Should the Vassal system be re-worked in the next patch?

[mudphud]

1. They should NOT have to give you anything but resources (and possibly civics changes and 'stop trading with') research should be theirs

I don't think that they should have to give you their research but I don't think they should be able to not trade it because they don't like me enough since I get to tell them what to research. It just seems illogical that I can force them to research sometime but not trade it to me.

 

[mudphud]

Maybe it would reasonable for the new master to come to you and say nation X is now my vassal and under my protection if you don't cease war on them I will declare on you (unless of course he wants to declare on you but it seems like it should be an option for him to offer you a change at peace if the new master wants to).

 

[Kalimakhus]

i understand that if the nation is as small as monaco, but on scale of the map, the country would've looked more like Austria or something with the bigger country to scale would've been the size of former yugoslavia.

It is not a matter of how small but of how much risk is out there. Let me see Hatty spr/cre with only four cities for a long time. Large cities with much culture, maybe a wonder or two, and some chance of a shrine or at least a holy city without a shrine yet. How lucrative indeed. Don't you think she needs protection? (BTW wasn't you eying her for some time already before she got herself vassalized?)

 

[InvisibleStalke]

Maybe it would reasonable for the new master to come to you and say nation X is now my vassal and under my protection if you don't cease war on them I will declare on you (unless of course he wants to declare on you but it seems like it should be an option for him to offer you a change at peace if the new master wants to).

I like it how it is - the friends of the nation you are attacking decide suddenly to intervene. An outright declaration of war when they are sick of your war crimes and atrocities is much more historical than a threat.

I love this feature - it means you can't just be a psychopath and hope that noone notices that you are killing their neighbours one by one. I used to like the feature in civ2 (I think) where if you eliminated a civilization other AIs would remember what you had done.

There are a couple of conditions that I think are reasonable:

- The new master and the vassal should have good relations. And the new master should like their vassal better than they like you.

- The new master should feel militarily strong enough to take you on.

As long as those are implemented I think its great.

 

[Kalimakhus]

@InvisibleStalke

Your second condition should be already implemented. The master would refuse a vassal offer if this wonnabe vassal is in war with a civ far stronger than him.

Your first condition however is not realistic. It is a matter of compatible interests. The vassal need protection, the master likes to have a vassal and maybe want a chance to take you with your ... down.

I hope everybody here just measure things on their own behavior. I mean if you are going to a domination victory would it really matter if you have excellent relation with your next victim? The AI wants to win he will back stabs you simple and easy no matter how pleased or even friendly he was just the previous turn. (They do nothing you won't do).

 

[Putchuco]

Well Israel is a vassal of the US and it's half way around the world. Cuba became a vassal of the USSR. It's quite common actually.

Excellent points!
But it also illustrates that there should be some sort of relationship for someone to become someone else's vassal. Call it 'religion', special friendship, but something that makes sense.

Maybe it's just me, and it would make it a lot easier for me to accept when we would get a message like: 'Monte sought refuge with his long-time friend Washington (+13 relationship, same religion, close neighbor) and is now his vassal.'

 

[InvisibleStalke]

@InvisibleStalke

Your second condition should be already implemented. The master would refuse a vassal offer if this wonnabe vassal is in war with a civ far stronger than him.

Your first condition however is not realistic. It is a matter of compatible interests. The vassal need protection, the master likes to have a vassal and maybe want a chance to take you with your ... down.

I hope everybody here just measure things on their own behavior. I mean if you are going to a domination victory would it really matter if you have excellent relation with your next victim? The AI wants to win he will back stabs you simple and easy no matter how pleased or even friendly he was just the previous turn. (They do nothing you won't do).

I wasn't thinking of excellent relations. If the potential master liked me more than the vassal, wouldn't their interest be in dogpiling the vassal for even less risk and the chance to hurt someone they hate more? Then they can still vassalize the vassal and they don't need to declare on me.

Or if they are just waiting to backstab me, they can do it anyway without the vassal mechanism being involved.

Anyway it seems to work this way. If someone takes on a vassal and declares on me, its usually someone I (a) would expect might declare on me anyway, or (b) had a good relation with the vassal and didn't like me much. So I'm happy as it stands.

 

[Armor (Veteran)]

I think the vassal system is mostly fine, but could still use a few tweaks. I have only played a few games of BTS, so correct me if any of this has already changed since Warlords.

I've noticed that usually when you are crushing someone and they vassalize to another nation, usually they would have capitulated to you a turn or two earlier had you asked. It's kind of a pain to have to check every turn to see if your opponent is ready to capitulate; it would be nice if as soon as they were willing they would talk to you and make the offer themselves. It would make sense for them to seek someone else's protection after you turned them down, since at that point it's the only alternative to being completely destroyed.

My main beef, though, is with voluntary vassals, especially in the hands of the AI. Voluntary vassals are pretty much useless to the human player and a borderline bug in the hands of the AI. Particulary irritating is the habit of the AI of immediately granting all its technology to a backwards nation who then turns around and breaks free shortly thereafter.

I think there needs to be some additional restrictions on voluntary vassals to make them more worthwhile to take on, and/or changing the AI to not just give away their technology to a vassal who can break free whenever it wants.

 

[Rockstone]

We need to primarily get rid of the notion that my (rightful) cities want to join my vassal. This happens all the time (later in the game) and its utter nonsence. Get rid of it.

Btw, I disagree that if you attack somebody (and are winning), that he would not be allowed to vassalize himself to a third party. I think thats a fair strategy for the unfortunate ruler. Though a nuisence, its up to you to solve the problem.

 

[Horace]

I think Human players should be able to capitulate to the AI. True Id prob rather fight to the death but it might be nice to capitulate to save your bacon and fight back to win a game

 

[feldmarshall]

it is reasonable. have you ever heard of Persian Gulf War? Cathy asked Gil for help, and pay it by being his vassal. BUT i think gil should have given you ultimatum first. "Make peace with catherine or I'll join her"