Vassal feeding is back in AoW and it's even better

[aitaituo]

Those two situations are exactly the same.
They involve nations gaining power (directly/indirectly) be retrieving territory they formerly lost. If it makes sense for one, it makes sense for the other.

The difference is that Hungary never ruled Kiev and by feeding Ukraine, which they force vassalized after force releasing Ukraine from Poland, they're expanding their own power, not Ukraine's, because they're just going to annex Ukraine as soon as they have the DIP, if they haven't started annexing already. And in the meantime Ukraine's armies are fighting for Hungary.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

Overlord gets AE.

Thanks God. I was worried a second or two. Was afraid you'd forgot this issue.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

I'd really like to see this, make vassal feeding a strong strategy but make the vassal AI more likely to cause trouble

Oh yeah. That's a very interesting mechanic. It shouldn't have to be too big before there is a risk for troubble, and potential big troubble.

 

[Outrider]

The difference is that Hungary never ruled Kiev and by feeding Ukraine, which they force vassalized after force releasing Ukraine from Poland, they're expanding their own power, not Ukraine's, because they're just going to annex Ukraine as soon as they have the DIP, if they haven't started annexing already. And in the meantime Ukraine's armies are fighting for Hungary.

You're mixing realism rationale with game-play rationale.

On one hand, you don't like self-core gain AE because it doesn't seem realistic.
On the other hand, you like vassal-core gain AE because from a game-play perspective (where you're likely to annex vassals) that territory will go directly to you.

If you want countries to get AE when you become stronger than your immediately preceding standpoint, both situations need to get it.

And that's not even considering the explotive gameplay you could engage in with no AE on self-core recovery when you lose AE on ceding provinces.

 

[deezee]

You're mixing realism rationale with game-play rationale.

On one hand, you don't like self-core gain AE because it doesn't seem realistic.
On the other hand, you like vassal-core gain AE because from a game-play perspective (where you're likely to annex vassals) that territory will go directly to you.

If you want countries to get AE when you become stronger than your immediately preceding standpoint, both situations need to get it.

And that's not even considering the explotive gameplay you could engage in with no AE on self-core recovery when you lose AE on ceding provinces.

Yeah. I mean while vassal-core gain AE makes sense from a realism perspective (think of it as a country forcibly expanding its sphere of influence rather than directly annexing territory; this was very much considered a threat to the balance of power), reclaiming your own cores should also get AE from the same logic (even if a nation's claim to a territory is totally justified, its still more of a threat now that it has reclaimed it). I guess its possible that the reclamation of territory seems like legitimate, and thus more aggressive, when it is another nation reclaiming territory on behalf of a vassal, but its getting a little tenuous (in that case you should get AE for reclaiming cores when allied with much stronger powers).

That said, the game logic works because people want to have at least one way to gain territory without gaining AE, and it isn't really a big deal from a balancing perspective; big powers usually hold all their cores and it is difficult to get cores by event now that we have the claim system.

 

[Basterbane]

Can subject marches form client kingdoms? There were screens in another thread of Poland pressing Moldavia claim. If Moldavia would get all needed provinces for Romania could they form it? This apply to all the other nations that could be formed.

 

[aitaituo]

I'm looking at it from a purely gameplay standpoint and from a purely logical standpoint. The latter was in hopes of avoiding a discussion of what makes "sense". I can restate my points more formally if its unclear.

 

[lucaluca]

But very important question: will vassals try to rebel? Because without this feature vassal feeding is massively overpowered... free cores basically

 

[grommile]

But very important question: will vassals try to rebel? Because without this feature vassal feeding is massively overpowered... free cores basically

A core you have to pay DIP for isn't free. (Depending on the precise details of your circumstances, it may be cheaper than one you have to pay ADM for.)

 

[Outrider]

Can subject marches form client kingdoms? There were screens in another thread of Poland pressing Moldavia claim. If Moldavia would get all needed provinces for Romania could they form it? This apply to all the other nations that could be formed.

Generally the formable nations have the requirement of "not a subject nation".

 

[lucaluca]

A core you have to pay DIP for isn't free. (Depending on the precise details of your circumstances, it may be cheaper than one you have to pay ADM for.)

it's free because you don't pay ADM costs on it, and being ADM the currency of conquest, they are basically free...

 

[delpiero1234]

This EU IV DLC will be awesome and the first one I'm looking forward to.
Marches and vassal feeding will be fun

 

[Outrider]

But very important question: will vassals try to rebel? Because without this feature vassal feeding is massively overpowered... free cores basically

Um....it's not particularly different than the existing vassal feeding mechanics. Or I guess...vassal feeding is currently massively overpowered?

In this forum, especially for certain posters, playing without a literal blindfold and an arm tied behind your back is apparently "overpowered".

 

[Freudia]

it's free because you don't pay ADM costs on it, and being ADM the currency of conquest, they are basically free...

I think DIP is used more for conquest than ADM is, honestly. I vassal feed a lot more than I core stuff, that's for sure.

 

[grommile]

it's free because you don't pay ADM costs on it, and being ADM the currency of conquest, they are basically free...

ADM is a currency of expansion; DIP is also a currency of expansion. You can, at present in 1.7.3, sell accepted-culture own-religion-group provinces to your vassals even if you don't have core on them and your vassal has neither a core nor a claim. Getting a core on those provinces will require you to wait for your subject to core them, then pay the DIP cost of annexation.

 

[l0rdg4m3r]

not having claims cost dip, diplocoring vassals costs dip,you get ae aswell, I mean the only 2 things before that got changed was that you actually had to conquer a province and then sell it to your vassals and now you can even press vassal claims if they have some.
I think its fine.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

Diplo-annexing is rather free of rebell problems, compared to Direct "Adm-annexing". I'd love to se more potentially disloyal vassals.

 

[Rooz]

Also, either Wiz or A_Spec said on a stream that marches would be limited in size (they said somewhat about not being able to make a march out of France, for example). But could you give them lands in a war to get them above this limit? So, could you, for example, cut France down in size, vassilize them, make them a march, and return them their cores?

 

[AurochsAway]

it's free because you don't pay ADM costs on it, and being ADM the currency of conquest, they are basically free...

Dip has always been a currency of conquest as well, even before it annexation was given the dip cost. You already had it limited by relationship slots, and need it to effect peace deals.

 

[rayyuri]

I'd say I quite like this change.