How do I leave the conquered territories?

[prasatko333]

I play as Rome. My neighbor will attack me. I'll beat him on his land. But I don't want those lands. How do I get rid of them? How do I leave the conquered territories?

[willgamer47]

Originally posted by wade.venhaus:

Originally posted by willgamer47:

Right... but then you don't annex it as the comment seemed to indicate...

So, when the AI declares war on you..if you move an army into or across any of their regions do you not automatically annex any region you move through of theirs (Battle or not)? This is what I experienced...it breaks the game for me so I have quite playing.

If you have an Ally and they get declared war on and lose a bunch of regions that are automatically annex by the aggressor. You decide you want to help your ally and move you armies into the regions they lost with the goal of just pushing back the aggressor and restoring your allies original regions...is this possible?

First point, I was just questioning the no battle issue as I have passed through enemy regions with some kind of wall without a fight and didn't annex. Guess I never noticed a rare empty enemy region. No problems...

Second point, don't know... do your ally or you get the region per your description of assisting an ally?

[LEGIO_XXX_ULPIA]

Originally posted by wade.venhaus:

Originally posted by PocusFR:

We know that many of you would like the option to abandon a region under certain conditions and we are working on that.

Diplomacy is indeed not the most developed part of the game and we plan to improve it. We ask for a little patience here, the game is out since 2 weeks only and you'll get a 2nd patch full of improvements very soon.

I don't want to fool anyone on the AI. There will be incremental improvements, but if you feel like it is not up to the challenge, your best option is anyway to crank difficulty some, as artificial as it is, it will lead to the biggest improvements on AI army size and such.

It is not about being able to abandon a region. It is about the fact that a region should not be automatically annexed into you country just because you army crossed though it...or there was a battle fought there.

exactly. Totally agreed!

[Slitherine_Iain]

Originally posted by wade.venhaus:

Originally posted by PocusFR:

We know that many of you would like the option to abandon a region under certain conditions and we are working on that.

Diplomacy is indeed not the most developed part of the game and we plan to improve it. We ask for a little patience here, the game is out since 2 weeks only and you'll get a 2nd patch full of improvements very soon.

I don't want to fool anyone on the AI. There will be incremental improvements, but if you feel like it is not up to the challenge, your best option is anyway to crank difficulty some, as artificial as it is, it will lead to the biggest improvements on AI army size and such.

It is not about being able to abandon a region. It is about the fact that a region should not be automatically annexed into you country just because you army crossed though it...or there was a battle fought there.

This has been discussed. The issue here is a UI one. If territory is not auto annexed when captured it means some ui control to annex it. We felt this created more issues than it solved as people would forget to do it and we didn't want to force users through an auto popup to confirm. We have some ideas we're experimenting with but not an ETA yet.

And I forgot the huge issue of moving through a territory and not annexing it as there was never an opportunity to ask the player.

[darth_alles]

How about still annexing a region automatically, but changing it to not happening instantly? You move your army into a region, for whatever reason (battle, passing through) and if you move on in the next turn, nothing happens to ownership. But if you decide to stay with your force (part of your force) for another turn (or even more?), the region will be annexed. It seems to me a realistic way of annexation, because most of the people back then probably did not thought of themselves as being annexed if an army marched into their territory, mounted their flag, and left next day.

TL;DR: To annex a region, you should need to have a military force present for at least 1 turn, before ownership of that region is given to you.

[Hendricus]

Do not build anything in those new lands, just ask them to generate gold, they revolt and you get rid of them. Perhaps a more friendly neighbour appears. Or you have to do that several times. Those fluid borders are hard to handle, it's almost historical.

[Aleksei.Volchok]

Originally posted by darth_alles:

How about still annexing a region automatically, but changing it to not happening instantly? You move your army into a region, for whatever reason (battle, passing through) and if you move on in the next turn, nothing happens to ownership. But if you decide to stay with your force (part of your force) for another turn (or even more?), the region will be annexed. It seems to me a realistic way of annexation, because most of the people back then probably did not thought of themselves as being annexed if an army marched into their territory, mounted their flag, and left next day.

This will change pacing a lot. You can expand very fast in the no man's land or barbarians in this game.

[darth_alles]

Originally posted by ilitarist:

Originally posted by darth_alles:

How about still annexing a region automatically, but changing it to not happening instantly? You move your army into a region, for whatever reason (battle, passing through) and if you move on in the next turn, nothing happens to ownership. But if you decide to stay with your force (part of your force) for another turn (or even more?), the region will be annexed. It seems to me a realistic way of annexation, because most of the people back then probably did not thought of themselves as being annexed if an army marched into their territory, mounted their flag, and left next day.

This will change pacing a lot. You can expand very fast in the no man's land or barbarians in this game.

If I am not missing something, this would not change with the suggested annexation rule; you would just need more troops to leave garrisons in every region you want to keep.

[willgamer47]

Originally posted by darth_alles:

How about still annexing a region automatically, but changing it to not happening instantly? You move your army into a region, for whatever reason (battle, passing through) and if you move on in the next turn, nothing happens to ownership. But if you decide to stay with your force (part of your force) for another turn (or even more?), the region will be annexed. It seems to me a realistic way of annexation, because most of the people back then probably did not thought of themselves as being annexed if an army marched into their territory, mounted their flag, and left next day.

TL;DR: To annex a region, you should need to have a military force present for at least 1 turn, before ownership of that region is given to you.

So defeating whatever is in the region and remaining there a year (that turn) wouldn't make the region yours?!

Not buying it...

[CelestialSlayer]

No I don’t want to waste turns hanging around. Just to take a province.

[欣怡 (Nathalie)]

Originally posted by ilitarist:

Originally posted by darth_alles:

How about still annexing a region automatically, but changing it to not happening instantly? You move your army into a region, for whatever reason (battle, passing through) and if you move on in the next turn, nothing happens to ownership. But if you decide to stay with your force (part of your force) for another turn (or even more?), the region will be annexed. It seems to me a realistic way of annexation, because most of the people back then probably did not thought of themselves as being annexed if an army marched into their territory, mounted their flag, and left next day.

This will change pacing a lot. You can expand very fast in the no man's land or barbarians in this game.

You can, but your empire would collapse if you expand too quick due to decadence and loyalty.

[欣怡 (Nathalie)]

Pocus has said they are working on it. To me it seems simple, though complicated to implement without screwing over balance. It should cost to return a province because well it makes balancing better and avoids abusive action of taking territory to weaken enemies then giving it back. Some form of peace treaty system similar to Paradox may be a good idea in this regard. When it comes to marching through territory, maybe an army stance that allows you to not take the region (though you should still have to fight local factions unless you are at peace (ala Hannibal and the Alps). I imagine this is all quite complex to implement, but thats just my ideas.

[wven]

Every grand strategy game I have ever played...except for this one handles this situation.

There has to be a difference between Occupying a region DURING a war and annexing said region AFTER the war. What regions are annexed should be determined by the Peace Treaty.

You should also be able to defend Allies and recover their 'Occupied' regions FOR THEM...not annex the region for yourself.

[wven]

Originally posted by Goodpass:

Do not build anything in those new lands, just ask them to generate gold, they revolt and you get rid of them. Perhaps a more friendly neighbour appears. Or you have to do that several times. Those fluid borders are hard to handle, it's almost historical.

I know how to work around it...it is not fun. It is not historical.

[Bozz 💀]

well at some point Pyyrrhus did invade macedonia and he left it to lysimachus even though he defeated the macedonians whoi had already defeated lysimachus etc... so it"s not true to say that an invading forces never abandonned the territories they conquered... rome even did invade some tribes in britain without really annexing anything they just left with some kind of deal but the tribes were let to do as they wanted...
And the example of hannibal has already been pointed out several time..

What bothers me with the actual mechanique is that I can't do anything against an opponent that is getting out of control and invading the whole world, in other games if I had been expanding too much and was struggling with over expansion penalties I'd just go to war defeat my ennemie and make him release some factions that he has conquered and in that way weakening him severaly without taking any territories I don't want... here I would need to annex an absurd amount of territory...
In this game that is just not possible... Rome and other countries did not always annex all the territories they invaded, several times rome made client states in gaul or britain so that they don"t need to immediatly administrate those areas fully... again here there is no such possibilities, you can just invade and annex nothing more.. I believe that if this game wants to be a real competitor it absolutely needs to expand on the diplomacy aspect.. and that is kind of urgent because it is lacking a lot right now and that hurts the experiance in my opinion...

[欣怡 (Nathalie)]

Originally posted by wade.venhaus:

Originally posted by Goodpass:

Do not build anything in those new lands, just ask them to generate gold, they revolt and you get rid of them. Perhaps a more friendly neighbour appears. Or you have to do that several times. Those fluid borders are hard to handle, it's almost historical.

I know how to work around it...it is not fun. It is not historical.

I'm sorry you can't, but I would jsut like to pre-face for others who might be thinking of picking up this great game, that its very workable for most of us, and is being fixed/thought about for a future update. If one was to raid they can without invading a region, and if one wants to cross territory they could seek aliances for access. If on the defence and not wanting to take territory, stay and defend on your own land. But its worht pointing out sometimes you have to go on the offensive, in fact the Roman empire partly came into being for that exact reason, they didn't set out to have one, and thats one reason the republic fell.