Should we bring back vassals and colonies?

[ShahJahanII]

Does everyone remember vassals from Civ IV? And how you could liberate overseas cities to form colonies? I say we should bring these 2 features back.

 

[Gilkan]

I agree. Colonies were a lot of fun and required you to consider whether you wanted to raze or form colonies. I also miss my buffer states. Nothing like having the Aztec and Mongol war machines under your control.

 

[ShahJahanII]

It would be even better if they didn't increase policy costs You could have a huge empire, not worry about hapiness as you would with puppets, and still work on a cultural victory.

 

[starrywisdom]

ou could have a huge empire and still work on a cultural victory.

The puppet system works just fine for that...IMHO.

 

[Bechhold]

As long as they play a factor in say policy and AI decisions etc.

 

[Lose]

The puppet system works just fine for that...IMHO.

100% vouch

 

[ShahJahanII]

100% vouch

But colonies should have no unhappiness at all. Puppets do

 

[JesusofNazareth]

But colonies should have no unhappiness at all. Puppets do

England's 13 Colonies weren't so happy.

 

[ShahJahanII]

England's 13 Colonies weren't so happy.

Maybe we should have some sort of "revolution" system to simulate this.

 

[SpearMan153]

I'd like to see some kind of colony mechanism - maybe it could be like founding a city state that starts allied with you...

or instead of founding a regular city you have an option of founding a colony which you don't have direct control over (acts like a puppet) but has reduced happy/culture cost hit and can later go independent (turn into city state)

I'd like to see some kind of vassal/captitulation/tribute mechanism that would work in addition to regular puppets. AI pays you not to kill it because it knows its beat.

 

[The Tollan]

Vassal states definitely should return in Civilization V. This would make the game much more interesting.

I didn't play Civilization IV too much after Beyond the Sword came out, but enough to observe that the addition of vassalage was positive.

The concept of vassalage could maybe be given a slightly greater degree of complexity in Civilization V.

One possibility (if considered viable) would be to have two different forms of vassalage. One would allow for greater control over the vassal by its master and the other would be a looser association. There are other, different possibilities as well.

 

[danieladler]

Colonies were never that attractive for me so i almost never used that concept in civ 4. But if it becomes more attractive i would certainly like to see it in V. Vassal states on the other hand was a quite logical part of for example a peace deal or when a civ offered you to be your vassal state. But for this to work i think you would have a totally different ai than the ridiculously irrational one we have in V. I know, i know...it all comes back to that goddam stupid AI hehe....

 

[Drawmeus]

Maybe we should have some sort of "revolution" system to simulate this.

It'd have to be a planned, unavoidable thing - industrial era techs eventually lead to revolutions, or simple time after colonization. Mismanagement -> revolution will never come up except for people who aren't good at the game, and they're already going to be frustrated.

Colonies were never that attractive for me so i almost never used that concept in civ 4. But if it becomes more attractive i would certainly like to see it in V. Vassal states on the other hand was a quite logical part of for example a peace deal or when a civ offered you to be your vassal state. But for this to work i think you would have a totally different ai than the ridiculously irrational one we have in V. I know, i know...it all comes back to that goddam stupid AI hehe....

All you really need is for the AI to be playing for the best interests of its nation, instead of for a victory. I consider it a much greater failing of the civ franchise that the best interests of your nation and winning the game aren't synonymous (and they aren't, in I believe any version) unless you're playing for points victory.

 

[Sonereal]

No. Vassals in Civilization IV didn't make any sense and were ungodly annoying.

 

[Helmling]

Vassals made sense, but they were far too common place.

Colonies, though, made no sense. Empires don't found colonies as separate countries, but with the Civ IV anti-growth constraints, there had to be a mechanism to offset the tremendous cost of settling overseas. In Civ V, the cost is a happiness hit, shucking the game dynamic we've had since Civ 1 whereby corruption was a factor of distance from the capital.

So, what Civ V should introduce is distant cities sometimes breaking away and becoming CS's or new civs.

 

[kaltorak]

I'd love to. In civ4 colonies weren't very useful tho. They had to think how to make them worth.

 

[Mods]

With civilization 5's rules, if the 13 colonies were very unhappy, there's be a revolt in scotland
So I definitely think they should get their own happiness system (Maybe they should even get to pick their own policies?)

 

[Ravellion]

No. Vassals in Civilization IV didn't make any sense and were ungodly annoying.

Hear hear. And I've never liberated a colony in my life when playing Civ4. I just made sure that I did not expand beyond 4 cities on the same overseas landmass.

 

[Becomedeath]

The problem with Vassals was that the AI could use them, and really screw up your nicely planned war effort. Suddenly being at war with your main rival when you didn't expect to be was something of a nightmare, especially if the main purpose of that war was to capture a resource.

It would have to be hugely reworked as a concept to get my vote.

 

[Babri]

Vassals : Yes of course. I don't want to fight endless battles all the time. Sometimes I just want to show my might so that AI surrenders.
Colonies : Yes but not like cIV. I want them to be something special. Revolutions, stability etc could combine very well with colonies if they introduce them.