Loyal Subjects

[Alexstarfire]

Pretty sure I ran into a bug with the Loyal Subjects event. I was in the process of annexing Syria and got the event about 90% of the way through. I've got the Vassal Integration Act policy active too. The event itself said it would give me 15% reduction in diplomatic annexation cost, but the total amount of Diplo Points needed went from 1205 to 753, ~38% reduction. Even from the original amount of points needed, which I calculate to be ~1506, this would be almost an even 30% reduction.

The pictures show it. The before picture is from the start of the year. I didn't save before I took the event. Also, obviously not playing on hardcore mode, if that makes any difference.

 

[Badesumofu]

With the act on you have a total of 45% discount, so the base cost would have been 2191. 15% of that is 329 points. So you got about a 20% discount... Any chance you also had policy you can get with Plutocratic? That would make the numbers about right, I think.

 

[rinehime]

What's your Administrative Efficiency (mostly absolutism at this point, but also 10% from Tech 17)? Did you trigger a Golden Age or get tech 23 really early? There's a bit more we need to know to figure out whether this is WAD or not...

Loyal subjects, the idea from influence and the policies are all additive. Adm. eff. also applies to diplomatic annexation costs. The additive modifiers are applied first then multiplied by 1-AdmE.

Your base cost is off too. Base cost is 8 * Development. 1506 implies a development level of 188.25, which isn't an integer value. What was the vassal development?

 

[Alexstarfire]

Turns out there are a few things I didn't take in account. Some other diplo annex reductions as well as the hostile core creation cost Syria has. Can't trust my memory it seems. I should have just gone to the wiki first because I didn't even know hostile core creation cost mattered for diplo annexing.

Dev of Syria is 341 (124 Tax, 121 Production, 86 Manpower). Admin Efficiency is 14.9%. Syria has a policy that adds +25% hostile core creation cost and a +6.9% coring cost for each province.

Using the equation on the wiki, 8 * x * (1 - .149) * (1 - .75) * (1 + .25 + .069), which gives me 748. That's close enough I guess. I used 2.244938 as the ratio to calculate the cost per province. Any rounding done on the percentages can account for the difference.

 

[rinehime]

Using the equation on the wiki, 8 * x * (1 - .149) * (1 - .75) * (1 + .25 + .069), which gives me 748. That's close enough I guess. I used 2.244938 as the ratio to calculate the cost per province. Any rounding done on the percentages can account for the difference.

Hrm, something still seems off. The numbers should be pretty close (I usually find they're within 1 point).

For your scenario, I get:
8*341*(0.25)*1.319*0.851 = 765, which is 12 points higher than 753 in your OP.
Also, your screenshot only lists your AdmEff as 1.6%... and where does that additional 6.9% HCC in Syria come from?

Does Syria have cores on all their provinces? You still pay the dip on non-cores, but I don't think the HCC penalty gets applied to them (and then you don't get a core after integration, so you have to pay again in paper mana.....) Did they take the policy before vassalization or after? That's kind of a jerk move if they took it after vassalization... AI vassals probably shouldn't do that unless their disloyal...

On a related note, I first thought your equation was wrong, but the wiki agrees and your math seems close enough for it to be correct. I've been working under the assumption that the HCC costs were additive with the dip. annex modifiers (because RCC is additive with HCC when coring). If HCC and -dip annex were additive, (territorial) coring HCC land yourself is cheaper in total mana (assuming -45% dip annex and no RCC) - with a little bit of RCC, it becomes much cheaper to core HCC land yourself.

Given that -dip annex and HCC are actually multiplicative, the break-even point changes and you require some RCC for self-coring to be cheaper.

 

[Alexstarfire]

I did the floor on a per province basis so that explains the differences in our calculations. I misinterpreted the wiki. IDK why it says 1.6% admin efficiency there. I have 10% from tech too which it's not including. The stability and expansion tab shows 11.6% which is where I pulled the value from.

The extra 6.9% I got by looking to see what modifiers Syria had to coring. That seemed.... wrong, but if I used mine in any way nothing made any sense. I added a picture of what mine displays. Based on my calculations the total HCC would need to be 29.8% or 29.9% for the output to be 753 after a floor operation.

Ohh, and Syria was disloyal for a couple decades because I passed the Revoke the Privilegia reform. I don't know when they added the policy but I'm pretty sure it's been over 10 years since they were disloyal. I don't really care to check though. Seems like they should remove it when they are no longer disloyal. But vassals and PUs play pretty stupid in general so I don't expect much from them.

I swear in this game they have all been getting rebels on purpose. I'll check their provinces for unrest during a war and they'll be a 0.0 but then 1-2 months later rebels will pop up. And half the time I see them decrease autonomy to give them 6+ unrest in each province. WTF ARE YOU DOING?

 

[Vulkandrache]

The extra 6.9% I got by looking to see what modifiers Syria had to coring

Why are you looking at that?
Why do you care about Syrias modifier?
Take their total dev, times 8. Thats the base integration cost. Each province with +ICC counts 25-50% more.
Subtract your AdminEff from that and then subtract your total integration cost reduction from that.

 

[Alexstarfire]

I mean, I explained exactly why, but I suppose you can ignore what I wrote if you want.