diplomacy: acquiring protectorates

[Wambat]

Elsewhere I read a handy little insight into diplomacy:

AI may accept settlements as gifts if you have troops inside the settlement, but not if you have troops outside the settlement, but (probably anywhere) inside the province. This insight has finally made useful to me a diplomacy option I had long given up as useless.

I am hoping to encourage anyone who has experience successfully acquiring protectorates (not using forced diplomacy) to describe in some detail the circumstances of negotiation. Please let us know about any instance using the BI engine, not just this mod. With any luck we may discover whatever counter intuitive requirements the AI has been programmed with and enjoy more interesting campaigns in future.

Much thanks to all contributors. Feel free to provide links if you know of other threads which can shed light on this topic.

[CountMRVHS]

Great topic; thanks for doing this.

We know the AI factions can and do acquiesce to a protectorate demand - most often, though, it's to another AI faction. One question could be, what are the AI factions that get protectorates doing that we as the players aren't doing?

Will be back shortly to list some old (and possibly not very useful) info/speculation on protectorates. At least it'll be a starting point.

Alright, a couple of links. This first one is to a diplomacy guide for RTW that goes back to 2004 (author Tamur). Actually, the link takes you to a totalwar.org thread, the first post of which has a link to the pdf of this guide. The rest of the thread also contains discussion that may be relevant: http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...-Initial-Guide

(This (another org link) doesn't have info on protectorates, but some stuff on bribery: http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...otal-War-Guide)

And finally, this is a link to a blog about Medieval 2: http://t-a-w.blogspot.com/2009/11/wh...edieval-2.html Why is it relevant? Well, I'm not positive, but I suspect that some of the diplomacy mechanics in RTW were recycled for M2. If you've played M2, you probably know that diplomacy in that game is easier to work in your favor, partly because the system is made explicit: you get to see other factions' priorities and, most importantly, opinion of you. RTW doesn't list those factors, but they could be present. It's an interesting read, anyway, and worth testing out if the M2 methods for increasing your global reputation (which makes diplomatic maneuvers, such as getting protectorates, easier) can be used for RTW.


From Tamur's guide, I find this quote from a CA dev about protectorates: “To temptthe faction into submission you need to be at war with them, threaten themquite severely, particularly by massing extensive troops on their borders, blockading their ports and putting the entire faction under pressure. Oncethat's in place, the faction should be more amenable to subjugation.”

However, to tie this back in to the M2 thing, I suspect that there is another element here, and that is factional standing, or reputation - whatever you want to call it, your faction's trustworthiness in the eyes of the other factions. I've definitely gotten protectorates in M2, and it involves playing a 'chivalrous' game - Occupy cities, don't Exterminate; don't start wars; get allies; don't drop alliances; etc. etc. (other criteria for trustworthiness in M2 are mentioned in that 3rd link above). So perhaps a way to get protectorates in RTW (and, by extension, RTW mods) is to pretend you're playing M2, and try to develop your (invisible) global rep.

[Nelduin]

I myself never managed to get a protectorates in any RTW game, except one time. But that faction attacked me only a few turns later, with absolutely no reason.

[athanaric]

Elsewhere I read a handy little insight into diplomacy:

AI may accept settlements as gifts if you have troops inside the settlement, but not if you have troops outside the settlement, but (probably anywhere) inside the province. This insight has finally made useful to me a diplomacy option I had long given up as useless.

Yes, I seem to remember that I put this in the guide thread

I am hoping to encourage anyone who has experience successfully acquiring protectorates (not using forced diplomacy) to describe in some detail the circumstances of negotiation. Please let us know about any instance using the BI engine, not just this mod. With any luck we may discover whatever counter intuitive requirements the AI has been programmed with and enjoy more interesting campaigns in future.

No luck so far with protectorates specifically, but I've noticed that the AI tends to be more amicable if you offer a sum upwards of 1 million mirian along with your demands.

[Wambat]

If you've played M2, you probably know that diplomacy in that game is easier to work in your favor, partly because the system is made explicit: you get to see other factions' priorities and, most importantly, opinion of you. RTW doesn't list those factors, but they could be present.

The AI factions do have opinions of the players faction which, no doubt, develop as the game progresses according to player actions. Though the game does not display this information, it must be recorded. Perhaps there might be some way of extracting this information to a spreadsheet from saved game files. Thus a player could consult the spread sheet each turn.

Yes, I seem to remember that I put this in the guide thread

I am glad you showed up. I was too lazy to figure out what thread I had seen that tidbit on. It is amazing how one can still learn new things about this game ten years down the line.

[CountMRVHS]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...-Protectorates

Some more potential tips here. One poster in this thread reports success at forcing Gaul to become his protectorate (he was playing Germany) after allying with the Romans and Spain, both of whom also attacked Gaul - suggesting that the AI is 'intimidated' enough to accept protectorate status, either by the multi-front war or the combined strength of the alliance bloc. (I suspect, though I'm not positive, that the AI may think in terms of 'coalitions' rather than just single factions when it comes to determining whether they need to ally with you, etc.)

Another poster mentioned getting very easy (and repeated) protectorate status from Dacia after very short wars - just blockading a port, then Dacia asks for ceasefire, then the player counters with protectorate, which is accepted. This, to my mind, is some evidence that protectorates are easier to acquire early in a game/war because you haven't had enough time to tarnish your reputation (by exterminating settlements, trespassing, dropping alliances, etc.)

In that thread, Blatta also links to InfernoCanuck's YouTube channel, where that player apparently got some success acquiring protectorates playing as Sparta in the Rise of Persia mod. Haven't seen the vids myself, but maybe worth a look.

----

For completeness: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...saled-the-Pope

This is a thread on getting vassals in M2, but again, if the diplomatic systems are similar, we may learn something.

----

Found this bit on rtw.heavengames:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Alright turning a faction into your protectorate nation is a little tricky and I worked out a way to do the same. Now lets assume we want to turn Hispania into a protectorate.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

First of all study their alliance, now having done this send a troop marching on OSCA while at the same time send another troop marching on the weakest faction allied to Hispania. Lay siege to the capital of the weakest allied faction and start negotiating terms with Carthago Nova. Here timing is important, you should have a major garrison at Narbo Mauritius and a huge army right next to OSCA.

My Observations have shown that, the weakest faction goes to your capital seeking peace/cease fire, using which you can extract tribute from if you wish to or else continue the siege. When our diplomat negotiates with Hispania at this time, chances of Hispania turning into our protectorate is ~90%.

Reason, the weakest of the allies turns neutral towards Hispania while we lay siege to their capital and negotiate with Hispania. They prefer us not attacking them. or even better is to have a spanish strong hold of our own, lets say Numantia.

The idea here seems to be that factions are sensitive to attacks on their allies (perhaps some evidence that factions think in terms of coalitions). Threatening and separating them from their allies may make them more amenable to a protectorate status. A 'coalition mentality' may possibly explain why severely weakened factions are so averse to submission - if they're still allied to strong factions, they may feel safe and strong themselves.

------

Another poster from twc (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?51192-How-to-make-other-factions-a-protectorate):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I made 2 protectorates in my current campaign on easy or medium difficulty. I actually find it pretty easy. All you need to do is hage greater army, not huge but just like 5-6 000 men close to the enemy positions. Maybe besiege 1-2 settlements and kill lots of infantry on the field. When the enemy asks for ceasefire i counteroffer for him demanding to be my protectorate. And he accepts not even wanting denarii or if he wants he need only like 3000 denarii - Macedon is example. Also they had army that could defend them good like 2000-3000 men but knew I was a lot more powerful. I suppose it has a lot to do with your current controlled regions like I had 30+ or/and if they have enemies that crush them and need protection. However Spain didn't become protectorate even offering them cities but they knew I would eventually take them back if I wanted to.

Main points: kill enemy in the field, have large armies near enemy positions, wait for the enemy to ask for ceasefire, counteroffer with protectorate. Offer cash if necessary. Seems also to be related to relative strength (poster had 30+ regions). The enemy asking for a ceasefire is always a good sign that you can get what you want.

[webba84]

This is some interesting research, Id never considered that the ai was set up the consider the strength of its alliances as a whole, rather than just itself.

[demagogos nicator]

It does not have to be true at all but I always had a feeling that diplomatic AI is way more peace-wanting towards the human player in vanila RTW than in vanila BI or its mods. Especially as one of the Roman factions but also as Britons and Seleucids I had several campaigns where I get advantageous peace with neighbouring factions really easilly despite they had more regions then I did. I can not remember whether I ever attemted to gain protectorate (I have not played vanila RTW for 6 years). When I thinking about it now in the light of the abovementionet theory it may have been caused that in vanila RTW when playing Rome you have at least three other roman factions to fighting the common enemy which may influence enemy AI to be more willing to accept peace or protectorate proposals.

[CountMRVHS]

That's a good point about the Romans. And if true, it has implications for FATW as well! Dale, the Dwarves, RK, Rohan - and then the factions that begin the game as allies (Khand, Rhun, Adunabar, Dunland, Beornings, Elves).

[Wambat]

(This (another org link) doesn't have info on protectorates, but some stuff on bribery: http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...otal-War-Guide)

Obtain Surrender The Senate feels that a faction has been weakened enough to make forcing surrender a realistic option. Send a diplomat and demand that they become a Protectorate under Roman control. Note: Guy Davidson from CA has said, "This mission is only issued if the target faction has less than 4 settlements and less than 5 family members and the Senate is at war with them."

The passage about the Senate Mission requiring you to acquire a protectorate suggests that CA did intend for this to be possible for the casual user. It might also suggest that CA had the Roman factions in mind when balancing for the protectorate option.


Some contributions from my current campaign: I restored from before snuffing out Harondor and tried a few experiments, all failures.


1) I tried besieging their last settlement and demanding protectorate, with and without threat of attack, at one two and three turns after our last battle.


2) I tried removing my armies to my side of the border and demanding as above.


3) I tried placing a good sized army on their last land trade route (with Harad) and demanding as above.


There are several factors which may be contributing to this failure:


a) The armies I have locally are not ranked as sufficiently powerful enough to properly intimidate Harondor. I am using an army of tier 1 and 2 units to finish them off while my more advanced units are on Harad’s coast.


b) My reputation is too poor/I am not well enough trusted by factions at large. I have been aggressively milking other factions for money in exchange for map/trade/attacking factions I plan to attack anyway. Making so much money off these other factions may be ticking them off. Only Dale, Rohan and the Beornings do not call me a “lying liar who lies through his lie hole” every time I talk to them. After reading the MTW info I am suspecting my regular expulsion of populations. The RTW discussions consistently recommend occupy and disparage exterminate, but say nothing of enslave, which should be the equivalent of expel in DOM. And then there is the MTW mechanic wherein one’s reputation gradually erodes (at higher difficulties) if you make no positive action to counteract this effect.


c) Harondor has an alliance with Far Harad. I don’t know if there is some way to force the breaking of that alliance to see if it makes a difference.


d) Harondor still has trade. I am not sure if I do not have to cut off all foreign trade entirely to place a faction in the mood to accept protectorate status. Unfortunately, Rad Harnen still has a land route to Harad and I am not sure placing an army on that road is sufficient to block all trade. It might be necessary to capture the Harad settlement Rad Harnen is still trading with.

I am attaching a saved game file. This is the beginning of the turn in which I eradicate Harondor. If somebody can figure out how to make Harondor a protectorate from this point it might just crack the code. If there is a way to reset AI attitudes through a line command or such this might reveal an underlying problem. I know you can use line commands to grant units, so maybe dropping a bunch of tier 3 & 4 units on Harondor’s border will do the trick. I don’t know how to break the alliance between Harondor and Far Harad; forced diplomacy could be used to give RK an alliance with all other factions, perhaps outweighing the effects of Harondor’s alliance. Let us know if you have any luck.
rk016.01.zip

[CountMRVHS]

I don't know of any way to reset AI relations/attitudes, but then I don't know a lot of the command codes.

Have you tried offering back some of their settlements, or a large cash sum? I know, it seems ridiculous, but that might be the only way to get it.

You also might just be too far along in your war with them for it to work. Found another post (this one from 10 years ago, though, so it could possibly be before some patches) - http://comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strateg...-protectorates

Relevant bit:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

You need to humiliate them not corner them. Also protectorate is
only useful for places like Briton where they rebel a lot when
you conquer them.

Essentially if you play the game by following the senate missions
you'll see that the senate will conquer half an enemy, blockade
all its ports, and then ask one of the roman factions to demand
they become a protectorate.

I've done it with Briton. I didn't conquer them just pushed them
back to the island, and laid seige on the remaining cities. They
agreed to become a protectorate then.

Don't corner them. Humiliate them.

[Wambat]

Thank you Count. I am starting my RK campaign again. I will try this time not expelling, giving more gifts to increase my standings with other factions, working on acquiring more allies and offering protectorate without taking every city first. I still hope that saved game places someone in a good position to try acquiring a protectorate, and I will post other saved games that I think are in good position to pursue a protectorate.

[CountMRVHS]

Diplomacy seems to cost a lot of money to have a chance at being effective - which is difficult for the RK, since they tend to be poor early on.

If I were to try a faction specifically for the purpose of seeking protectorates, I might choose Dale. They can be very wealthy, have a great defensive position, and there are a lot of nearby small factions that you will get into early wars with - plenty of chances to try out diplomacy!

[Wambat]

At turn 18 I had a balance of some 140,000 as RK. I expect I can manage. Anyway, it is necessary for psychological reasons: I want to play RK.

I wouldn't mind making a competition of it. If anybody wants to take up another faction and we can see which one of us gets a protectorate first. I have to agree that Dale is likely the ideal candidate in this mod.

[CountMRVHS]

140k! Wow, I've never seen that much as the RK. I'm around 20 turns in a campaign with them currently. Haven't done any map info selling (I've read that it makes the AI more likely to attack you, since it can 'see' your territories... not sure if that's true), but I do like to see what I can get out of Harad for a ceasefire.

[Wambat]

Harad will often pay quite well for a ceasefire; they will often pay you well for an alliance as well; they have, however, no qualms about using that ceasefire to plant armies on your coast, unless they have pressing business elsewhere. I would try to maneuver them into war with their other neighbors before offering them terms. Having them at war with Harondor might be a much better position to press Harondor into becoming a protectorate

[CountMRVHS]

Yes, it would probably be better to have your target faction at war with someone else in addition to you.

As for Harad, they're pretty consistently at war with both Harondor and Far Harad (who are allied), usually just a few turns into the game. The war ends when Far Harad and then Harondor (in that order, usually) get eliminated. Then it's war between Harad and Khand.

Hmm. Maybe Harad would be a better target to try a protectorate on, actually... if you can build up your navy to blockade their ports, and then wait until they're at war with the other Haradrian factions (ideally after Harondor has taken Ur)...

You might also consider taking some coastal Haradrian towns and gifting them to Harondor before asking for protectorate status.

I'm thinking the fact that, 1) Harad doesn't border you, and 2) they usually seem eager for ceasefire might mean that you'd have a better chance with them.

Also, found a post on reddit that suggests the system in RTW and M2 is essentially the same. (Like all of this info, I'm not sure how reliable it is, but may as well gather all of this stuff in this thread) : https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/co...rtw_diplomacy/

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Here's RTW/MTWII diplomacy.
You have a hidden "relationship score" with each faction. At specific thresholds the AI will allow you do perform various deals.
Specific actions raise or lower this score. Anything "positive" boosts it, but its been years since I looked up hard numbers. Trade rights, selling map info, becoming protectorate, trading regions, and ceasefire all raise relationships. Giving money in tributes also adds relations relative to the amount of money.
Going to war, breaking agreements, allying with nations the AI is at war with, and failed negotiations (any time the AI gets mad and closes the diplo window on you) all lower relations.
Heres the problem. You also passively lose relations with every AI that has a land border with you. Its to represent territorial hostilities. This means neighbors end up in a perpetual state of war. You can "appease" neighbors to offset this, mostly by giving them tributes, but eventually they will go to war, even if they are allied.
They may go to war earlier or later based on your military strength relative to theres. They may also go to war if pushed to by Alliance politics.
So what does all this mean? It means the AI is retarded. Dont seriously expect lasting alliances, from ai, or between ais. Just expect and endless state of chaos with occasional peace treaties. Also, Protectorates. They are very difficult to acquire, and not very benefitial. You get a portion of the protectorates tax income (20%?) and have alliance and military access with them. However, the AI will still have very low relations with you, because to even get them to agree to protectorate they must be thoroughly beaten into a pulp first.
So Protectorates betray their masters at the drop of a hat, making it far better to just wipe them out and be rid of them.
As for your alliance comment, go for it. It wont really help. AIs are far more likely to break alliances than join you in war, so you might have 5 allies, but 4 of them jump ship when a random neighbor declares war.

-----------

Edit: I've been watching that video series by InfernoCanuck in which he plays Sparta in the Rise of Persia mod (RTW, probably not BI now that I think of it, but likely the same in terms of how diplomacy plays out). It's episode 64 where he finally acquires a protectorate (around 9:45 minutes in) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh8N...22F4CB400E3B7F

Now, the lead-up to this was that he (Sparta) had been involved in a war with Macedon. He enslaved their cities, so that seems not to have mattered. At one point, he paid out 30,000 for a ceasefire, and then managed to get them as allies. I believe he also gave a town of theirs back as part of these deals.

As the game progressed, the Macedonians eventually dropped the alliance, and then he (or they - can't remember) re-started the war. At this point, they had 2 towns left. He blockaded both ports and besieged both towns with large armies.

One of the Macedonian towns (not the capital) sallied; he won, taking the town and leaving them with just their faction leader in the capital, which was also besieged. He left it under siege, and then, just before it fell, he lifted the siege and sent in a diplomat, offering the following:

-Become Protectorate
-We will give ~47,000 (it was his entire treasury)
-We will give (the city he had just taken)

And they accepted.

The conditions were roughly this:

-the Macedons had a single town with a tiny garrison
-there was a large Spartan army just outside the town (that had been sieging them)
-their only port was blockaded

And, IIRC, they were actually allied at the time (to a faction the Spartans were also at war with).

Unfortunately, the exact exchange happened off-screen in this case. So, like Bigfoot, UFOs, and unicorns, no one has video of actually getting a protectorate.

[Wambat]

The Macedon scenario gives me greater hope that the saved game could be be used to bring about a protectorate. Perhaps all that needs to be done is to lift the siege and wait for Harondor to send out an army to crush.

[Stark1]

Long long time ago a friend got a protectorate when both parties in deal became protectorates of one another. More food for thought

[webba84]

The overwhelming impression I'm getting here is that the workings of the RTW AI are utterly alien to the human mind, and it's better to just kill them all...