To vassal, or not to vassal...

[T'hain Esh Kelc]

So, having beaten up one of my opponents, he usually crawls to me, begging to become a vassal under my mighty, vast, strong and luxury empire.

But what exactly are the benefits, as opposed to say, just capture his last few cities and using them to your advantage? Are there any good reason to make a civ a vassal state, if you have the advantage and could easily just conquer his remaining cities?

In the long run, the vassal state usually just breaks off anyway... Do you gain any major points benefits when the game ends?

 

[Firewind]

If you're going for a domination victory and your opponent still has a decent-sized empire, then it might be faster to vassalize, withdraw, and reload for your next war to grab more land, since half of your vassal's land counts as yours for domination purposes.

My verdict is, if the empire's still decent-sized, vassalize them. If not, don't even bother, just crush them and reuse the land. Each to their own, of course - I tend to avoid drawn out wars, for instance, so vassalizing ends the war faster for me.

 

[JimT]

Each to their own.

I never vassalise except when going for cultural war (don't need a war and don't want one). Even then I am wary in case someone decides to declare war on him and drag me in.
When going for domination I would rather crush a pretty much defeated foe and have the whole of his land count to mine. This can often reduce the number of civs you have to wipe the floor with.
It may be beneficial in a conquest victory to speed up the final result, don't use it myself though.

 

[T'hain Esh Kelc]

The risk of having a vassal state dragging you into war, is also one of the things I despice.

Are the points you get for having a vassal state large enough, for not deciding to destroy them?

 

[Firewind]

That's what you have to take into consideration when you decide whether or not to vassalize - if the score they'd provide is unlikely to be worth the hassle, then it's much simpler to crush them, but make sure you can crush them quickly - if they're offering to capitulate, and you refuse, it's almost dead cert they'll capitulate to someone else a turn or two later.

Remember, there's also always the chance that they'll turn on you and break free - I vassalized Toku, gave him back the city I took from him, and left him to his own business while I worked on my backdoor space race (It was a Chieftain game, I was playing for the amusement factor more than the challenge). I demanded a few things in tribute, which he gave, then after a few years, he suddenly retracted his tribute. When I demanded he give in, he broke off and declared war on me. I ended up crushing him and taking his land anyway, so no big deal, but it's something to bear in mind - having a vassal turn on you at the worst possible time could cause serious problems.

Of course, this was in a BTS game, but I don't think THAT much of what I did differed from what I'd have done in Warlords, apart from espionage of course.

 

[McGoo]

The last domination win I had ended when I vasselized a fairly large civ. Would have probably taken at least another 20 turns to get the land for myself with the multi-turns of revolt. If I would have done the same with one other AI I probably could have ended the game 30-40 turns earlier in the early 1900's instead of mid 1900's.

 

[manu-fan]

ALso be aware. If you have a Civ on it's last knees and have the oppontunity to get it to capitulate. If you don't, it may become the vassal of someone else, who you will immediately be at war with. That's probably the reason I vasslaize the most.

Cheers.

 

[T'hain Esh Kelc]

ALso be aware. If you have a Civ on it's last knees and have the oppontunity to get it to capitulate. If you don't, it may become the vassal of someone else, who you will immediately be at war with. That's probably the reason I vasslaize the most.

Cheers.

A very good reason actually. I usually play on Warlord since Im still trying to perferctionalise my strategy, and I don't believe I have seen that happen yet.

But on Noble, that might happen..

 

[Crighton]

Trust me it happens. It's one of the more common complaints about the vassal system, you go beat up on someone, that guy goes and becomes a vassal to another civ and now your at war with someone else (usually someone you had decent relations with which is what really pisses people off).

Basically the civ that takes the vassal makes a calculation based on whether it thinks it can either take you or go for enough of a standstill to make some large enough gain for itself.

 

[Dubai Vol]

Trust me it happens. .. you go beat up on someone, that guy goes and becomes a vassal to another civ and now your at war with someone else (usually someone you had decent relations with ...)

Yup, just had that happen to me, and war weariness was a mother. Now my police state is waging blitzkrieg on both of their sorry butts. (Can we say butt here?)

 

[dgl_thrawn]

Hannibal kept becoming a vassal to Ragnar in my current game and then getting himself out of it, so I just loaded up with Cossacks, killed Hannibal and vassalised Ragnar. Currently about 3% short of Domination Victory. Asoka's up next. In hindsight, it might have been better to vassalise Hannibal first, but I wanted that Holy City.

 

[marciv]

I played a BTS game on Noble with Shaka and totalled three of Charley's cities with four to go. My troops were all over his territory. He wouldn't capitulate despite my asking at the start of every turn. Next thing, Boney vasslaizes him, he hadn't done a thing prior to my attacks or during my onslaught. Cheeky don't you think?

 

[gdgrimm]

Usually I won't accept capitulation until their remaining cities are on a distant continent or behind somebody else's border. Accepting before that just leads to issues with them culturally taking back tiles that I feel should belong to me.

 

[Crighton]

I've got a habit of taking vassals on when they're going to form a buffer for my target. I try and reinforce the vassal cities with some strong defenses in the hope of chewing up assaults by the enemy. Hopefully the fighting and the rampant pillaging will only take place around the vassal's cities.

 

[dgl_thrawn]

Hannibal kept becoming a vassal to Ragnar in my current game and then getting himself out of it, so I just loaded up with Cossacks, killed Hannibal and vassalised Ragnar. Currently about 3% short of Domination Victory. Asoka's up next. In hindsight, it might have been better to vassalise Hannibal first, but I wanted that Holy City.

And what do you know? Almost as soon as I load the game again, Mehmed (my good friend for almost the whole game) attacks Asoka, and Asoka capitulates. Apparently I was too powerful for him to become my vassal. So to get that Domination victory, I have to attack both. Still, I won the domination. my first victory that was not a Time Victory.

I think that if I'd completely crushed Ragnar, rather than taking his capitulation, I would have won a lot sooner, as he only had the one city left. Live and learn. Live and learn.

 

[say1988]

My only use of vassals is so I don't have to mop up small remnants of civs I have nearly destroyed, especially to get a conquest victory. Though, if I can divert my armies to a more valuable target, then I do it in domination as well, but often normal peace suffices (and I can take the rest of their land later).

 

[Civfan333]

All I can say is that vassalizing is a horrible idea unless you're running out of troops, your future vassal is unaware of this, and they offer capitulation. Other than that, I haven't had many good experiences. Backstabing, traitors, and all that horrible stuff.

 

[Willard IV]

there are many benefits to having a vassal, however i find that it hurts my diplomacy with my best buddy civs, i usually take them over totally or make sure they are set back so far that they have no way to ever recouperate, then give tham a tech or two and convert them to your religion.