After sveral games I think that the post Common Sense diplomatic vassallization system is almost useless due to blocking almost any attempt at diplovassalizing.
The main problems stem from the development system, the numbers were somewhat balanced when basetax was a fixed value but now, in my opinion, they are severely messed up:
1) 100 overall development causes a -1000 fixed modifier at diplovassallizing attempts.
While not much of a problem when warring this block has become too arbitrary: before common sense 100 basetax would be equivalent to a pretty relevant territorial extension, in the current build you will see even 100 development OPMs by late game. With war you can still annex 100 dev provinces and it is actually not that horrible by endgame, due to administrative efficiency kicking in.
2) In the comparison of the economical power between nations the target nation is still comparing the economy (defined as base tax+base production) of the proposing nation with (his own economy)^2
Given that, bar wars, raising the development is based on your monarch stats and that on average every nation is going to improve roughly at the same rate... this means that unless you are blobbing the penality is going to become higher and higher every next year.
This penality is also pretty harsh since it can grow up to a -90 modifier that is almost as blocking as a -1000: for comparison you would need all the other existing positive modifiers at max value and no other negative ones plus a diplomatic reputation of 7 (rounded down to the lower integer) to be able to diplovassalize anyway against a -90 modifier due to development.
And if you are not expanding by blobbing that -90 is going to become the norm.
The conclusion is that you have to actively expand by blobbing if you want to keep up with the increase to the economy penality, but this goes against the whole purpose of expanding your nation peacefully.
And also if you are expanding by blobbing what is the point in diplovassallizing? Force vassallization is going to be much easier and faster and even if a nation grows over 100 development you can still destroy it by wars before force vassalizing it.
Diplovassallizing should be slower, but should still give comparable results and it should be possible, even during lategame, for peaceful countries. To avoid blobbing nations to land grab with war AND diplovassallization at the same time there could be extra penalities for aggressive expansion (a scaling penality that grows up to the -100 of the hostile/outraged attitude penality without stacking) and overextension (though the diplo reputation penality for overextension is already working in that direction and is probably enough).
Then you have the HRE diplovassallizing penality that is the final nail in the coffin and kills the option and force to the war solution when expanding in the HRE, when combined with 2) above.
I would like for this to be reworked so that important member states inside the HRE have an actual chance to expand peacefully.
For example something like this (not an actual proposal, just a quick example):
-30 penality to diplovassallizing an HRE member, but
+10 if you also are an HRE member (as it is already)
+10 if you are an elector
+10 if the target nation is outraged towards the current HRE emperor
Thus negating the penality for HRE electors proposing vassalizzation to an HRE member that is currently scared by the emperor.
The main attractive of being a vassal state in the HRE should obviously be the fact that you can say "sorry I'm a vassal talk to my rightful liege instead" to the emperor, so if the emperor goes conquer happy inside the HRE (or a previous conquer-happy nation become emperor) it makes sense that small nations would gather around the most powerful (better if HRE members and even better if electors that could vote against the hostile emperor next time) confining nations for protection.
I'd like the chances for diplovassalizing and peaceful expansion when in similar circumstances.
The main problems stem from the development system, the numbers were somewhat balanced when basetax was a fixed value but now, in my opinion, they are severely messed up:
1) 100 overall development causes a -1000 fixed modifier at diplovassallizing attempts.
While not much of a problem when warring this block has become too arbitrary: before common sense 100 basetax would be equivalent to a pretty relevant territorial extension, in the current build you will see even 100 development OPMs by late game. With war you can still annex 100 dev provinces and it is actually not that horrible by endgame, due to administrative efficiency kicking in.
2) In the comparison of the economical power between nations the target nation is still comparing the economy (defined as base tax+base production) of the proposing nation with (his own economy)^2
Given that, bar wars, raising the development is based on your monarch stats and that on average every nation is going to improve roughly at the same rate... this means that unless you are blobbing the penality is going to become higher and higher every next year.
This penality is also pretty harsh since it can grow up to a -90 modifier that is almost as blocking as a -1000: for comparison you would need all the other existing positive modifiers at max value and no other negative ones plus a diplomatic reputation of 7 (rounded down to the lower integer) to be able to diplovassalize anyway against a -90 modifier due to development.
And if you are not expanding by blobbing that -90 is going to become the norm.
The conclusion is that you have to actively expand by blobbing if you want to keep up with the increase to the economy penality, but this goes against the whole purpose of expanding your nation peacefully.
And also if you are expanding by blobbing what is the point in diplovassallizing? Force vassallization is going to be much easier and faster and even if a nation grows over 100 development you can still destroy it by wars before force vassalizing it.
Diplovassallizing should be slower, but should still give comparable results and it should be possible, even during lategame, for peaceful countries. To avoid blobbing nations to land grab with war AND diplovassallization at the same time there could be extra penalities for aggressive expansion (a scaling penality that grows up to the -100 of the hostile/outraged attitude penality without stacking) and overextension (though the diplo reputation penality for overextension is already working in that direction and is probably enough).
Then you have the HRE diplovassallizing penality that is the final nail in the coffin and kills the option and force to the war solution when expanding in the HRE, when combined with 2) above.
I would like for this to be reworked so that important member states inside the HRE have an actual chance to expand peacefully.
For example something like this (not an actual proposal, just a quick example):
-30 penality to diplovassallizing an HRE member, but
+10 if you also are an HRE member (as it is already)
+10 if you are an elector
+10 if the target nation is outraged towards the current HRE emperor
Thus negating the penality for HRE electors proposing vassalizzation to an HRE member that is currently scared by the emperor.
The main attractive of being a vassal state in the HRE should obviously be the fact that you can say "sorry I'm a vassal talk to my rightful liege instead" to the emperor, so if the emperor goes conquer happy inside the HRE (or a previous conquer-happy nation become emperor) it makes sense that small nations would gather around the most powerful (better if HRE members and even better if electors that could vote against the hostile emperor next time) confining nations for protection.
I'd like the chances for diplovassalizing and peaceful expansion when in similar circumstances.
Last edited:
- 1
Upvote
0
