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,928
Yep. My idea was to make puppet states something you conquer, not force on the survivor and it never made sense for them to become my vassal forever. Unconditional Surrender allows the AI or me to win a war, get something very valuable, while allowing the loser to be politically independent still.
Iceciro
Special Ability: Decimate
I absolutely adored Aforess' idea of varying levels of autonomy given to the vassal states - Just as a note, a puppet state needs a LARGE positive relations monitor with a slow decay so that they stay loyal to you - I shouldn't have to punch them once every 20 years to make them behave, at that point it's easier to just keep a stack of troops nearby and shoot rebellious people.
fireclaw722
Imperial Guard
I'd love to see coalitions into civ. I always wanted to be able to team up with someone against a common enemy(but have nothing else in common).
I second this.
