Military access decided by overlord

[redbloodedmalk]

If I get military access through Hungary, wouldn't it make sense to also have access through Croatia? Why must I also get permission from them if their overlord already said yes. The converse should also be true, if I deny military access to the Mamluks, my subject Byzantium shouldn't then go and give them the access I didn't want them to have.

 

[Arizal]

As much as I sometimes love having access everywhere in a war because a vassal or his mother asked for them, I think what you say makes sense. Vassals, client states and colonial nations are subunits and have almost no external diplomacy of their own except when they seek independance.

 

[redbloodedmalk]

Hmm, I have military access through Poland. Poland has a PU over Lithuania. As I understand it, that means the same monarch rules both nations. However, when he puts on his Lithuania hat he suddenly won't grant me military access. Quixotic.

 

[Arizal]

Hmm, I have military access through Poland. Poland has a PU over Lithuania. As I understand it, that means the same monarch rules both nations. However, when he puts on his Lithuania hat he suddenly won't grant me military access. Quixotic.

It depends. If Lituania were rebellious, you couldn't say the king of Poland effectively rules in it. The king also isn't the only one who rules. The nobility might be opposed (or in favour) to the military access.

I think the impact of a military access in terms of supply and banditism isn't shown enough in the game (not at all).

That said, what I said above stands. It would make sense if a military access through the overlord would translate into a military access in all its subunits, provided they aren't rebellious.