Something Total War always did wrong, and it's annoying

[VoiD]

Well, diplomacy in general, it feels like it improved a lot over the years but there's still ground to cover, but I don't want to get into something some general.

What really bothers me is vassalization, it has never worked, more often than not it's more of a headache than a bonus, it's just not worth doing even for RP reasons, and frankly it shouldn't be annoying at all, in fact it should even be desirable.

The issue is that the game treats a vassal like some sort of ally, with a desire for freedom, that is not what a vassal is, a vassal is, essentially, part of your empire, he gets no saying on whether he will come to your aid if you declare war or if he's not going to join in, as part of your empire your foes are his foes and that's the end of that, sure he can rebel and try to break free, but he should have to actively declare war against you for freedom, not just refuse to join you when you attack someone else, until a vassal decides do declare war on you for freedom he shouldn't have a say on anything really.

Hell things can get even more retarded when one vassal declares war on another and, for some reason, you have to pick a side, this happened to me often in Rome 2 and it doesn't make any sense at all, either they'd have to declare war on YOU, being 100% unable to declare war on your vassal, or they shouldn't be able to declare wars at all, in fact I'd go even further, as a vassal and part of your empire nobody should be able to declare war on them, they should declare war on you instead, putting you (and all your other vassals) against the invading force, and if they weren't already rebelling at that time they should have no saying on the matter.

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥'s annoying to try to create a real empire (with the empire) or take it from the (as the vampires) when feudal mechanics don't work at all, it's just easier to just turn into a massive blob instead.

Hell they could have added so many cool features to the empire, inner politics and vassals, they could make requests including declaration of war requests, or many ways in which the emperor could help them for some kind of reward, make inner struggles, etc.. really seems like a wasted opportunity.

I know the next factions on the line for a rework are the Empire and the Greenskins but I wouldn't be naive enough to think they'd fix this with the rework, it's just too much to ask for I guess, but it would be glorious, though I wouldn't say I don't have any hope at all, the last DLC factions were outstanding with brand new mechanics unlike anything else in previous total war titles, so there's at least a little bit of hope...

[Ruinae Retroque Rursus]

Curiously the one use for vassals is as TK, whereby vassalizing a faction and getting money from them nets you more money than if you were to own the settlements themselves.

Other than that, yes, you're quite right: vassals are useless.

[Congo_Jack]

Good post and I agree.

We don't know when Empire are Greenskins are getting upgrades do we? I thought it was Bretonnia next from CA's hints?

[Wh♂♂par]

I'm a little confused.

Vassals can't declare wars and you can always choose to break a vassal treaty, just that the AI doesn't do it other than if a war is not what they desire and then they rebel against you - a reason for a rebellion.

I am hopeful, that the Empire gets the biggest changes along with Chaos and Greenskins on the campaign map, because the battles are simply fine with them. Nothing to go against. And if I hear one more WOOD ELVES NEED IT, I am going to combust. They need it the least.

[Spookymancer]

I played a Throgg campaign once, and made the Red Eye greenskins tribe my vassal after crushing them down to one settlement. I did it for laughs, certain I would soon be able to farm their pathetic rebellion for loot and xp.
But they were loyal. For the rest of the game.
When I ordered them to attack Kislev, they sent stack after stack to die for dozens of turns.
When I put the Empire to the club, the Red Eye tribe was there, happily claiming the inland cities I could not.
When I betrayed the Everchosen, the Red Eye stayed loyal, goblins and orcs dying by the thousands to blunt the chaos invasion long enough for me to ambush and kill Archaeon's death stack.

[VoiD]

Originally posted by Spookymancer:

I played a Throgg campaign once, and made the Red Eye greenskins tribe my vassal after crushing them down to one settlement. I did it for laughs, certain I would soon be able to farm their pathetic rebellion for loot and xp.
But they were loyal. For the rest of the game.
When I ordered them to attack Kislev, they sent stack after stack to die for dozens of turns.
When I put the Empire to the club, the Red Eye tribe was there, happily claiming the inland cities I could not.
When I betrayed the Everchosen, the Red Eye stayed loyal, goblins and orcs dying by the thousands to blunt the chaos invasion long enough for me to ambush and kill Archaeon's death stack.

back in WH1 when I played chaos I spent 80 turns vassalizing every norscan tribe, 3 turns later they started declaring war on one another and I had to break treaties to chose either side and lose reputation either way, 5 turns later I had no vassals left.

Just 2 days ago playing VC I had a vampire vassal, just one I made on that same turn with 200 relations, I attacked a skaven enemy to the north, didn't set "call allies" just to make sure ♥♥♥♥ didn't happen, they decided not to join anyway and broke vassalization, turning into war enemies on the spot, then later I vassalized count noctilus diplomatically, he liked me that much, 2 turns later the same thing happens, they break the treaty and turn into enemies, vassals are even worse than not ever having them, now I got 2 free enemies with near 300 relations.

Always on legendary of course, the issue is in the game design, such things shouldn't even be a possibility, no matter the odds, a vassal has no saying their suzerain's diplomatic affairs, they don't get to chose whether or not they want to "join" a war either, once war has been declared, they were already part of the empire, so they were already at war.

[Wh♂♂par]

Vassals aren't part of your Empire. A vassal is gaining protection by promising support. Military, social or monetary. They can still decide upon what their own lands are used for. Bad behaviours led to cancellations. Edit: It really depends on what type of vassal this game goes for. But since you aren't telling them what to do at home aswell, I'd say it's just protectorate.

And it's also pretty silly to say they can't have a say. They say, they don't want to join, so they do. With the huge drawback of being at war with the superior force. And probably a dent in their reputation.

Edit: Vassals in 2, as much as I remember got patched to not declare war on one another anymore.

The real problem is just that the AI hardly faces any issues from other AIs just because they did something in diplomacy. They get worse relationships for A and with B, but that hardly ever matters, since most of the times they have their Nemesi and that's it. Fight until eternity, with a victor maybe coming out on top, and then to the next Nemesis. E.g. Lothern's Dark Elf crusades. And that never changes.

If there were some more dynamic repercussions for AI diplomacy, then this probably would all just go poof and away.

You broke a pact so soon? Lower trade income (no instant kill-off)/public order/maybe a random rebellion somewhere, depending on race. Let's say Vampires break a vassal treaty. But some humans still remained in their lands, that aren't simply slave labourers. Rebellion!

Vampires broke a Vampire treaty - Vampire "rebellions" in their lands, because of different houses.

Greenskins accept treaties only if paired with a "common enemy to beat up", ♥♥♥♥ like this.

[VoiD]

Originally posted by Wh♂♂par:

Vassals aren't part of your Empire. A vassal is gaining protection by promising support. Military, social or monetary. They can still decide upon what their own lands are used for. Bad behaviours led to cancellations.

Actually yeah that is exactly what it means, a vassal is for all intends and purposes part of your empire, even the vassal's lands are now the lord's lands and, though very unlikely and frowned upon, without proper justification, it could even be possible for a lord to legitimately take a vassal's lands away from him.

That's what a vassalage agreement does, you trade away your freedom and sovereignty for military protection from a more powerful liege, this is why a vassal pays taxes to their suzerain just like a peasant pays taxes to their lord, they have freedom, mostly internal, but it's very restricted and, depending on the kingdom or empire in question, it can be completely restricted, in fact this is how kingdoms and empires expanded, without modern technology one king can't directly control all of their own land so they used vassals to manage their ever-expanding domain, that's the entire purpose of vassals.

Sure they can revolt for many reasons, but they don't get to say "nah" when war is declared just like that and even on the very odd ocasion in which a vassal really would do that, undermining their right to rule entirely which could be translated by -100 public order on every province they own until his death using ingame terms for breaking THE most important contract between nobles at the time, the odds of this happening should be lower than winning the lottery and/or it could only happen if your relation was severely damaged, -300 or below, never with vassals close to +300 relations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vassal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fealty
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominium_directum_et_utile

Edit: tl;dr vassals are part of your empire, if someone declares war or you declare war, they don't get a choice because war has been declared, they are already part of the war whether they like it or not, not to say betrayal couldn't happen after the fact, such as getting paid a very large sum to get a peace deal with the attacker and declaring war for independence on their liege instead, though it should come with severe penalties.

Also, the AI should use vassals more often as well, but that requires them working.

[Wh♂♂par]

Many empires have set up vassal states, based on tribes, kingdoms, or city-states, the subjects of which they wish to control without having to conquer or directly govern them. In these cases a subordinate state (such as a dependency, suzerainty, residency or protectorate) has retained internal autonomy, but has lost independence in foreign policy, while also, in many instances, paying formal tribute, or providing troops when requested.

Mate.

Edit:
You'd also have to define, that vassalage could never be broken - by definition it might; reality is different. Any pact, treaty, promise can be broken. There's an uprising here, uprising there. People break treaties. Just that there are more severe drawbacks than in this game.

[VoiD]

Originally posted by Wh♂♂par:

Many empires have set up vassal states, based on tribes, kingdoms, or city-states, the subjects of which they wish to control without having to conquer or directly govern them. In these cases a subordinate state (such as a dependency, suzerainty, residency or protectorate) has retained internal autonomy, but has lost independence in foreign policy, while also, in many instances, paying formal tribute, or providing troops when requested.

Mate.

Exactly, the most common model definitivelly being the one where their foreign policy is not independent in any way.

Even if you wanted to use the other examples (most of which aren't even vassals by the way) then they should be treated in different ways, for instance, if one nation subjugates another, forcing them to pay tribute for their freedom while not turning into a direct vassal, they should be treated as such, for instance, if you declare war, or if someone declare war on you, they don't get involved in the war period, exactly for the reason described above, in these specific cases they are not part of your empire, so you have the responsibility to protect them, not the other way around.

In either case they don't get a popup asking whether or not they want to join a war, if they are your vassal they are already in every war you declare or get declared upon, if they are not quite vassals they may call you, but you may not call them (unless you open the trade screen and try to make a deal for it, of course).

tl;dr having vassals in total war is not worth it because they don't work as vassals, it just adds one extra layer of dice-rolling whenever you declare a war, more often than not they just turn into additional enemies in your wars.

[RCMidas]

I'm actually expecting to see some of the diplomacy changes they're introducing in Three Kingdoms show up in Warhammer 3. Not necessarily all of them, but certain broad strokes would work well enough.