Dynamic Vassals

[EU3NOOB]

I think vassals should be as dynamic as they are in CKII. In CKII Vassals can declare independence. That'd be awesome, but it shouldn't be without rhyme or reason. You should be able to dynamically set tribute for each of your vassals. Low tribute will(naturally) get you less money but it would also keep that vassal happy and another side-effect will have more money to spend on their military making them good allies in a war. High tribute will increase the likelihood of their declaring independence. Also if you suffer a major loss in a war(i.e. lose territory or lose a large percentage of your army), have high WE and negative stability and high revolt risk then that increases the likelihood of vassals declaring independence, but there's got to be really low relations first.

 

[justin6477]

I would like this, but I'd also like different sliders regarding tribute.

Maybe I'm a playing a wealthy nation, but I don't have a massive population. I may prefer to demand levies or manpower from a vassal rather than actual gold. For example, if I'm Venice and control Crete and Cyprus for example. I'll be gaining money by way of trade routes, I don't need local production income. I do however need men to row my damned boats.

 

[Tornadoli]

It would be cool to have vassals make "secret" coalitions, and attack you all at once to declare independence. It would add another factor, and might discourage large number of vassals.

 

[SchwarzKatze]

Shameless self-quoting another thread:

I think it can be simulated by decision chains that demands more and more concessions/rights from a vassal, if a vassal decided "it's too much!" then it will be a (maybe) CK2-sque tyranny war, but doing so will cause unrest in other vassal states and they might join the cause and/or more difficult to demand vassalization. In addition vassals should be able to conduct "secret diplomacy" with other countries but if caught will be demanded further concession(without provoking unrest) or even(maybe) a demand of annexation.

 

[Blaaat]

I always thought it was weird that vassals in the EU games never broke free from their masters even if they had -200 relations with said master.

 

[Spurius]

A similar system could also work well for colonies.

 

[AlHasanAlbaghdadi]

A similar system could also work well for colonies.

Seconded
but the problem is that this system would tie EU and CK franchises even closer

 

[JesterCorp1990]

Seconded
but the problem is that this system would tie EU and CK franchises even closer

This. Personally, I love playing an OPM who has managed to gain large vassals whom they force to fight wars for them. I remember playing as Ulm once, I vassalized Brunswick, Hesse, and Thuringia. I sold those three vassals every province I claimed and eventually, they had about 10-15 provinces each. From then on, I held a garrison of 5,000 troops and simply focused on my economy and becoming rich. My super vassals took care of my wars. A more dynamic vassal system could ruin things like that and really, it was historically accurate. I remember in the prime of the Persian Empire, only a small portion of the Persian armies were actually Persian. The bulk of their armies were slaves and soldiers of the lands they conquered, or "vassals". While Persia had all the money and funded the wars and equipment, the other Empires funded the soldiers who would go to their deaths.

 

[MrQwerty]

I always thought it was weird that vassals in the EU games never broke free from their masters even if they had -200 relations with said master.

Then how about if a vassal's relation with his or her master is low, then less money should be paid, like in CKII? If relations are between -100 and -200 (If there will be -200 relations), then the vassal should be much more likely to declare independence when the ruling country is weakened. This would be about as far as I go, since vassals in EU4 should still take less priority.

 

[flame7926]

This. Personally, I love playing an OPM who has managed to gain large vassals whom they force to fight wars for them. I remember playing as Ulm once, I vassalized Brunswick, Hesse, and Thuringia. I sold those three vassals every province I claimed and eventually, they had about 10-15 provinces each. From then on, I held a garrison of 5,000 troops and simply focused on my economy and becoming rich. My super vassals took care of my wars. A more dynamic vassal system could ruin things like that and really, it was historically accurate. I remember in the prime of the Persian Empire, only a small portion of the Persian armies were actually Persian. The bulk of their armies were slaves and soldiers of the lands they conquered, or "vassals". While Persia had all the money and funded the wars and equipment, the other Empires funded the soldiers who would go to their deaths.

That was thousands of years before EU time period. In this period, in Europe definately, the vassals would try to break free, if it was simply vassalage, and they were a lot stronger.

 

[unmerged(353072)]

Just to let people know vassals can declare independence from you. You just need the dishonorable scum and low relations. Had this happen in my Germany game lost about 5 vassals. Though, I do at least wish they tried to get independence more depending on your relation with them. Also, it would be cool if you could tell them where to concentrate their war efforts. Like telling them to focus their men on France or Milan.