|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Apr 19, 2016 10:32:42 GMT
'Buff said, do you guys want me to include the vassal idea into the war or nah? *Vassal idea created by NetherFreek*
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Apr 19, 2016 10:37:43 GMT
I think we should test vassals, but they must have a limit, like one to one player (otherwise you end with like a ton of vassals) and they should be degraded compared to a normal country as a vassal equal in strength to a country just means controlling a third country
|
|
|
Post by Von Bismarck jr on Apr 19, 2016 13:31:14 GMT
I'd kinda prefer not to do the whole vassal thing. Never been one for making puppet states in Civ, just want more territory.
|
|
|
Post by Frederick the Great on Apr 19, 2016 14:04:44 GMT
I think it could work well if implemented well. It would mean players wouldn't been knocked out so easily but you would have to make it appealing for the conquer otherwise they would just annex instead of making a vassal. Is there somewhere that explains the vassal idea for the TWs?
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Apr 19, 2016 15:30:22 GMT
i have another idea for the tw's=vassal you can release a country you conquered into a vassal. a vassal country will start with zero tech (in end game ther can come events that will give all vassals tier 1 tech oder so). but you gain 3 turns for a vassal country, so in the end it will eventually add up. but in the beginning it wont . how do you feel about it? I believe this is what General William T. Sherman was referring to, Frederick the Great.
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Apr 19, 2016 15:44:18 GMT
I'm not voting yet, but if it's going to be incorporated into the TW11... some balancing is needed, that's for sure. If having a vassal is really incentive with excellent benefits, I don't see why a player can't have up to 3 vassals. I'm thinking of EU4 here btw, which does have a certain limit on how many diplomatic relations you are allowed to have at a time (including alliances, royal marriages, and vassals etc) I'm thinking maybe the armies of vassals cannot be controlled directly, they are more of defensive in nature without a bold valorous human leading them like a normal nation has somebody like us. I'm talking about NPCs. But things would be different with a player being a vassal though. NPC Vassals however should contribute to the controller nation with some reasonable amounts of prestige points, and likewise the vassals' points do go toward the count for BP and cities (but at a 50% rate) and the vassals have a raised level of angry people. Which makes it dicey during times of crisis as vassals could suddenly break free. A Player-controlled vassal would probably take the opportunity to break free too anyway. I'm thinking there should be a benefit for vassalize a player instead of killing him flatly. Of course, a player may prefer to be defeated instead of being a vassal to another. I think vassals is an interesting idea if there's cons and pros set up for it to give the player a chance to think about it.
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Apr 20, 2016 17:01:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Apr 20, 2016 17:08:34 GMT
4 people voted for "yay! vassals!" 2 voted for "nay vassals!"
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Apr 20, 2016 18:12:15 GMT
Vassals will be added in, but you can only have a limit of one vassals (can be raised to two in later technology.)
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Apr 20, 2016 18:19:14 GMT
Vassals will be added in, but you can only have a limit of one vassals (can be raised to two in later technology.) Have you already worked out the vassal idea?
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Apr 20, 2016 18:23:58 GMT
I am deciding between whether to use Netherfreek's idea or to incorporate your ideas along with a few of mine into the ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Apr 21, 2016 8:47:42 GMT
I think we should be able to not only make nations into vassals but also create client states.
|
|
|
Post by best75 on Apr 21, 2016 9:26:07 GMT
I want to see how this war runs as it now before more stuff is added.
|
|