Vassals & EU4

[ZomgK3tchup]

There were a few things that always bugged me about PUs and vassals in EU3, and I hope they get addressed.

First was that you couldn't do anything if you weren't HRE and your vassal converted to a different religion. I hope that you get an option to demand their conversion or some event that allows you to go to war with them without the huge stability hit that you got in EU3.

The second was that if you aren't war leader and you peace out, your vassals remain at war. I hope this gets fixed so that vassals always peace out with their masters.

Third, it doesn't make sense for PUs to convert since your leader is the ruler of the other state. The only way a PU conversion would happen is if the government was overthrown, in which case, you should get a Restoration of Union/Conversion CB against your target.

The fact that you couldn't do anything (minus going to war with a -5 STAB hit) about vassal conversions was frustrating. At the very least, I'd like to go to war with my heretic vassals. D:

 

[DanubianCossak]

Yeah that thing with vassals is highly annoying.

It works something like this:

You have vassals. You get dragged into a war. All your vassals join. You make a separate peace, however you vassals still keep fighting the same war. Your former enemy beats your former allies, and occupies all their land, and same with your vassals. It sues for peace and takes random land from your former allies, which may even include land of your vassals!

As for vassals converting, yeah thats a bit annoying too.

 

[MrQwerty]

Another annoyance is that if I subjucate a nation that's at war with another nations, the two nations keep fighting, which could jeopardize my plan. For instance, I, as Venice, declared a war of subjucation on Aquelia, who also became involved in a war with Austria. Even after I forced Aquelia to become my vassal, Austria was still at war! Luckily, only a small reperation was paid.

Still, in the game, vassals can be quite powerful. They pay their master, send troops to fight the master's wars, and hardly even revolt! Perhaps the liege-vassal relationship should drop significantly once the ruler dies and a new ruler arrives. That way, there is a balance between keeping a vassal or simply conquering the land.

 

[Hydro Globus]

You have vassals. You get dragged into a war. All your vassals join. You make a separate peace, however you vassals still keep fighting the same war. Your former enemy beats your former allies, and occupies all their land, and same with your vassals. It sues for peace and takes random land from your former allies, which may even include land of your vassals!

Also add that you don't even get a CB to get the land of your faithful vassal back, because it was never your core, and the vassal itself can't/won't declare war.

 

[unmerged(612669)]

Vassals should sometimes benefit to.

For example if you vassalize nomads by lets say the release vassal button, or vassalize oyo, or vassalize others who the eu system classifies as primitives. In such a case their tech group should go up and they should have a good chance of modernizing and learning how to fight back against you so you better watch out.

 

[ZomgK3tchup]

Vassals should sometimes benefit to.

For example if you vassalize nomads by lets say the release vassal button, or vassalize oyo, or vassalize others who the eu system classifies as primitives. In such a case their tech group should go up and they should have a good chance of modernizing and learning how to fight back against you so you better watch out.

This seems like it would make the game way too easy for some states since you could theoretically "tech hop" until you become western. Russian states could let themselves get vassalized by the TO, Balkan states could let themselves get vassalized by Austria, etc.

The same would be true for New World states. Just wait for Europeans to arrive, let one vassalize you, hyper tech, break free, and then colonize the continent.

 

[Hector of Troy]

The main problem I see with the vassal system in EU3 is that it´s ok for a player to make 200.000 vassals without a problem. They will pretty much all love you forever; and all other nations will still love you as well.

Relationship between the lord and his vassals shouldn´t be that stable and secure, as it makes the game too easy, ahistorical and predictable. Moreover, other free nations should hate you for subjugating so many kingdoms around them like nothing.

 

[Hydro Globus]

The main problem I see with the vassal system in EU3 is that it´s ok for a player to make 200.000 vassals without a problem. They will pretty much all love you forever; and all other nations will still love you as well.

Relationship between the lord and his vassals shouldn´t be that stable and secure, as it makes the game too easy, ahistorical and predictable. Moreover, other free nations should hate you for subjugating so many kingdoms around them like nothing.

What do you expect from the AI, should it, as a 3PM vassal rebel against the player's 50PGP and its 20 other 3PM vassals? It (or even a mass revolt of all the vassals, the player should be able to beat them piecemeal) will be resubjugated as fast as the diplomats make the return trip. And a Subjugate CB against a vassal breaking away is very much rightful, otherwise, there would be no point in keeping vassals.

 

[Hector of Troy]

What do you expect from the AI, should it, as a 3PM vassal rebel against the player's 50PGP and its 20 other 3PM vassals? It (or even a mass revolt of all the vassals, the player should be able to beat them piecemeal) will be resubjugated as fast as the diplomats make the return trip. And a Subjugate CB against a vassal breaking away is very much rightful, otherwise, there would be no point in keeping vassals.

One way of dealing with the flaw I mentioned about the vassal system in EU3 would be to give a cumulative penalty relationship hit with other powerful free nations once the player started vassalizing everyone around. You should become a threat to powerful nations in case you subjugated a vast number of vassals.

And I particularly don´t like the idea of vassals being eternally granted as piecemeal. Depending on the circumstances (different culture and religion, friendly free kingdoms nearby who despise you to whom they could ask for military alliance, etc.), it should be very difficult to keep vassals in a short leash.

 

[Hydro Globus]

That will probably happen anyway. Agressive expansion is something that gives a lot of negative modifiers, probably creating vassals (or creating vassals of different culture groups, because, for example, France vassalizing all other French rulers, basically saying "you can keep ruling here, but know that I am King of France, oh, and pay me some taxes, will you" at the time was, if not rightful, at least expected. Powerful dukes (especially electors) taking vassals in the HRE, also expected) will do that too.

 

[Baneslave]

The main problem I see with the vassal system in EU3 is that it´s ok for a player to make 200.000 vassals without a problem. They will pretty much all love you forever; and all other nations will still love you as well.

Relationship between the lord and his vassals shouldn´t be that stable and secure, as it makes the game too easy, ahistorical and predictable. Moreover, other free nations should hate you for subjugating so many kingdoms around them like nothing.

In EU4 you have to spend diplomacy points to upkeep your vassals, so they aren't exactly free anymore.

 

[Jia Xu]

Being a vassal wasn't very fun in EU3. The tribute was too high and you couldn't go to war. There was no way to enjoy the game like that. As a vassals, you should pay maybe around 25% of your income to your suzerain and share its diplomatic ties (wars, alliances, etc). You should be able to go to war against countries your master state isn't allied with.

 

[Baneslave]

Being a vassal wasn't very fun in EU3. The tribute was too high and you couldn't go to war. There was no way to enjoy the game like that. As a vassals, you should pay maybe around 25% of your income to your suzerain and share its diplomatic ties (wars, alliances, etc). You should be able to go to war against countries your master state isn't allied with.

Well, I am not really surprised that being a vassal sucks, but maybe player should concentrate on breaking the vassalage instead of nerfing vassals to uselessness.

 

[Jia Xu]

Well, I am not really surprised that being a vassal sucks, but maybe player should concentrate on breaking the vassalage instead of nerfing vassals to uselessness.

This almost isn't possible though if you're a vassal to a powerful state. Because you can't grow, you never have any chance to break free on your own. You always have to rely on luck and hope that an even bigger state pummels your suzerain, allowing you to break free while it's trying to build a new army. This doesn't create fun game play, IMO. There should be drawbacks to being a vassals, but you should be able to handle that by adopting a growth strategy so eventually you can break free in a civil war of sorts.

 

[mchaza]

Another thing is that if one of your vassals has core on a province it shouldn't cost the master any infamy to take it for their vassal. For example England took 2 southern provinces from Naples after annexing Sicily. I ended up as France vassalising Naples apart of my Italian naval vassalisation scheme due to weak naval strength, so when war happened between me and England for Calias, Naples took control of its lost provinces and during the peace agreement it cost me 4 infamy per province despite they had cores.

 

[Baneslave]

This almost isn't possible though if you're a vassal to a powerful state. Because you can't grow, you never have any chance to break free on your own. You always have to rely on luck and hope that an even bigger state pummels your suzerain, allowing you to break free while it's trying to build a new army. This doesn't create fun game play, IMO. There should be drawbacks to being a vassals, but you should be able to handle that by adopting a growth strategy so eventually you can break free in a civil war of sorts.

This would still ruin the idea of actually owning vassals.

 

[Jia Xu]

This would still ruin the idea of actually owning vassals.

You don't "own" a vassal. Attempting to own a vassal defeats the purpose of vassalage, actually. Vassalage is supposed to be a contract between to nobles. One noble gives tribute and/or services to another noble in exchange for protection of his rights. The point is that being a vassal in EU3 was never fun and in most cases it wasn't practical to break free. It wasn't a balanced part of the game.

 

[spyroware1]

You should also be able to command your vassal to leave HRE chipping away HRE authority in areas like Italy.

 

[Hector of Troy]

That will probably happen anyway. Agressive expansion is something that gives a lot of negative modifiers, probably creating vassals (or creating vassals of different culture groups, because, for example, France vassalizing all other French rulers, basically saying "you can keep ruling here, but know that I am King of France, oh, and pay me some taxes, will you" at the time was, if not rightful, at least expected. Powerful dukes (especially electors) taking vassals in the HRE, also expected) will do that too.

In EU4 you have to spend diplomacy points to upkeep your vassals, so they aren't exactly free anymore.

Great news indeed.

I don´t know what you guys and others think about it, but in all my previous EU3 campaigns, the game would become incredibly easy after approximately 100/150 years, mainly because of two reasons: Firstly, expanding was too stress-free. Secondly, once expanding was not advisable for some reason or other, the player could effortlessly make plenty of vassals who would faithfully answer to him forever.

I would like EU4 to be more of a challenge, and for me that would only be possible if game mechanics would not allow players to quietly and quickly expand so effortlessly, and also if the vassalage system would receive significant changes.

And Add to those changes rebels posing a real threat (fewer but much stronger rebellions) and chain events sometimes making the player´s life truly miserable, and EU4 would be a lot of fun.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

The main problem I see with the vassal system in EU3 is that it´s ok for a player to make 200.000 vassals without a problem. They will pretty much all love you forever; and all other nations will still love you as well.

Relationship between the lord and his vassals shouldn´t be that stable and secure, as it makes the game too easy, ahistorical and predictable. Moreover, other free nations should hate you for subjugating so many kingdoms around them like nothing.

True indeed. Especially when playing in the HRE a human player could choose to vassalize all minor he ever was in war with and in almost no time be an unbeatable juggernought. This waythe player also avoided unlawfull terriotory, and also very soon came in a situation where he controlled all the Electors being garanteed being Emperor for ever.

In EU4 it seems to be a limitation on aliiances and vassals. If you want to go over it you will have to pay upkeep. Most likely 1 diplo-point per month per vasal. Then this old make whole HRE your vassals strategy will be a bit more difficult, and have its opportunity costs. So yes, it seems like they've done something about it.