What is the difference between a satrapy and a client state?

[TuckingFypo]

Title says it all. As of now I am playing as Subei, I made contact with Iceni and found out they were on the brink of being destroyed. I began to negotiate. I offered them to become a client state because I wanted to see what it did, the chances were low and they refused. So I moved on and offered them to become my satrapy, they instantly agreed, All other britannic tribes suddenly made peace with Iceni not sure why. But what is the difference between client state and satrapy I believe I am missing something here consdiering the chances were so apart.

[Hannibal Barca]

satrapy is the Persian word for client state

[HexeR]

One becomes a part of your empire I believe and the other remains autonomous, but you recieve income and building bonuses from them.

[Pulloraha]

Satrapies have limited diplomacy options (they can make trade but not wage wars of their own or so), client state can have some diplomatic freedom. Also satrapies break most of their agreements with other factions.

[Darkwalker875]

Satrapies can only have trade agreements with other factions and I do not think that they give you money every turn. Client states pay you money every turn and otherwise act as a normal country that expects you to fight for them if you are attacked. Client states can declare war on other factions while satrapies can only go to war with factions you are fighting. Also satrapies appear to be less willing to go to war against their benefactors except for the large break away of the seleucid satrapies at the beginning of the game.

[N8Rush]

If I remember my history correctly, client states pay money to their overlord for protection, where as satrapies are given money to simply be a part of the empire without conquest.

I'm sure that is a dumbed down description, but it's at least how I look at it.

[God_Emperor_Trump]

Originally posted by N8Rush:

If I remember my history correctly, client states pay money to their overlord for protection, where as satrapies are given money to simply be a part of the empire without conquest.

I'm sure that is a dumbed down description, but it's at least how I look at it.

They both had to pay taxes to the ruling countries, Satrapies were simply kings who submitted to another king without armed conflict (example would be in 300 where the Persian ambassador "offers" Leonidas a opportunit to join the Persian Empire or go to war). Client States on the other hand were puppet rulers that the Romans installed or backed up financially and politically in places that were either too foreign to accept Roman rule but were too strategically important simple to let go (Egypt, Judea, Armenia). So they were allowed to have thier own "kings" just to keep the peace.

[blakhawk12]

I believe the difference is that satrepies are forced to declare war/make peace whenever you do, but client states get the option to help or not.

[Sir Steal Your Tech]

Can the player become a Satrapy for a large faction?