Subjugating Satrapies Impossible

[Sanguine]

Hi, currently I am playing with Parthia and dealing with Seleucid's satrapies. I was going to destroy Persia, later they lost their only settlement and then retook it. I offered them to become my satrapy and they accepted. Because of their brief nomad situation they were no longer satrapy of Seleucid. Then I moved on to take Drangiana, I reduced them to one settlement which was in the same province with my new satrapy Persia. So I wanted to make them satrapy too. BUT I can't. I can't offer anything because you can't make any agreement with satrapies when you are at war. I tried take their only settlement to subjugate them manually. Nope, subjugate option doesn't show up. I get the idea to make satrapies more subservient by removing some diplomatic abilities like declaring war. But this is very ridiculous.

Do you have any ideas? I tried to make Seleucid cancel their satrapy agreement with Drangiana but as it can be guessed they decline no matter how much I offer them.

[MANWHATADONGA]

1 destroy seleucid or get a mod that will inctrease your chances.

[Delacourt '27]

Satrapy Seleucid to get all their satrapies become yours.

In order for Drangiana to become your satrapy, you can take their last city, they become independent if they have a navy/army still alive, let them take a city, now is possible. Or kill them of, let one of their original city rebel, satrapy them then, but try diplo first, since you will become Unreliable if you declare war and satrapy them on the first turn.

[Perturabo did nothing wrong]

The thing is, you cant subjugate somebody elses satrapy

When you take someones last city they need to be free and not a client state/satrapy for you to subjugate them

[Sanguine]

Originally posted by Delacourt '27:

Satrapy Seleucid to get all their satrapies become yours.

In order for Drangiana to become your satrapy, you can take their last city, they become independent if they have a navy/army still alive, let them take a city, now is possible. Or kill them of, let one of their original city rebel, satrapy them then, but try diplo first, since you will become Unreliable if you declare war and satrapy them on the first turn.

Well this worked like a charm. Though I had to reload a couple times which I hate to do making me feel like cheating. It should have been possible, as it was in the Empire TW. Diplomacy didn't work like I said, after they retook the city I subjugated them forcefully without making any agreements. And there was little penalty due to we were at war for like 5-6 turns. Making Seleucid satrapy is impossible at this stage. I even don't share a border with them. Now I can peacefully move on to Media lol.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=794124872

[Red Spot]

Honostly said, I would not want a client state if they are not somewhat reliable. Somewhere along the line they will betray you and having them in the back of your empire means they did not offer you anything when you made them client, but they will hurt you when they have 2 or 3 full stacks they can send at you where you have no defenses.
A client on the frontline can be very usefull since they can field 1-3 armies on 1 well developed settlement and those armies will work for you, making your expanse or defense a bit easier and if they betray you later on they at least served a purpose.

[Delacourt '27]

Originally posted by Red Spot:

Honostly said, I would not want a client state if they are not somewhat reliable. Somewhere along the line they will betray you and having them in the back of your empire means they did not offer you anything when you made them client, but they will hurt you when they have 2 or 3 full stacks they can send at you where you have no defenses.
A client on the frontline can be very usefull since they can field 1-3 armies on 1 well developed settlement and those armies will work for you, making your expanse or defense a bit easier and if they betray you later on they at least served a purpose.

Satrapies of the same culture, or different culture but been in multiple wars, will not betray you, since your relationship will be in the green.

Client States are just Defense Allies that pay tributes would act like you said and betray you if you are not careful.

[Red Spot]

All relationships decay over time, and you will get a negative hit when you grow large. So each and every faction, no matter the culture, will eventually hate you.

Edit; or is there some noteworthy difference between a satrapy and a client state as they game makes me believe the only difference is the label used.

[Delacourt '27]

Originally posted by Red Spot:

All relationships decay over time, and you will get a negative hit when you grow large. So each and every faction, no matter the culture, will eventually hate you.

Edit; or is there some noteworthy difference between a satrapy and a client state as they game makes me believe the only difference is the label used.

If all of you are in wars together, each attacks or champion/dignitary actions against the enemies will increase you friendly points. So you can hold over 300 positive points at max Imperium with satrapies, less points but in green with military allies.

Client states are just Defense Allies that pays you tributes.

Satrapies lose most foreign diplomacy option other then trade independence. They join all your wars, end wars when you do, no dimplomatic independence.

[Red Spot]

So what I said still stands, all relationships decay over time and eventually they will declare war on you. That you personally play a game where you can keep declaring wars on new enemies or feel like doing agent action all the time in order to keep relationships up does not make my statement untrue. It just says that you put effort in 'keeping' them loyal.
If you where to stop expanding etc for x turns to do research or build up your econ, they might just as well declare war on you in the meantime.
Next to that, I've often seen strapies declare war on their AI masters cause they targeted a faction the satrapy actually liked.

[Delacourt '27]

Originally posted by Red Spot:

So what I said still stands, all relationships decay over time and eventually they will declare war on you. That you personally play a game where you can keep declaring wars on new enemies or feel like doing agent action all the time in order to keep relationships up does not make my statement untrue. It just says that you put effort in 'keeping' them loyal.
If you where to stop expanding etc for x turns to do research or build up your econ, they might just as well declare war on you in the meantime.
Next to that, I've often seen strapies declare war on their AI masters cause they targeted a faction the satrapy actually liked.

I guess this is a difference in playing style, since I don't get the reason for stop expansion to research or build up your economy. Why not do all those at the same time?

If your relationship is in +200, x turns of not increase points will not cause them to betray you.

I need to clarify, spy don't increase diplomacy relationship points since they are hidden, other powers can't see the action to get the increase or decrease in diplomacy points.

I guess if playing on legendary, I might do as little as possible per turn for the 1 save.

I think you forgot that they patched the AI to not betray player even more. In the earlier versions, if you are powerful, AI won't betray you ever, like in the older games where weak AI declare war on player just to die. After the patch, they tune down the AI aggressiveness to allow the "major" power a better chance to survive. A prime example is the ISLAM, International Satrapies League Against Macedonians(people), after the patch they can't kill Seleucid anymore due to players' complain that minor powers keep killing majors. After this patch, I was able to hold older alliances that became yellow or red to the end of the campaign when I keep my reputation to Reliable.

And I didn't say your statement was untrue.

Hates you doesn't mean they will betray you and declare war. Unless you are using certain mods that changed the diplomacy AI.

[Red Spot]

You may very well be true and since I do not use clients late game, if at all .. and I often see Libya declare war on Carthage and the Seleucids do more often than not die before mid-game cause they get gang-banged .. I will not risk the safety of my 'deep' territory by having clients there.
In regard to the Seleucids I do have to add that killing the Greek states makes it all a lot harder for the Seleucids and leaving the Greek states, or even helping them by taking some out, supports the Seleucids as those remaining Greek factions pretty much always go after Egypt, which in turn will always die if I do not take out all Greek states. Then again, following history, the Greek states should quickly become ruled by Rome and soon after does Egypt and soon after that does the Seleucid empire .. so cant be too bothered with that balance :D

[Delacourt '27]

Libya is a client state, so it doesn't apply to what I described since I was talking about satrapies.

I should also add that the best time to add satrapies or any type of diplomatic alliances, is between Imperium 3 to 6, where you have just become powerful and right before you become too powerful.

FYI, only Armenia, Parthia, Pontus, Bactria, Egypt and Seleucid of the playable factions can form satrapies, all other none barb factions has client states.

Assuming it's a simple way of naming factions, there is no playable Greek states faction. And Greek culture pack factions generally has no impact on Seleucid, since Pergnmon and Cimmeria are with the Black Sea pack are closer.

A historically based sandbox game don't follow historical progressions, since the Greek culture pack factions tends to thrive against other barbs.