Vassals

[zeta]

Someone said that it doesn't matter what you do, but AI should handle vassalage. I agree with that. Although can't say anything else, never played with vassalage on, since I don't really care about it. Vassalage fits perfectly in such games as CKII, but I want to keep Civ as simple as possible. Only mods I use are this and lots of convenience mods.

But, if you want my opinion on your suggestions then taxation sounds great to me.

 

[VampireSeraphin]

Could you conscript troops from a vassal like compelling tribute from a city state? Would such a feature be interesting/balanced?

 

[Putmalk]

That's a fair point, but when you're 2-3 eras ahead, possess at least 10x the amount of cities they have, have a military that with a few units can curbstomp the entirety of their empire (And one has far more than just that to use.), and have been nothing but helpful it just feels odd.

At that point it feels like 'C'mon man, I'm going to win the game. I'm being nice here.'.

Okay, I'll agree. I'll look into adjusting the Vassalage logic. Overhauling if necessary. This change might take a while to make, okay? I'll probably make another post detailing my ideas.

I'm not sure if this is part of the vassalage concept or not, first time it has ever occurred for me.
Morocco went war against me and I felt like removing them permanently and now that my armies/navies are about to decimate their last city they sued for peace with an offer of:
Capitulation

Now I know what the term means, but not what it means in this game. No pedia entry that I could find.
What does it mean for the vanquished and the victor in CBP?

Capitulation is absolutely part of Vassalage. I agree there should be a pedia entry, I thought I had created one. I think that's part of what I want to do with a future update, increase the ability for new players to learn the system. Capitulation is the "forced" version of Vassalage, where an opponent defeated in combat becomes your forced vassal because they lost in the war.

Someone said that it doesn't matter what you do, but AI should handle vassalage. I agree with that. Although can't say anything else, never played with vassalage on, since I don't really care about it. Vassalage fits perfectly in such games as CKII, but I want to keep Civ as simple as possible. Only mods I use are this and lots of convenience mods.

But, if you want my opinion on your suggestions then taxation sounds great to me.

The AI should / will handle anything I implement. If they do not, please let me know so I can report it as a bug. I will make a post when I'm ready to begin implementing features with proposed suggestions / known issues when I am ready to start developing.

Could you conscript troops from a vassal like compelling tribute from a city state? Would such a feature be interesting/balanced?

I'm not sure. The vassals rely on you for protection and as far as I know, the vassals already supply a levy to their master once in a while, a change implemented in CBP.

 

[Jdoug312]

I'm not sure. The vassals rely on you for protection and as far as I know, the vassals already supply a levy to their master once in a while, a change implemented in CBP.

Every new era, they gift you 2 troops. The number might be variable, but I've only seen per 2 vassal so far.

 

[Gazebo]

Every new era, they gift you 2 troops. The number might be variable, but I've only seen per 2 vassal so far.

Uses terracotta logic, up to a certain amount per vassal.

G

 

[Wario Mario]

I would suggest adding a fairly simple gameplay rule involving vassals:

Vassalize everyone = victory

I don't know how hard it would be to program (Civ 5 doesn't have a victory condition for eliminating everyone like Civ 4 did) but it would bring the mod closer to Civ 4, where vassalizing everyone did declare the master the winner.

 

[joosegoose25]

I would suggest adding a fairly simple gameplay rule involving vassals:

Vassalize everyone = victory

I don't know how hard it would be to program (Civ 5 doesn't have a victory condition for eliminating everyone like Civ 4 did) but it would bring the mod closer to Civ 4, where vassalizing everyone did declare the master the winner.

That made a lot more sense for Civ 4 imo--now that Civ 5 switched to controlling all the capitals for domination, what's the incentive for taking capitals if all you have to do is vassalize everyone?

 

[Putmalk]

That made a lot more sense for Civ 4 imo--now that Civ 5 switched to controlling all the capitals for domination, what's the incentive for taking capitals if all you have to do is vassalize everyone?

His change does kinda make sense - however, the civ would only count if it was involuntary (read: Capitulation) vassalage.

I am hesitant to make changes to victory conditions, however. I feel like Gazebo needs a say in that.

 

[Wario Mario]

That made a lot more sense for Civ 4 imo--now that Civ 5 switched to controlling all the capitals for domination, what's the incentive for taking capitals if all you have to do is vassalize everyone?

It's typically a lot easier to take one city than it is to force capitulation.

There are 2 main reasons why this change makes sense:
1. Logical. If every civilization on the planet is your vassal, then you've basically conquered the world.

2. Practical. The idea that you must intentionally lose a vassal so you're allowed to declare war on them just so you can take their capital and win is annoying at best.

EDIT: Thanks Putmalk

 

[joosegoose25]

It's typically a lot easier to take one city than it is to force capitulation.

There are 2 main reasons why this change makes sense:
1. Logical. If every civilization on the planet is your vassal, then you've basically conquered the world.

2. Practical. The idea that you must intentionally lose a vassal so you're allowed to declare war on them just so you can take their capital and win is annoying at best.

EDIT: Thanks Putmalk

I do think it can be easier to force capitulation in a variety of cases (many civs will offer if you've taken a couple cities along the way, and the capital is usually toughest along with generating a much larger warmonger hit)...but you're right in that if you make the entire planet your vassal, it doesn't make any sense to say you haven't won the game.

To be honest I kind of assumed this was too big a feature and thus DOA (until I remembered that Putmalk is back!), but I wouldn't have any problem with this being implemented.

 

[Putmalk]

Update. I am in the process of negating negative diplomatic modifiers upon capitulation (needs testing) and adding some more descriptive notifications (see pics).

 

[Funak]

Update. I am in the process of negating negative diplomatic modifiers upon capitulation (needs testing) and adding some more descriptive notifications (see pics).

Damn, that looks sexy.

 

[Tarzan737]

Update. I am in the process of negating negative diplomatic modifiers upon capitulation (needs testing) and adding some more descriptive notifications (see pics).

 

[XplosiveLun]

I don't agree on clean state apply. AI should hate the master. Suppose the human player is capitulated. Why won't you hate the master? They have almost removed you from the game (Assuming human vassalage is considered a conquest loss.) or reduced you into a minor power. If possible, you would plot the master (jointing other civilizations against the master) to regain the lost power. Also, diplomatic opinion shouldn't be viewed as the desire to befriend because AI is deceptive.

 

[Putmalk]

I don't agree on clean state apply. AI should hate the master. Suppose the human player is capitulated. Why won't you hate the master? They have almost removed you from the game (Assuming human vassalage is considered a conquest loss.) or reduced you into a minor power. If possible, you would plot the master (jointing other civilizations against the master) to regain the lost power. Also, diplomatic opinion shouldn't be viewed as the desire to befriend because AI is deceptive.

The idea is not to have the AI piss off the master five seconds into being forced to submit, and that the vassal should hate the master for events after capitulation. That being said, I probably won't do a clean 100% reset. Mostly clean denouncements and "one-off" things like spying incidents, world Congress incidents, etc. There needs to be tuning of it.

 

[Wario Mario]

I don't agree on clean state apply. AI should hate the master. Suppose the human player is capitulated. Why won't you hate the master? They have almost removed you from the game (Assuming human vassalage is considered a conquest loss.) or reduced you into a minor power. If possible, you would plot the master (jointing other civilizations against the master) to regain the lost power. Also, diplomatic opinion shouldn't be viewed as the desire to befriend because AI is deceptive.

First, I'd assume that the reset would also apply to the master (at least when an AI forces a human to surrender). This would prevent your new master from automatically treating you like garbage, instead working based on how your current relations are.

I would also consider trying to regain/exceed my former power by capturing the crap out of my master's next victim, thus gaining practical power if not status on the world stage. Alternatively, I could use the protection they provide to get away with a small military, and thus have plenty of peace of mind in going for a non-domination win.

Finally, if your conquer was paid off to attack you in the first place, shouldn't you hate them? I hate those nations that keep paying off others to attack me far more than I have the actual countries I'm fighting.

 

[Putmalk]

I am currently having some difficulties making it so that vassals are locked into voting for their Masters (also, an ambiguous case where you have multiple masters, who do you vote for?) so I am compromising by making it so Vassals cannot be considered for World Congress Host or Diplomatic Victory.

 

[Gazebo]

I am currently having some difficulties making it so that vassals are locked into voting for their Masters (also, an ambiguous case where you have multiple masters, who do you vote for?) so I am compromising by making it so Vassals cannot be considered for World Congress Host or Diplomatic Victory.

// Calculate how much we think our interests are aligned with ePlayer, based on ideology, liberation, past voting patterns, etc.
CvLeagueAI::AlignmentLevels CvLeagueAI::EvaluateAlignment(PlayerTypes ePlayer)
{

In here, assign them alignment_liberator.

Alternatively, actually discretely remove votes from the vassal and give them to the master (so the master gets their votes and can use them how they want!).

G

 

[Putmalk]

// Calculate how much we think our interests are aligned with ePlayer, based on ideology, liberation, past voting patterns, etc.
CvLeagueAI::AlignmentLevels CvLeagueAI::EvaluateAlignment(PlayerTypes ePlayer)
{

In here, assign them alignment_liberator.

Alternatively, actually discretely remove votes from the vassal and give them to the master (so the master gets their votes and can use them how they want!).

G

I was trying to do it through vote commitments. Modifying the AI is fine but it still gives humans the ability to choose another player. :/

And removing the votes from the Vassal seems really hacky. Something I'd like to avoid because I want it to be clear. You being a Vassal locks you into voting for the Master.

 

[Gazebo]

I was trying to do it through vote commitments. Modifying the AI is fine but it still gives humans the ability to choose another player. :/

And removing the votes from the Vassal seems really hacky. Something I'd like to avoid because I want it to be clear. You being a Vassal locks you into voting for the Master.

Removing votes seems easier, but you could also try manipulating the 'filter' on what aspects of a vote (i.e. yes/no, leader, etc.) that the vassal can choose.

G