Release non-vassal nations

[ShadowCammy]

Currently, you have to release a nation as a vassal. But why? Why can't you release a nation as a free state? Because it would make playing nations not in 1444 easier? I never understood.
There had to have been times historically where nations released another without having them be vassals (like the decolonization of Africa, decolonization of the Americas, decolonization of the Ottoman Empire, and I'm sure there have been other examples through history. Perhaps this would be more of a Victoria III suggestion, but really I don't get it. A simple checkbox to say if you want them as a vassal or not.

 

[Maq]

Currently, you have to release a nation as a vassal. But why? Why can't you release a nation as a free state? Because it would make playing nations not in 1444 easier? I never understood.
There had to have been times historically where nations released another without having them be vassals (like the decolonization of Africa, decolonization of the Americas, decolonization of the Ottoman Empire, and I'm sure there have been other examples through history. Perhaps this would be more of a Victoria III suggestion, but really I don't get it. A simple checkbox to say if you want them as a vassal or not.

Though I agree with your suggestion, your historical examples are not very accurate.
Latin American colonies freed themselves as a result of a successful liberation war.
Ottoman Empire always agreed to free Balkanian states only as a part of a peace deal after losing a war against a foreign power. And it often went in two parts: first released as a vassal, only after another war completely.
All in all, I think it's rather difficult to find examples from period before 1821 when a state voluntarily agreed to release part of its territory as a new state, even a vassal. There used to be dynastic divisions among brothers or so, and one of them might have held the highest title, while the others were nominály subject to him (Carolingian Empire and Mongolian Empire are 'big' examples, but countless similar divisions happened in medieval Europe). But still, that's not quite voluntary release, is it?

 

[ShadowCammy]

Though I agree with your suggestion, your historical examples are not very accurate.
Latin American colonies freed themselves as a result of a successful liberation war.
Ottoman Empire always agreed to free Balkanian states only as a part of a peace deal after losing a war against a foreign power. And it often went in two parts: first released as a vassal, only after another war completely.
All in all, I think it's rather difficult to find examples from period before 1821 when a state voluntarily agreed to release part of its territory as a new state, even a vassal. There used to be dynastic divisions among brothers or so, and one of them might have held the highest title, while the others were nominály subject to him (Carolingian Empire and Mongolian Empire are 'big' examples, but countless similar divisions happened in medieval Europe). But still, that's not quite voluntary release, is it?

Good point, I wasn't feeling up to digging to find any examples. But really releasing vassals wasn't so common, but neither were releasing nations as a whole. We know easily France did it, Poland was an example it released from Russia in a peace deal, and Italy as a client nation, however still direct French vassals. But they still had a choice, and it would be nice to get rid of them entirely, say if there is reble problems and you don't wanna deal with them at all. Just boot that nation and conquer them later.