Johan twitter tease- Protectorate Fix!

[Stgerlachus]

What I think is needed instead is a more flexible 'diplomatic capacity' system that isn't based just on the number of countries you have relations with, but the power of those countries and the depth of the relations. Then it could actually make sense to have a realistic sphere of minor satellites around a major country, instead of just a few force-fed vassals and major PUs (diplo slot scenario), or a massive area of assorted balkanised countries that have been indiscriminately 'subjugated' at no cost to the overlord beyond the initial subjugation (no diplo slot scenario).

I always felt the 'every relation is 1 slot' system te be extremely limited. It was fine in the early builds. But it should be changed by now.

Just brainstorming. But something like 1 slot for CN, 2 for overseas vassals and 3 for local vassals would be a start.

 

[durbal]

I hope there's a modifier for vassal LD based on their tech compared to yours.

 

[bbqftw]

Hope relative strength actually corresponds exactly with army strength, instead of some weird development + army strength formula.

Ridiculous to have half bankrupt vassals with 10% of your troops have nearly 40-50% relative strength modifier.

 

[Golladan]

Hope relative strength actually corresponds exactly with army strength, instead of some weird development + army strength formula.

Ridiculous to have half bankrupt vassals with 10% of your troops have nearly 40-50% relative strength modifier.

So that relative strength skyrockets when your army gets destroyed in a war, even though you have the potential to quickly rebuild it?

 

[bbqftw]

More logical than current system at least.

 

[Bella Gerant]

So that relative strength skyrockets when your army gets destroyed in a war, even though you have the potential to quickly rebuild it?

Maybe add consideration for manpower, income, etc.? If your manpower is nil, you're heavily in debt, and all you've got are loans and merc as your WE hits 20, then it makes sense for a vassal to see an opportunity for independence. Whereas now, a vassal with 300 development and a puny army can go disloyal from having one or two more diplo techs, despite not being able to win an independence war.

Also maybe the vassal's capitol's province terrain and distance? It's a lot harder maintaining the loyalty of mountain and distant peoples due to logistics, defensibility, etc.

 

[Meds]

Paradox fixes protectorates like the mafia fixes snitches, by removing them from existence? I hope there is some more depth to this.

What would perhaps make sense, would be a ladder akin to what someone was saying in hoi4, but have a trade-off where more autonomous regions would require less diplomatic effort but provide less resources, and vice versa?

 

[Vulkandrache]

So that relative strength skyrockets when your army gets destroyed in a war, even though you have the potential to quickly rebuild it?

At the start, after LD was introduced, i was pissed that it didnt work that way.
Stackwipe Castilles army, Aragon still at only 20% LD.

If you want to go for some middle ground then have the current LD adjust by 5% per month to what it should be.
That way you've got a few weeks to rebuild your army before your subject calls for support against you.

 

[Gratak]

More logical than current system at least.

No it's not. Your suggestion would mean that an OPM becomes rebellious just because his 500 dev overlord was stackwiped... Yet, he (even as the AI) would just recruit a few mercs and crush the OPM if he rebels... The relative strength system is mostly alright. It's only the LD per dev system that is totally unrealistic and stupid.

 

[Bouchart]

How will this affect the Send Officers interaction? Can you send them to vassals now?

Cuz I'd make Prussia a vassal and send them some officers. They might not have enough..

 

[iShurik]

Hm I'm really worried about my trading game, since there are no more free protectorates... Also I really liked protectorates and the continental game I hope for more infos about this topic soon. With 5 dip slots a continental game in africa/asia seems impossible...

 

[MiniaAr]

I'm close to super salty on this. I used protectorate a lot and was waiting for a fix, not a removal. Protectorates had the trade use, but they also could start wars on their own, which was fun to observe/support. You could make bigger countries your Protectorates in exchange on not being able to diploannex them and the seize territory option was great so that you could take the provinces you wanted and still keep your subject.

Also colonial wars were an expansion feature, what is going to be the replacement?

Really I'm disappointed they are calling this a fix when it's a flat out removal of a nice mechanism.

 

[blackchoas]

I have mixed feelings about this

obviously the current way protectorate verse vassal works was silly, literally just last night as the Ottomans I wanted to make Yemen a vassal only to realize I couldn't because they are one institution behind me

However this is just a patch on the problem, I'm ok with this but only if they are planning to bring back protectorates after taking some time to work on them and help redefine them.

with vassal types getting as specific as Marches, Colonial Nations, Personal Unions, Tributaries, Vassal and Protectorates I hope they consider the subject important enough to give the whole thing a look over

 

[Bics93]

Damn! I loved to create big colonial empires like French or British ones in 19th century by protectorating Natives, Tribal African Nations and Eastern Kingdoms in India and Asia, exploiting their shared trade power and combinig it with trade companies... With 1.19 this wasn't possible due to protectorates breaking free and I really hoped for a fix...
But that twit makes me sad: no more British Raj or French Indocina