Vassals are bad: Devs please respond!

[Morgalion]

Could justify leaving it there, but they are so terrible in the base game. I notice the devs tend to leave it alone on every thread I've looked into.

First, some why's:
Why do vassals get such a large penalty simply because the player owns it, when federated AI are just as powerful as they otherwise would be?
Why do vassals misuse their territory so much? I notice that they are building buildings that give percentage bonus to jobs, yet there are no jobs related to that bonus. (eg Monument is the first building on a new colony of theirs.)
Why are vassals so poor compared to their hegemon counterparts?
Why do they lose all of their difficulty bonus when a player vassalizes them? AI that federated with the player are still as powerful as they would be un-federated (barring being absorbed).

What are vassals for historically? They make the ruling empire more powerful while the ruling empire doesn't have to expend resources governing the vassal. I've noticed in the 3.3.0 beta, that the AI for vassals is just as terrible as the AI from 2020 or prior. It would seem the logic never got updated for them and literally have been ignored as it may be deemed "less fun."
Y
I am confused, two of the largest games on the Paradox roster have excellent vassals. Why is this difficult in space? There are some mods and suggestions that are available. You would do a much better job at it than I. But, I compare vassals to federations for a reason: an empire surrounded by vassals and tributaries is something that was historically overcome by "federations". The goliath empires that build these satellite states up should be rewarded for their effort.

I ask, nay, challenge you to make them better. Make this lackluster style of gameplay more interesting as you are now on this kick of reintroducing "tall" into the game. Keep making more gameplay styles viable! We love it.

 

[Ffc]

I remember few years ago they said there were working on making vassals better or they thought about doing it, but then we got nothing about it.
Maybe they changed their mind and made Hegemony Federation instead?

Anyway, it would makes sense in an Internal Management update, so maybe next DLC, even if it would have made sense in a Diplomatic update too, so I don't know !

Surely the Difficulty bonus would be a good and fast update, but I think they did this to avoid some exploit, I guess

 

[ASGeek2012]

I would like to see more ways I can interact with vassals. All I can really do now with them is improve relations to make them loyal. I'd like to see something more akin to EU4, where you have a lot more options in dealing with them.

 

[methegrate]

Maybe one option would be that you could set some sort of production emphasis for a vassal empire? Like I could choose for a given vassal to emphasize Economy / Technology / Fleets / Armies.

If I choose Economy, they send me 25% of their alloy and CG production. If I choose Research, they send me 25% of their research output. If I choose Fleets, they just have a bigger navy with which to support me in future wars. If I choose Armies, I can direct them to invade planets during a war.

This would give vassals some overlap with tributaries, but on a more advanced level. Where tributaries send you basic resources, vassals would send you advanced resources. In doing so it would both make them more useful and give the player a bit more agency in how they use their vassals.

 

[methegrate]

There could also be interesting room for espionage here, from the other direction. If your empire is a vassal, maybe you could get access to espionage operations that let you try to conduct secret diplomacy. You could try to seek allies or get trade deals to build back up the resources you lose to your parent empire.

 

[evilcat]

The thing with difficulty is that if you can get pet AI with all bonuses that would downgrade the penalt itself. You pick GA you suffer GA.
Of course there is always a way to improve basic AI or at least economy, and if needed create more player help difficulties (super easy).

What i wish for:
Abiliti to switch vassals type tribute-vassal and other way around.
Civics/Traditions/Ascension related to vassals in useful way including increasing likehood of peaceful accepting my kind request to obey.
Same C/T/A could buff performance of vassal. Like they we get more tribute or we get some naval cap.
Remove galactic tribunal judging from whom i can demand vassalization (for DOW).
Some ways to tier interact with our vassal for the cost of disloyality. like demand pop or some other favor.
Basicly you either die to devouring swarm or you live long enought to become fallen empire.
Vassals needs to be less loyall, especially if we amas many of them in some way.
The cost of vassal integration needs to be many times bigger. So if we integrate mega vassal it will be at least 1000i. Unless we have special perk.

For the record on normal you can buy/generate favours and that gives enought bonuses for vassalization or at least protectorate. It may be easier to gain technology advantage with protectorate.

 

[Ixal]

Its obvious that hegemonies are the improved vassalls and the old ones are just some leftovers they didn't want to remove.

 

[HelmuthM]

The Vassal CB is already overpowered…
They can be integrated for a ridiculously cheap influence cost after only 10 years.

 

[Losttruppen]

Its obvious that hegemonies are the improved vassalls and the old ones are just some leftovers they didn't want to remove.

With the new ascension paths I am all the more reluctant to take Diplomacy when I am using might as my right.

Either fix Vassals or put Hegemonies somewhere else.

 

[Ffc]

The Vassal CB is already overpowered…
They can be integrated for a ridiculously cheap influence cost after only 10 years.

It's strong but not for the good reason. What you're saying is that Vassals are good because you can integrate them, which is the opposite of having vassals.

 

[evilcat]

It's strong but not for the good reason. What you're saying is that Vassals are good because you can integrate them, which is the opposite of having vassals.

I suppose that there could be change in integration cost to make it more brutal for very big vassals. Now that influence is useless it will not even not even better.
This could also make civics like vassal integration cost or demand system action more relevant.

 

[GOLANX]

It's funny that the Ascension perk for vassals only makes them trust you more (like thats hard) and makes integrating them go faster.

It's odd that a vassal AI has its difficulty bonuses turned off but a federation AI is just as loyal and just as useful doesn't.

It's weird that vassals are supposed to be able to rebel but never do because they always love me, even the ones I genocided will never lift a finger against me (i have actually done this).

 

[blahmaster6k]

The problem with giving Vassals the difficulty bonuses is that the difficulty bonuses are so overpowered. They're needed for other empires that are competing with the player, but a player could just create a minmaxed planet and release it as a vassal. That vassal could contribute meta ships to the federation fleet (vassals inherit player technology and ship designs when released), or just add the AI's broken fleet buffs to your own with take point. This is part of why the Hegemony origin is such a broken one for snowballing, you get an AI with difficulty bonuses to fight with you in addition to the extra starting planet. Now imagine if you could just create broken vassals after you've rammed into repeatable techs and have meta lategame ship designs researched, and then control what they do.

 

[GOLANX]

The problem with giving Vassals the difficulty bonuses is that the difficulty bonuses are so overpowered. They're needed for other empires that are competing with the player, but a player could just create a minmaxed planet and release it as a vassal. That vassal could contribute meta ships to the federation fleet (vassals inherit player technology and ship designs when released), or just add the AI's broken fleet buffs to your own with take point. This is part of why the Hegemony origin is such a broken one for snowballing, you get an AI with difficulty bonuses to fight with you in addition to the extra starting planet. Now imagine if you could just create broken vassals after you've rammed into repeatable techs and have meta lategame ship designs researched, and then control what they do.

Yeah but I look at this and think we should make it easier for them to rebel, Released vassals could also be set up to take the penalty and not captured ones.

 

[DeanTheDull]

What are vassals for historically? They make the ruling empire more powerful while the ruling empire doesn't have to expend resources governing the vassal.

And how do you think they did that, apart from bringing military forces or favorable economic deals or generally politically supporting like-minded overlords or gradually being incorporated into the greater polity or being pushed into greater political architectures? All of which Stellaris vassals do?

Militarily, Vassals are valid military allies and buffer states, whose innate starbase and fleet capacity provide a greater defense in depth and fleets share hostilities. The AI's effectiveness at being a combined ally could always improve, but it's certainly no less reliable than any given player when forced into a war they have no stake or interest in.

Economically, the loyalty dynamic of relations- in which relative military power provides potentially overwhelming diplomatic bonuses- gives overlords incredibly advantageous trade deal options for trading processed goods (CG, alloys) for basic resources. This allows far greater specialization for the overlord even without considering tributary subjects. Sure, the AI loses AI difficulty bonuses, but those don't exactly exist in history either.

Diplomatically, vassals are diplomatic force multipliers. Even unwilling vassals can, through economic trades, be compelled to provide favors that can be called in to boost your initiatives. But like minded vassals- those you created from yourself or from careful use of ideology wars and diplomacy- don't even need to be compelled to support. If you are playing into ethics playstyles, they will not only keep Federation cohesion high through for consistently high Federation centralization, but they will not only vote for the corresponding ethics-synergy Galactic Community resolutions, but also pay the influence costs for the resolutions for you, leaving you more diplomatic influence to do, well, anything. Megastructures, habitats, claim wars.

Expansion-wise, vassals have been the historic norm for how most modern states centralized into what we recognize today as individual countries. Subjugating and integration may be far faster in Stellaris, but it is completely compatible with the reason why, say, France or England have the borders they do today.

Internationally, vassal relationships have been core constituent parts of multiple historical macro-states that were often identified, but not quite synonymous, with a core dominating power. The Roman Empire was filled with semi-independent polities that were closer to clients or allies; the Holy Roman Empire was even less centralized. Sometimes those coalitions scattered, sometimes they centralized into core states that exist to this day, but the Stellaris federations allowing Subject states to be brought into the Federation fold- where they then receive the benefits, and give benefits to their allies, and contribute to the Federation fleet- all model historic patterns.


So what, exactly, is the conceptual lack of purpose of Vassals? Especially in 3.3, where vassal resource trading means you can set up resource-vassals to provide you the vassals without the 2%+ tech penalty that 20+ admin sprawl would cause? IE, taking the administrative burden off your empire?

 

[DeanTheDull]

It's strong but not for the good reason. What you're saying is that Vassals are good because you can integrate them, which is the opposite of having vassals.

Well, yes. And money is good because you intend to spend it, which is the opposite of having money. And having fleets to beat the crisis is good, even thought beating the crisis defeats the purpose of having a fleet. This is true, and also fine, because many good things are good precisely because, not despite, their fleeting and transitory nature of their purpose.

 

[Nevars]

Tributary + Federation (especially Hegemon) is basically better vassal, minus integration but if you planned it right you won't need to integrate them anyway.

 

[FinbarFlin]

...Now imagine if you could just create broken vassals after you've rammed into repeatable techs and have meta lategame ship designs researched, and then control what they do.

At that point you dont need vassals... even if you could do what you say... the game would be already decided... and the OP vassals would not change much...
The most important point is the question... why do someone need vassals?

The answer is: To provide something...
Ships, resources anything useful in an amount or way the player would have more benefits from, than just integrating them...

There is no incentive right now to do anything other than integrating them after a cheap territory grab due to the cheap CB...

 

[MordridBlack]

Could justify leaving it there, but they are so terrible in the base game. I notice the devs tend to leave it alone on every thread I've looked into.

First, some why's:
Why do vassals get such a large penalty simply because the player owns it, when federated AI are just as powerful as they otherwise would be?
Why do vassals misuse their territory so much? I notice that they are building buildings that give percentage bonus to jobs, yet there are no jobs related to that bonus. (eg Monument is the first building on a new colony of theirs.)
Why are vassals so poor compared to their hegemon counterparts?
Why do they lose all of their difficulty bonus when a player vassalizes them? AI that federated with the player are still as powerful as they would be un-federated (barring being absorbed).

What are vassals for historically? They make the ruling empire more powerful while the ruling empire doesn't have to expend resources governing the vassal. I've noticed in the 3.3.0 beta, that the AI for vassals is just as terrible as the AI from 2020 or prior. It would seem the logic never got updated for them and literally have been ignored as it may be deemed "less fun."
Y
I am confused, two of the largest games on the Paradox roster have excellent vassals. Why is this difficult in space? There are some mods and suggestions that are available. You would do a much better job at it than I. But, I compare vassals to federations for a reason: an empire surrounded by vassals and tributaries is something that was historically overcome by "federations". The goliath empires that build these satellite states up should be rewarded for their effort.

I ask, nay, challenge you to make them better. Make this lackluster style of gameplay more interesting as you are now on this kick of reintroducing "tall" into the game. Keep making more gameplay styles viable! We love it.

1) Outside of not being able to expand anymore, and having some diplomacy options yeeted, they don't have penalties. Unless those are the penalties in which case...see #2

2) Because the AI is stupid

3) I'm not sure what you mean here. There are no specific subject empire types related to Hegemon in any fashion that I am aware of

4) Because the AI is no longer free, they were either vassalized via war, through tech advancement...or of their own accord



Historically, vassals in Stellaris have always been, at best, a meat shield [i.e. time for you to build up forces while other ais that declared war on you are fighting a vassal that is in the way]

 

[GOLANX]

1) Outside of not being able to expand anymore, and having some diplomacy options yeeted, they don't have penalties. Unless those are the penalties in which case...see #2

Their difficulty bonus is turned off which is a penalty compared to Federations. At some levels this leads to an economic death spiral for the vassal

2) Because the AI is stupid

Question is why are vassals so uniquely terrible at managing their economy, or if they all are why are they still this broken.

3) I'm not sure what you mean here. There are no specific subject empire types related to Hegemon in any fashion that I am aware of

Hegemony Federations give the president all the same power as a vassal overlord, without applying penalties and the perks of the Hegemony are a cherry on top.

4) Because the AI is no longer free, they were either vassalized via war, through tech advancement...or of their own accord

The Federation member AI isn't free either. They can be added through war, tech advancement, the expenditure of favors and cheap envoy deployments... or of their own accord.

Historically, vassals in Stellaris have always been, at best, a meat shield [i.e. time for you to build up forces while other ais that declared war on you are fighting a vassal that is in the way]

Historically undercooked implementation is not a reason to not improve the system. Especially when there are similar mechanics, that have been added since then, that work better and can be used to backfill vassals issues.