Is this a bug with Timurid Vassals

[rui.silva.incp]

They pretty much just sit around and never ever move their troops outside their lands.
Its ridiculous.....

It simply does not work.

I have tried the game in Europe and in South America where vassals actually join in wars and move around trying to help conquer land.

What is the problem with Timurid Vassals???

Am I missing something???

[Vituperator]

if they are disloyal they generally won't move troops outside their land

[rui.silva.incp]

Ohh....

Another silly thing in this game.....

Yup, it would be very wise for a vassal to not help his lord at war. Great way to get himself beheaded or razed at the next possible chance.

I could even buy some slow movement or keeping a reserve at their lands if disloyal.

Doing nothing???

So....I will attack them then lol And be done with those bastards!!!

[Malvastor]

Originally posted by rui.silva.incp:

Ohh....

Another silly thing in this game.....

Yup, it would be very wise for a vassal to not help his lord at war. Great way to get himself beheaded or razed at the next possible chance.

They're disloyal because they're collectively stronger than you. As far as they're concerned, you're not going to do anything to them because you can't. And there's a good chance that they're all allied to each other and ready to dogpile you if you try.

If they actually thought you were capable of beheading or razing them? They'd be marching.

[SkyRipper]

"Yup, it would be very wise for a vassal to not help his lord at war. Great way to get himself beheaded or razed at the next possible chance." they did in history the exact same thing, if the overlord loses then the vassal goes to war with him and manages to become independent and even take land for example, it is wise indeed ofc the overlord might win and then you are screwed so it's a bet, also no one goes and "beheads" someone, that is like saying to all the other vassals to rise up against the overlord XD

[grognardgary]

Study the history of the 100 years war some time. Both sides had trouble with disloyal vassals hell according to the rules it was entirely clear exactly who was a vassal of whom and more than a few French nobles were at least nominally supporting both sides at one time or the other.

[ArchiV]

with icta thing, strong duchy and your first ruler, they should be loyal
then, go FULL ANNEX ajam (take all your core back), improve with vassals, then annex them for free... timi is really ez

[LSD]

Originally posted by grognardgary:

Study the history of the 100 years war some time. Both sides had trouble with disloyal vassals hell according to the rules it was entirely clear exactly who was a vassal of whom and more than a few French nobles were at least nominally supporting both sides at one time or the other.

EU4's vassals are like British "dominions" rather than vassals. Disloyal dominions got their populations butchered and their leaders "removed". Doesn't make sense from any real perspective for them to just not participate.
But then, keeping them happy is pretty easy, so it's kind of a non-issue.

[Malvastor]

Originally posted by LSD:

Originally posted by grognardgary:

Study the history of the 100 years war some time. Both sides had trouble with disloyal vassals hell according to the rules it was entirely clear exactly who was a vassal of whom and more than a few French nobles were at least nominally supporting both sides at one time or the other.

EU4's vassals are like British "dominions" rather than vassals. Disloyal dominions got their populations butchered and their leaders "removed". Doesn't make sense from any real perspective for them to just not participate.

That's been the case all through history- the Romans or Assyrians certainly weren't any gentler with rebellious subjects. But it only works if the overlord is actually capable of beating the subject. Rebellious vassals are rebellious precisely because they don't think you can defeat them anymore; it doesn't matter what you would do to them because they don't think you can. So from that perspective their non-cooperation makes perfect sense.

[RCMidas]

It's also worth noting that the more an overlord sends its armies into its subjects' lands to slaughter them, the less productive they are and the more loyalist lives are lost. This means trouble at home is more likely to rise. See "the civil wars and collapse of just about every major empire ever".

[Påsan]

i have played timuruds several times and know you have several ways to keep them loyal. its only a big issue if they dip into disloyal and start allying eachother.

remember they are designed to have a unique starting position where you have limited time to make sure they are loyal, or hell break lose. probably based on some historical events i dont know.

[RCMidas]

The death of the Timurids' starting ruler, I forget his name right now. He was one of the last strong kings of the empire, and his descendants were completely unable to keep their client states and "integrated" peoples loyal or compliant. Rebellions and revolts cropped up time and again until the whole thing fell apart as much from within as from the latest Persian empire attacking from without.

Which is an oversimplification, yes, but a decent enough one for a Steam post.

[grognardgary]

Originally posted by Malvastor:

Originally posted by LSD:

EU4's vassals are like British "dominions" rather than vassals. Disloyal dominions got their populations butchered and their leaders "removed". Doesn't make sense from any real perspective for them to just not participate.

That's been the case all through history- the Romans or Assyrians certainly weren't any gentler with rebellious subjects. But it only works if the overlord is actually capable of beating the subject. Rebellious vassals are rebellious precisely because they don't think you can defeat them anymore; it doesn't matter what you would do to them because they don't think you can. So from that perspective their non-cooperation makes perfect sense.

Yep the Romans also get their heads hand to them by some of their more reballious vassals,

[Malvastor]

Originally posted by grognardgary:

Originally posted by Malvastor:

That's been the case all through history- the Romans or Assyrians certainly weren't any gentler with rebellious subjects. But it only works if the overlord is actually capable of beating the subject. Rebellious vassals are rebellious precisely because they don't think you can defeat them anymore; it doesn't matter what you would do to them because they don't think you can. So from that perspective their non-cooperation makes perfect sense.

Yep the Romans also get their heads hand to them by some of their more reballious vassals,

Yep- the fall of the Western Roman Empire was arguably just a bunch of vassals realizing there was no more overlord worth reporting to, and just dropping the pretense of servitude.

[Kapika96]

lol @ OP wanting to be an evil dictator. It's not a factor in the game of course, but you wanting to behead your vassals is actually a very good reason for them to let you be destroyed by your enemies rather than helping you...