Gameplay mechanics: Vassals

[Pumis]

I get that the game is mixed, but I enjoy vassal mechanics overall in total war games. My favorite one was in three kingdoms. So here is the question before I make decision to buy the game.
How is the vassal system and diplomacy in this game?
Is it detrimental to have vassals? Can you even vassalize other factions? Is there benefits in diplomacy?
It's hard to get his information from storepage so I ask from those who have already played and tested the game.

[DarkGlam]

Trade and diplomacy is essential to keep enough incoming resources and you can confederate or trade regions (settlement+ 2 or 3 outposts).
Vassals is a wide play field since when you have sacred lands of Hatti or Egypt. First you are vassal to Pharaoh, when you have sacred lands of Egypt, after some turns Pharaoh dies and you fight, vassal or become vassal, or ally to win civil war for the throne, if you do or dont you can still play with your vassals or becoming a vassal youtself to declare war in brother vassals and weaken the lord to betray later. So yes, vassals is very expanded. Court system have seats amd tittles like Visir, Treasurer, First Commander or Pharaoh with special powers of machiavellian actions available per turn, and legeitimacy points let you to start a new civil war, is also important.

Diplomacy gameplay is the most complete.

[Pumis]

Originally posted by DarkGlam:

Trade and diplomacy is essential to keep enough incoming resources and you can confederate or trade regions (settlement+ 2 or 3 outposts).
Vassals is a wide play field since when you have sacred lands of Hatti or Egypt. First you are vassal to Pharaoh, when you have sacred lands of Egypt, after some turns Pharaoh dies and you fight, vassal or become vassal, or ally to win civil war for the throne, if you do or dont you can still play with your vassals or becoming a vassal youtself to declare war in brother vassals and weaken the lord to betray later. So yes, vassals is very expanded. Court system have seats amd tittles like Visir, Treasurer, First Commander or Pharaoh with special powers of machiavellian actions available per turn, and legeitimacy points let you to start a new civil war, is also important.

Diplomacy gameplay is the most complete.

Interesting, so they basically made it more like crusader king? I might even buy this game based on this.

[Kryos]

Originally posted by Pumis:

I get that the game is mixed, but I enjoy vassal mechanics overall in total war games. My favorite one was in three kingdoms. So here is the question before I make decision to buy the game.
How is the vassal system and diplomacy in this game?
Is it detrimental to have vassals? Can you even vassalize other factions? Is there benefits in diplomacy?
It's hard to get his information from storepage so I ask from those who have already played and tested the game.

There are vassals once you are High King/Pharaoh, and both Hittites ancient legacies rely heavily on it ( one gives your generals very powerful traits, even enhanced when you make them "leader" of a vassal, the other one encourages you to have many vassals and good relations with them in exchange for many boons ). Also, they are still active and will fight your ennemies instead of just sitting home, so I'd say this game has pretty heavy vassals systems depending on who you play !
I would advise you to play as Suppiluliuma as with him, you can vassalize from the start and get the said Hittite legacies

[Kryos]

However, I must point out that diplomacy is not as good as in 3K, both in terms of options ( understandable since they are different epochs and lands ) and especially regarding AI opinion on some deals. However, it is absolutely possible to vassalize your neighbors through war or diplo, and they are even inclined to it if you are a powerful faction

[Pumis]

Sounds like mechanic wise game is exactly what I want. Just curious is there any negatives? Beside some random youtube/community drama about location itself.

[Kryos]

Originally posted by Pumis:

Sounds like mechanic wise game is exactly what I want. Just curious is there any negatives? Beside some random youtube/community drama about location itself.

To the game or to the vassals ?
To the game of course there are negatives, but I'd say most are opinion based rather than factually bad things ( for example I regret there are no family trees, but some people dont care ). The game is taking an, imo, very injustified bashing although being one of the best TWs I've ever experienced myself
To the vassals, once again it depends how you play. My only negative was that, being a bit perfectionnist, I like vassals to hold their provinces as a whole, and I try to trade settlements so that they are not mixed. But with invaders keen of razing and active vassals fighting the said invaders and taking every razed city they encounter for themselves, the provinces can quickly become a bit messy. Again, I think most people dont care about this
Also, the vassals can declare war by themselves, but as long as you are at war with at least one enemy they usually dont do it ( in this regard, constant war with Sea People is a good thing haha )

[Hexagoros]

Originally posted by Pumis:

Sounds like mechanic wise game is exactly what I want. Just curious is there any negatives? Beside some random youtube/community drama about location itself.

If you liked 3K Total War and/or Troy: Total War, you will love Pharaoh.

My only "big" negative to Pharaoh as compared to those games is the map feels too small.

[Kryos]

Originally posted by Hexagoros:

Originally posted by Pumis:

Sounds like mechanic wise game is exactly what I want. Just curious is there any negatives? Beside some random youtube/community drama about location itself.

If you liked 3K Total War and/or Troy: Total War, you will love Pharaoh.

My only "big" negative to Pharaoh as compared to those games is the map feels too small.

I'd go as far as say that even if you didnt like Troy you can like Pharaoh. Its more of a mix of 3K and Attila with Troy's ressource system imo
As for the map, idk, its true it feels smaller than 3K's for example, but at the same time its more intense, since the state of the worlds main cities can ♥♥♥♥ you up or make your glory. I also really like how they built Egypt's provinces, with big food cities around the Nile which is factually a highway, with other more scarse provinces in the desert provide gold and stone. I had more fun conquering regions in Pharaoh than ever before, and I already loved 3K.
Canaan is also cool with the whole coastline defence to set up, and Hatti with its moutains and chokepoints.
Also, personnal opinion, I still strongly believe the map will get expanded to Mesopotamia and west Anatolia at some point. But imo what we have rn is really good and fun to play on.

[DarkGlam]

Originally posted by Pumis:

Sounds like mechanic wise game is exactly what I want. Just curious is there any negatives? Beside some random youtube/community drama about location itself.

Very Crusader Kings. Generals has ambitions to develop further their personalities (and bonuses) you have to do certain missions in a limited number of turns, like conquer a settlement than produces gold in 10 turns and similar.
Negative things could be:
-No marriages or family trees (I love CK2 and CK3 but I feel this game doesn't need it)
-Game gives you absolute freedoom but is hard to master and if you dont know what is going or how to play you may do poor and worst choices and end thinking the game is to be played this way because is bad game LOL
-Crete(aegeans), Assyria and Babylonia are not in the game yet, They are fan favorites. I have high hope in Assyria and Babylon coming with next DLCs

[Pumis]

Originally posted by Kryos:

Originally posted by Pumis:

Sounds like mechanic wise game is exactly what I want. Just curious is there any negatives? Beside some random youtube/community drama about location itself.

To the game or to the vassals ?
To the game of course there are negatives, but I'd say most are opinion based rather than factually bad things ( for example I regret there are no family trees, but some people dont care ). The game is taking an, imo, very injustified bashing although being one of the best TWs I've ever experienced myself
To the vassals, once again it depends how you play. My only negative was that, being a bit perfectionnist, I like vassals to hold their provinces as a whole, and I try to trade settlements so that they are not mixed. But with invaders keen of razing and active vassals fighting the said invaders and taking every razed city they encounter for themselves, the provinces can quickly become a bit messy. Again, I think most people dont care about this
Also, the vassals can declare war by themselves, but as long as you are at war with at least one enemy they usually dont do it ( in this regard, constant war with Sea People is a good thing haha )

I learned from three kingdoms drama that most bashing is just reactionary. For example for me it was the best TW game published after shogun 2. More interested in good gameplay than petty internet drama. For province perfectionism... well similar issue was already in total warhammer, i can live with that.

Originally posted by Hexagoros:

Originally posted by Pumis:

Sounds like mechanic wise game is exactly what I want. Just curious is there any negatives? Beside some random youtube/community drama about location itself.

If you liked 3K Total War and/or Troy: Total War, you will love Pharaoh.

My only "big" negative to Pharaoh as compared to those games is the map feels too small.

Well some TW games maps seem to be too big to me, so I guess this is fine.

Originally posted by DarkGlam:

Originally posted by Pumis:

Sounds like mechanic wise game is exactly what I want. Just curious is there any negatives? Beside some random youtube/community drama about location itself.

Very Crusader Kings. Generals has ambitions to develop further their personalities (and bonuses) you have to do certain missions in a limited number of turns, like conquer a settlement than produces gold in 10 turns and similar.
Negative things could be:
-No marriages or family trees (I love CK2 and CK3 but I feel this game doesn't need it)
-Game gives you absolute freedoom but is hard to master and if you dont know what is going or how to play you may do poor and worst choices and end thinking the game is to be played this way because is bad game LOL
-Crete(aegeans), Assyria and Babylonia are not in the game yet, They are fan favorites. I have high hope in Assyria and Babylon coming with next DLCs

Thanks, well I can live with those... Though I would've loved possibility to play as eastern empires/kingdoms as well.

[i-dot]

how to demand someone to become my vassal?
now I have a war against Seti and I'm winning
how to make him as my vassal?

[Kendji]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1937780/discussions/0/3941272762721562768/
You yourself can even become a vassal. Unlike 3K you don't pay a percent of your income to liege. From what I gather this also applies to your vassals. They are more like glorified allies that you can tell to go do things

[Iskar]

Originally posted by i-dot:

how to demand someone to become my vassal? :lunar2020thinkingtiger:
now I have a war against Seti and I'm winning
how to make him as my vassal?

You have to be Pharaoh or at least pretender to the throne to unlock that option.

Originally posted by Kendji:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1937780/discussions/0/3941272762721562768/
You yourself can even become a vassal. Unlike 3K you don't pay a percent of your income to liege. From what I gather this also applies to your vassals. They are more like glorified allies that you can tell to go do things

I enjoy most the troops they send to your recruitment pool for free, allowing me to form armies with elite units from distant lands.