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
In remastered settings the AI is supposed to offer to become protectorates in order to save themselves from utter destruction. I've seen it happen a couple of times, but it's still too little and too late. The only times I've seen it is when the enemy is down to one city and they basically always ask to get back all of their lost settelements, which is a ♥♥♥♥ deal for the player faction and thus pointless.
in VH campaign map there should be a theoretical gain to have a protectorate between you and another faction since as soon as you share borders with a faction they will always declare war and having that faction in between could potentially delay that for a while. In practice, it doesn't work and is thus pointless and you're just asking for a stab in the back.
I love the idea, but the execution is still to wonky to work so I prefer to annihilate instead. Perhaps playing a more "RP" playthrough I'd consider to try it, but only on Medium campaign AI though, anything higher will make the AI break any deals with the player faction anyways, even when it's detrimental to themselves.
There really ought to be some kind of lock on it. Not a permanent one but, something along the lines of Crusader Kings II, EUIV etc. that they can't just break off from being a protectorate as easily as they do. Maybe a civil disorder mechanic (so, if the settlement enters disorder, or the ruler dies or something, then it can change, to simulate regime change)
Just spitballing, as it were, but something to prevent these 1 or 2 turn heel-face-turns that render the whole system pointless.
I find that when I am at a massive advantage they won't break it, but in the mid-game if I try to protectorate my first few rivals they will betray me and force me to reconquer them.
Asking for protection from a superior enemy (Roman family, Egypt, etc) on the other hand is crazy-useful. Weighed very highly on the negotiation screen, easy to break out of when you feel like it, instant peace and allied status with them and minimal impact on your economy while you murderize your other enemies first. The only real danger is that you accidentally win the game for them when you add your settlement count to theirs, otherwise its a really powerful move when you're struggling and lets you park entire armies next to their biggest settlements with no resistance before your betrayal.
Germany was annihilated because their remaining faction was way too far for me to protect. and so was Spain's but they somehow managed to survive, probably because Gaul was focusing on me a lot. However, Spain came back a while later to end the Protectorate status (to which I countered with "Protectorate Ultimatum" when means "remain my protectorate or I will attack you", they chose war.
Funny thing is, IIRC, I was not at war with the factions threatening Germany and Spain with annihilation, and they did not ask me to attack those factions when they became my protectorates.
Also I gained no denarii when they became my protectorates because they were already bankrupt.
This game needs to tune enemy AI to disband units when they have way too many just getting paid to sit around.
So...
I have discovered the "settlements counting towards the total" thing with Protectorates, and I find it very useful in getting to 50. However, I have not observed all of your protectorates settlements counting. From what I have been able to figure out, it seems like all of their Large and Huge Cities, plus their capital (if it is not a large or huge city) count. But there are a couple of exceptions.
For Example: Britannia can only get as high as minor cities. So, all of their minor cities count (and their capital if it is not a minor city).
But I have had trouble once or twice with this formula not quite working out.
Just to test my theory, I used a cheat on a campaign I had already completed to force diplomacy with everyone. Egypt, Thrace, and Britannia, followed these rules, but Armenia and Parthia did not.
Armenia had something like 2 Large Cities, and 5 minor cities (one of which was their capital), but they contributed a total of 5 settlements to my total. I then cheated again to force them to give me all of their cities except their capital, and I still got 2 settlements from them to contribute to my total (I assume their capital and one of their towns). I then started giving them their cities back a few at a time, and again, some of them counted, others did not.
Parthia, on the other hand, only had one city total when I made them a protectorate (their capital which was a minor city) and it did not count towards my total. I then gave them a Large City, and it did count towards my total.
There were no other surviving factions to continue testing my Theory, so I cannot explain this inconsistency with the formula I have observed for every other faction in the game.
Bottom line...
for most of the factions, any Large or Huge city (and their capital if it is not a large or huge city) counts towards your total number of controlled regions. If a faction cannot build Large or Huge Cities (i.e. Britannia), then their largest possible settlements count towards your total number of controlled regions.
If you have evidence of this theory not being true, or if you can explain the inconsistencies I had with Armenia and Parthia, please let me know!!!