Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Only thing I've seen to do this is make sure you're trading with him. Your relations are as high as possible, blood relationships help, and help them in wars. Other than that, spies are your best bet.
DPs are "owned" by the initiating diplomat. Send a spy to the kingdom that diplomat belongs to and wait for an opportunity to bribe/murder/otherwise remove him. That causes the defensive pact to collapse.
If you want to implode a pact, you have to either kill the diplomat that is hosting it with a spy or compromise the host nation in some way.
I noticed that they more likely to form DP when you are small and weak.
And when you grow, and becoming a real threat, they simply afraid to form pacts against you.
Your relationship with them doesn't matter.
As well as trade, etc. Only your influence.
Usually my best friends hosting DP against me. Those, who I'm helping the most.
It was funny when all my neighbors formed DP against me. Despite I had one province and not much of an army, and they all superpowers
Haha, I think it's fair enough. The enemy AI can form/join a pact against you if it thinks you might attack it, and it's right lol
Factions won't drop from the pact if you ask so you can simply attack it, and that's probably a good idea too
"Hey guys. You mind juuuuuust kicking Poland out for a minute? For reasons. Totally not going to attack it or anything. I just wanna check something"
Not really a diplomatic option
You don't ask the annexed for permission, it is by definition a unilateral declaration of sovereignty.
As such you need to take the land by force or by other means to annex it, there should not be an option to agree with the "victim".
When the target agrees to the "annexation" that's cession. You can achieve that through the diplomacy interface in the game, subject to its rules.
imo where cession exists in a game and is called "annexation" that is only a game mechanic choice, not a thing from the real world that is needed for accuracy. Annexation only really makes sense as a diplomatic option if the competitors are agreeing among themselves who annexes the territory or something.
What part of "I don't want to go to war with my friend" is so hard to understand?
Not what I'm asking about. Good grief.
You clearly don't understand anything I'm asking about. Have you never played a Paradox game? Or most other strategy games? There are usually ways to diplomatically annex a vassal. The lack of that option here is ridiculous. And you're just as ridiculous for acting like it's normal.
Again, it makes NO SENSE that I should have to go to war with my one province vassal to annex him. I should be able to say, "I'm annexing you now" and that's that.
No, you can't. It's literally not an option.
Richon... I said it once. You're replying to ONE POST. There's no "hard to understand" or "good grief" here, you've broken one paragraph in 3 and treated it as 3 repetitions.
That weirdness aside, here's a quote from your OP at the top of this thread where you say you want to dissolve the defensive pact so you can attack one of its members, lol:
So I guess my fairly light-hearted comments actually stand in their entirety.
The fact you can't just ask the AI to dissolve a defensive pact against you so you can attack one of its signatories with impunity is probably fair enough. It's a good thing. An AI faction joined a pact to stop you attacking them easily; It is stopping you attacking them easily. Feature is presumably working as intended.
Doesn't stop you taking another way around. As another user pointed out, and this is the way I would attempt this - one solution would be to send a spy to infiltrate and deal with the diplomat that maintains the treaty, as it will instantly dissolve without them.
You could also try to use the ruin relations feature to sow disharmony factions - some actions will cause a faction to exit from the pact, although I'm not sure how fast/effective it would be trying to do that via Ruin Relations.
Yes, I've played the paradox strategies, Total War, and a great long list of other strategy and/or war games.
"Annexation as a treaty with the victim" is a wart where it exists, and if the reason to have it in Sovereign is so it can be a better pdx clone well, this isn't striving to be a clone of those games.
It's nothing to to with Crusader Kings. It's nothing to do with Total War. Sovereign doesn't have to do things in the same way as either.
I mean you can say that if you like. You'll still have to annex the territory in the game, though. The only people you should be making treaties with regarding the annexation, is third parties that might step in.
Not sure why you think you have to go to war to do it. You don't. You can take land from a faction by force, yes, but you can take it by claims, you can take it by installing a puppet king, sympathetic rebellions, assassinations, and so on.
You can do cession via the "Demand" part of the diplomacy interface, but as I said before, you can only do that subject to the rules of the game.
Perhaps you want a mod where the demand lands feature works without resistance for a vassal - ie they just cede the territory without a fight or compensation.
I wouldn't like this personally as it'd feel a bit cheaty to me, but would that achieve what you want?
In addition: The idea that you can just declare annexation of a vassal is a severe misunderstanding of what vassalage is - a misunderstanding that likely stems from the fact that most people have a post-Westphalian-Treaty, i.e. territorial concept of statehood nowadays in contrast to the interpersonal concept of earlier times. But a vassal is not just a dependent subadministration of an otherwise centralised entity that can just be disbanded at whim. A vassal is a ruler in their own right that is linked to their suzerain (not sovereign, ironically :P ) by a web of mutual duties. The ruler's authority over the vassal only extends so far as they respect their vassal's own rights and their duties towards the vassal.
In the very moment that a ruler would try to openly annex a vassal they'd be violating their duties to them and as such forfeiting the very authority over them by which they tried to annex them. Hence, why the game only allows for annexation in sneak ways using spies and puppet kings.