Vassal states

[Flipantropo]

You could declare war to somebody near your vassal and sabotage your vassals defenses with spies just as they are about to be attacked while you mass your troops waiting to reconquer his cities. If your vassal loses 50%+ of his initial territory he may even break free from you so you can invade him.

 

[alex15]

I prefer playing without Vassal Sates option because without Vassal states some civs conquer other civs and becoming one big civ with alot of citys that a bit harder to kill than average one who have conquered only like 2-3 citys

If you have only Conquest/Domination victory on , turning off Vassal States makes game more challenging and harder (expect few situations where AI unable to conqueror other AI civs but able to get them as vassals after conquering 2-3 citys)

 

[lindsay40k]

I don't mind it all that much.

If you've reduced a rival to a punching bag, I don't mind the risk of a third party intervening. And if you've dogpiled a rival into oblivion, pay your co-belligerents to make peace with them so you can capture that Wonder city without being forced to make peace. It's all part of the risks and costs you have to factor in when eyeing up the rewards of war.

 

[Lexicus]

Personally can't imagine playing without vassals, they're absolutely essential for roleplaying! One of my big disappointments with Civ V was the lack of ability to turn other civs into your puppets. Considering the various forms of suzerainty and tributary relationships which have been so important throughout history, no reflection of this in-game is a disappointment.

Of course, if other people find the game more fun without vassal states, power to 'em. No skin off my bones