How would you feel about subjects being able to form other nations?

[Ferdinand_Bardamu]

Just curious what the EU4 community thinks about this.

I always cringe when I get a free PU over someone like Muscovy or Castile, or even England for that matter, because now I've basically negated a Russia or Spain forming and have a subject that is significantly weaker than what their highest potential could have been.

There are other cases, such as PUing Milan or Naples, which I don't mind so much but potentially you could still help them form an Italy.

Regardless, how would the EU4 community feel about Paradox allowing subjects to form other nations? Yes? No?

Am just curious. I don't have a strong opinion either way although it would be nice if they could form other nations. I just got a PU over Muscovy for example and it feels pretty miserable knowing Siberia will never be colonised.

 

[MachopPower69]

I think there was a mod where you could have your subjects form nations. From searching on the Workshop, there are three; two from line_r and another from Diofernic. They are 1.31 only according to the titles

 

[AvengedK1ng]

Just curious what the EU4 community thinks about this.

I always cringe when I get a free PU over someone like Muscovy or Castile, or even England for that matter, because now I've basically negated a Russia or Spain forming and have a subject that is significantly weaker than what their highest potential could have been.

There are other cases, such as PUing Milan or Naples, which I don't mind so much but potentially you could still help them form an Italy.

Regardless, how would the EU4 community feel about Paradox allowing subjects to form other nations? Yes? No?

Am just curious. I don't have a strong opinion either way although it would be nice if they could form other nations. I just got a PU over Muscovy for example and it feels pretty miserable knowing Siberia will never be colonised.

I wouldn't want it because then blobbing is that much easier due formables strong mission trees

 

[Elu Thingol]

I've written a post about this a while back, and i realy suport it. Mostly from a RP/Fluf point of view, it would be great being able to help you'r subject/junior partner grow. My last example was a France play, where it would have been very sweet letting one of my Irish minors ruling as a subject king of Ireland.

If people feel it would be to easy (missions, permaclaims and such) why not let it be a togleable feture, blocking ironman?

 

[Ferdinand_Bardamu]

I've written a post about this a while back, and i realy suport it. Mostly from a RP/Fluf point of view, it would be great being able to help you'r subject/junior partner grow. My last example was a France play, where it would have been very sweet letting one of my Irish minors ruling as a subject king of Ireland.

If people feel it would be to easy (missions, permaclaims and such) why not let it be a togleable feture, blocking ironman?

I also think from a RP perspective it would be nice.

I don't think this would be that overpowered anyway. For example, helping an Italy form as say France or Spain does not really provide you with anything you don't already have claims wise since Imperialism will probably roll around soon after.

 

[Raven100]

Forming new nations should be limited to marches only

 

[necro84]

I don't think this would be that overpowered anyway. For example, helping an Italy form as say France or Spain does not really provide you with anything you don't already have claims wise since Imperialism will probably roll around soon after.

and what about forming Russia using Novgorod as a subject? Just take one of their provinces when they are losing to Muscovy, release them as a vassal and use reconquest and later all of the russian claims. Or forming Andalusia from Granada?

 

[st360]

I would guess most people will support it just because it gives them more buffs.

I'm against it because forming a nation should be viewed as a people achieving supreme dominance in a region. Proclaiming yourself a better tag while being someones servant feels definitionally wrong.

*Maybe* a minor German city vassalized by Austria proclaiming itself Bavaria would work, but no, I don't think some minor should be able to legitimately proclaim itself Russia while being a vassal.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

I would guess most people will support it just because it gives them more buffs.

I'm against it because forming a nation should be viewed as a people achieving supreme dominance in a region. Proclaiming yourself a better tag while being someones servant feels definitionally wrong.

*Maybe* a minor German city vassalized by Austria proclaiming itself Bavaria would work, but no, I don't think some minor should be able to legitimately proclaim itself Russia while being a vassal.

We already have tag renaming with caliphate and kingdom of God, so maybe integrate vassal and client states being able to rename constantly using the same as colonial nations can be.

Westphalia and etruria are the only tags which formed when vassals of someone else, mughals were mughals before they became safavid vassals

 

[Elu Thingol]

Forming new nations should be limited to marches only

Out of pure curiosity, why?

I would guess most people will support it just because it gives them more buffs.

I'm against it because forming a nation should be viewed as a people achieving supreme dominance in a region. Proclaiming yourself a better tag while being someones servant feels definitionally wrong.

*Maybe* a minor German city vassalized by Austria proclaiming itself Bavaria would work, but no, I don't think some minor should be able to legitimately proclaim itself Russia while being a vassal.

Well, here i dont realy agree historicaly, becuse i would say that it makes perfect sense to establish a subject that could claim teritory out of for example historical reasons.

But I understand that having for example Russia as a subject would create some major balancing issues..

 

[Nostalgium]

Out of pure curiosity, why?

Probably because marches have higher autonomy, game-mechanics-wise.

Now, on the actual subject (hehe) at hand; no, but yes. I would be against Subjects forming nations on their own - they're technically you, after all - but I would quite like some kind of "reorganize region as..."-option where you could force (at the cost of stability and some liberty desire perhaps) the formation of a tag from several vassals. I.e. "Reorganize Italy under Milan", where you could force the union between Milan, Tuscany and Venice - all of whom were your subjects and together held the necessary provinces - into the Italy tag, by annexing them all into Milan and forcing them to form Italy. Stab cost could change based on how many tags you're integrating, starting at -1 for 1 and adding -1 per tag.

Do I think it would be very helpful from a gameplay perspective? No, probably not. Chances are that you can conquer the region easily through other means than the unification tag if you're in a position to form it through subjects. It's mostly just because for some nations, I like having vassals own regions, and in those cases, it's always a bit sad that if you want, say, Italy as a German march, you have to conquer, integrate, and release them as a custom client state. I'd like alternatives to that.

 

[reivaj89]

I think it makes sense with some formables (say, Ireland, German regional tags, maybe even the Netherlands) but not so much with larger nations like Germany or Russia. Where to draw the line? Maybe tags that are intended to represent "cultural unions" (Germany for Germanic cultures, Russia for East Slavic, Italy for Latin, etc.) could be forbidden to form if they are a subject.

 

[st360]

i dont realy agree historicaly, becuse i would say that it makes perfect sense to establish a subject that could claim teritory out of for example historical reasons.

1) Could you give a few historical examples of minor nations taking the identity of major nations while vassals? I'm not talking about formal titles or "my vassal Ragusa formed Dalmatia". But "my vassal Ragusa formed Italy". Where the vassal nation was large and the claims where of reasonable legitimacy?

2) National formation in EU 4 involves much more than claims. I would say that claims are actually the least important aspect of formation. You get a superior identity. More ambitious national ideas, often new national government forms and even mechanics. And new missions which are written to imply you are a newly formed free powerhouse with great ambitions.

 

[cuendillar]

TO and Brandenburg can actually form Prussia already, but that's due to historical reasons. Any other Prussia-capable country needs to be independent..

 

[Elu Thingol]

1) Could you give a few historical examples of minor nations taking the identity of major nations while vassals? I'm not talking about formal titles or "my vassal Ragusa formed Dalmatia". But "my vassal Ragusa formed Italy". Where the vassal nation was large and the claims where of reasonable legitimacy?

2) National formation in EU 4 involves much more than claims. I would say that claims are actually the least important aspect of formation. You get a superior identity. More ambitious national ideas, often new national government forms and even mechanics. And new missions which are written to imply you are a newly formed free powerhouse with great ambitions.

1) Why would'nt the first examples work? But i could live with the above mentioned idea of blocking "cultural unions" from being formable.

2) How you mean with "superior"? I'm not sure im behind the idea that all formable nations represent some freed powerhouses.

 

[st360]

1) Why would'nt the first examples work? But i could live with the above mentioned idea of blocking "cultural unions" from being formable.

You said you disagree historically, so I'm asking if there are any examples of vassals forming impressive new entities.

2) How you mean with "superior"? I'm not sure im behind the idea that all formable nations represent some freed powerhouses.

As I said, there are a few "low tier" formables for flavors sake, like Montenegro getting to form Serbia or german minors forming Saxony. But in practice, almost every formable nation in EU 4 (inspired by real history) is a flat out buff. Almost every formable has superior national ideas than the nations who can form it by design, more missions and often a better government form.

 

[please add multithreading]

I wouldn't want it because then blobbing is that much easier due formables strong mission trees

90% of mission trees require the owner to be a independent nation. So your fears will not happen.

 

[MatthewP]

1) Could you give a few historical examples of minor nations taking the identity of major nations while vassals? I'm not talking about formal titles or "my vassal Ragusa formed Dalmatia". But "my vassal Ragusa formed Italy". Where the vassal nation was large and the claims where of reasonable legitimacy?

The ilkhanate and the Golden Horde were cases where the mongol empire released vassals who took on powerful new identities with wide-ranging claims.

I think they also illustrate quite well the very simple reason examples of this are rare in history: for a nation to claim an identity as a great state, it needs to encompass the territory of a great state. There is rarely a strong enough overlord to handle a subject of this caliber. In fact, the mongol empire wasn’t able to do so for long, pretty quickly the subject relationship was only lip service and then nothing.

In EU4, the player, and AIs to a lesser degree, can build ahistorically strong and stable states. So, it doesn’t seem crazy that they could have ahistorically great subjects.

I’ll flip the question around: is there an example in history of a subject which encompassed an enormous territory for a significant time period and didn’t take on any unified identity of that territory?

btw: another example is the British raj in India.

 

[Elu Thingol]

You said you disagree historically, so I'm asking if there are any examples of vassals forming impressive new entities.



As I said, there are a few "low tier" formables for flavors sake, like Montenegro getting to form Serbia or german minors forming Saxony. But in practice, almost every formable nation in EU 4 (inspired by real history) is a flat out buff. Almost every formable has superior national ideas than the nations who can form it by design, more missions and often a better government form.

I think MatthewP sumarises my points quite good above.

And as i said, I sure could live with the top tier union-states being locked behind independence.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

90% of mission trees require the owner to be a independent nation. So your fears will not happen.

Niet, they're a minority of mission trees, moldavia and wallachia stick out