Im pretty sure you can set the vassal free and it will keep your relative as ruler.
- 1
Realistically is this justifiable
- Thread starter Mattzey
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Im pretty sure you can set the vassal free and it will keep your relative as ruler.
Which costs stab and prestige, and why would anyone ever do that, ever.
- 1
Which brings you back into having to take the trinity. And there is just no way anyone would do it and think it was a great plan. There is just way too much stuff that can go wrong with that. Rather just put them as a march and forget they exist.
- 1
The sad part about that is that changes like that don't happen at the same time as the initial change. It's common sense that the embassy was an important building that provided a rather important benefit to the game with the scarcity of diplomats. If they weren't sure how to compensate it, they should have done the temporary fix of providing a diplomat at tech 6 (when the embassy was available) then removing it when their better compensation method is available. Instead your diplomatic game is going to be gimped, not because that's the design, but because they haven't decided how they want to re-apply it.
- 5
No. It's more cost-effective (in theory) to annex land directly than to feed it to a vassal then diploannex them (since you get direct control of the land sooner and at lower initial LA), but vassal (or, even better, march) feeding of itself is still (much) cheaper than direct conquest.
Does selling land costing 10 prestige per province not apply to vassals? Or did I misunderstand that line in the patch notes completely? (there's a lot in there, I'm still trying to take it all in)
- 1
The whole diplomat system is bollocks. Instead of being limited by a number of diplomats, create an unlimited pool of diplomats where each diplomat over your diplomat limit (2 or 3) actually costs a certain amount of income. There, boom, no problem with limited diplomats, while avoiding diplomat spamming due to costs.
- 3
- 1
- 1
It is all three. It is too expensive because cost was increased without reducing drawbacks to diplo-annex and the cost increase had a bigger detriment to other mechanics.
- 2
Ah, you skipped one of the other DLCs. If you have a certain DLC installed, you can transfer occupation of provinces to your subjects, and feed them directly in the peace treaty.
The embasy diplomat could be solved by giving advanced goverment an extra diplomat
Oh, I read your post wrong. I read it as "annex land directly then feed it to your vassals". For some reason it made sense that it would be a different cost that way than giving it to them directly. Must be a lack of coffee this morning doing that to me.
But yes, I'm catching back up to the rest of the class now.
- 1
I'm not clear, so taking land in conquest is more cost profitable in ducats but not in monarch points then?
edit - Oh, you are saying feeding the vassal is cheaper than conquest, but not if you later diploannex?
Well I hope they bring back Embasy and other special buidings and maybe give them monthly maintanence like forts have, because they are so powerful.
- 1
Yes and that doesn't change the fact that Aragon itself was legally a personal union between the Kingdom of Aragon (the old county), County of Barcelona, Kingdom of Valencia, Kingdom of Majorca, Kingdom of Sicily, and the Kingdom of Naples. Each of these had more legal autonomy in 1444 than Aragon ever had under Spain. And we can go down the line like that if you want. France certainly did have the vassal horde in the legal sense in 144, Austria did not have unified laws pretty much ever, and so on.
We aren't going to be able to model all the legal niceities of dozens of different legal traditions. Instead we recognize a few key characteristics which determine if provinces should be subjects or integrated:
1. Common ruler (you need this for a personal union and all integrated provinces have this)
2. Independent foreign policy (limited for subjects, non-existant for integrated territory)
3. Direct pooling of taxation (no state in the early era had uniform taxation, but historically there was a continuum from sending off scutage to having centrally administered tax collection).
4. Direct control of military formations
5. Direct control of development
6. No foreign power can assist territory in organized independence.
All of these criteria were handily met by Aragon long before Neuva Planta.
If you want to model things like Spain as a personal union then you need to change the PU rules - Aragon should be six headed PU itself with no affect on its naval technology progression. France should not be able to use the extant Kingdom of Aragon as an independence wedge (just supporting separatist rebels) and so on.
Everyone should get the option of setting up subject integrations that were as lucrative and as quick as Spain. These were hardly unique and they should not require multiple levels of naval tech to be foregone.
- 2
After changes direct coring and diploannexation costs the same (but different points), unless you have some National tradition, that is,
- at the beginning coring might be superior, since claims give 10% (?) coring cost reduction
- later it depends which ideas you did take (influence or administrative)
- at high techs you get another discount, but who cares, you are superpower anyway
Well, excellent then! That is the way I always wanted it.
- 1