Why I can't use Subjugation CB if my fleet is superior?

[Kellvan]

Why I should be superior in general?

That doesn't make any sense. So I rush fleet, my opponent rush economy and lack of fleet power, why can't I force him to subjugate? I have all means to do so, but for some unknown reason no CB.

 

[HFY]

It does make sense that you'd pick a technologically competent empire to become your Scholarium, and that means you might not be superior in tech at the point that you decide to subjugate.

 

[DrFranknfurter]

Why I should be superior in general?

That doesn't make any sense. So I rush fleet, my opponent rush economy and lack of fleet power, why can't I force him to subjugate? I have all means to do so, but for some unknown reason no CB.

I'd rather have a Protectorate war goal when you're superior, normal subjugation war goals when you are equal.

If balance is the main reasoning then balance could be achieved by adding an influence cost to pick the wargoal. For example when you aren't superior and don't have the wargoal you can send a diplomatic message demanding subjugation. This message has an influence cost the scales with the relative powers of the two empires.

Subjects gained through conquest just swap over to protectorates instantly anyway most of the time, or flip flop back and forth. There's only a relatively small window where you are superior enough for the wargoal but not also so strong that you turn them into a protectorate.

 

[Wonoz]

To be honest that would be horrible snowball. Military aggression is arguably very potent as it is and we surely don´t need more. Especially considering the distinct lack of intervention-wars.
>I cannot protect my neighbour from getting the schticked by their other neighbour next over even if I wanted to.

And before you say "there is defensive pacts". Yes. There are. Excellent relations is a pretty substantial hurdle compared to "my stick is pointier than yours".
I agree that subjugation could be a permanent, unconditional CB but only if you can freely opt in as ally for the defender (which the AI cannot handle properly; I am pretty sure of that).

 

[UltimateSpinDash]

What annoys me is that we can't declare subjugation wars without being superior to begin with. The whole thing is supposed to be an ultimatum "submit or else". If I feel confident what I can defeat an empire that is considered equivalent to me, I should not be arbitrarily stopped from using a subjugation CB.

 

[zZander56]

Because

Now go research blocker clearing techs repeatedly until the technocracy to your north respects you enough to submit with a barrel down their throat.

 

[Varren]

If balance is the main reasoning then balance could be achieved by adding an influence cost to pick the wargoal. For example when you aren't superior and don't have the wargoal you can send a diplomatic message demanding subjugation. This message has an influence cost the scales with the relative powers of the two empires.

Basically what happens when the Imperial Fiefdom empire breaks apart. Though, obviously, you'd only get a wargoal on one empire, and it'd need a higher influence cost.

To be honest that would be horrible snowball. Military aggression is arguably very potent as it is and we surely don´t need more. Especially considering the distinct lack of intervention-wars.

So you're saying we need Vicky 3's diplomatic plays...