diplomacy: acquiring protectorates

[CountMRVHS]

I've been playing as Dunland, trying to get Tharbad to submit to protectorate status. So far no luck.

I started a war with them early on and quickly got them down to 1 settlement, Lond Daer. The garrison consisted only of 3 FMs, and there are no other military (land) forces around as far as I can tell. Tharbad still has a small fleet, consisting of 2 ships, at least 1 Emissary, and at least 1 Scout (Spy).

I have besieged their settlement for a few decades now. I have a full stack besieging Lond Daer, and another half-stack standing in the port to blockade it (as I have no navy). I have made perhaps a half-dozen demands for submission, offering as much as 94,000 mirian, and occasionally offering back settlements. Tharbad *does* seem interested in a ceasefire (but they want me to pay over 10k for it).

Tharbad had no enemies (except me) and no allies until recently, when they allied with Adunabar. Adunabar isn't *that* strong, though, I don't think, so this misplaced sense of pride on Tharbad's part doesn't seem like it would be coming from their alliance.

So I wonder if their navy is making them feel stronger than they really are. My next goal is to get some boats together and take care of those 2 Tharbad ships, and see how that works. My treasury is close to 100k, so maybe I'll just need to offer more cash. But I wonder if those ships make the AI feel as though it has more options than it really does.


Edit: Failed to get Tharbad to submit. They were down to just one elderly faction leader, and zero other FMs or military units. I built some boats and destroyed their 2 ships. Offered them over 200,000. No dice. The FL died and faction was eliminated.

Very disappointing, that. I'm not sure what's the reasoning. I've encountered stubborn factions who eventually submitted (see Dunland and Rhun, above); apart from this Tharbad experience, though, the only faction I've consistently had trouble with getting as a protectorate is Khand (trying as both Harad and Rhun, as detailed in above posts).

Maybe some factions are simply more stubborn than others. Maybe it's other considerations - Tharbad was only at war with me, and perhaps our relations had simply deteriorated to the point where they couldn't accept. As a prelude to our war, I demanded some money; I refused, and attacked, so maybe the intimidation factor really hurt our relations. We also never had a ceasefire during our war, though they wanted one (along with territory back, which I refused). So maybe I should have taken a ceasefire and just immediately continued the war? That has worked in the past for me (see my experience as Dale).

My guess is that the AI values ceasefires pretty highly (not that it *respects* them for long, but it certainly seems to think it's worth a lot of cash and, often, settlements); maybe the boost in relations for getting a ceasefire is enough to counter the presumed damage to relations by attacking the AI after a ceasefire has been signed...

[Wambat]

I would be surprised if relations were that influential in preventing a protectorate agreement. Could you try going back to before the faction died out and giving yourself hundreds of thousands of mirian to see if they will submit at some numerical value?

[CountMRVHS]

We're testing out different builds now, so I'm afraid those saves are gone.


It *is* possible to get Tharbad as a protectorate, though. I found some notes from previous campaigns; playing as the RK, I was able to get Tharbad as a protectorate in FO 408 for almost 200,000 (less than I offered as Dunland). In that scenario, I had their last 2 towns (Tharbad & Greyholm) besieged, and the capital was within 1 turn of falling. I also offered Ethir-berain, Ridhmallen, & Southguard Fort as part of the deal. The problem was that I couldn't keep them as a protectorate; they were allied with Adunabar, and would drop protectorate status when I attacked Adun.


Also, my notes indicate that I was able (also as the RK) to get Harad as a protectorate. (Must have happened sometime in the past year, but I forgot to post about it here.)

The year was FO 451. I had Harad down to 3 towns (Parchereb, Caranbad, and Athandad), and offered them 150,000 in exchange for my Overlordship, which they accepted.

Previous to that, they had said an offer of 100k + 1 or 2 towns was too generous, and they also didn't think too much of my "Accept or we will attack" threat.

Harad was allied to Dunland (my enemy) and Adunabar (my neutral trade partner at that point); Harad was only at war with me. So they had more allies than enemies.

Unfortunately, I can't remember (and didn't write down) how many stacks/units were involved in the process, or whether all 3 of Harad's towns were under siege at the time.

[Wambat]

The notes on Tharbad do seem to suggest that relations may play a role with the protectorate proposal; is it not so that Tharbad starts with greater affinity for RK than for Dunland? Another issue may be your total power rating. As RK you may have had a much higher military ranking due to the higher quality of your units.

It is good to have these examples of protectorates being acquired with factions still holding two or three provinces. I wonder if a faction will be more amenable to the agreement if it is holding more of its homelands. There are just so many factors to consider. I do suspect that different factions have unique factors which play in their diplomacy based on the vanilla factions each faction is using.

[webba84]

Can confirm the starting relationship between RK and Tharbad is better than that between Dunland and Tharbad (though not by a huge amount). What happens to that relationship after a few dozen turns, however, is very much the open question.

[Wambat]

I would expect relations to normalize fairly quickly, and any predispositions so close to be superseded by other factors, such as war and alliance status, within the first dozen turns or so. Unfortunately, another case where we might never know.

[CountMRVHS]

Maybe *slightly* off-topic, but I wanted to report that I was playing vanilla RTW as Germania and got Dacia as a protectorate.

We had been trading for a while, and I was allied with a couple of their enemies (Thrace and Scythia). I also had the Julii, Brutii, and Macedon as allies. Dacia was allied to Britannia and a couple of other factions.

As Thrace began to get the upper hand in the war, I decided I should get a piece of the action before Dacia was wiped out. Dacia was down to 4 towns, 2 in northern Russia and the other 2 west of its initial homelands; the towns were separated from each other by Thrace's acquisitions. So I pounced on one of the towns to my south (after cancelling trade rights with Dacia) and took it. A few years went by, and I moved an army to one of Dacia's northern towns, putting it under siege.

Out of curiosity, I sent an emissary to Dacia with a blank offer of map info. They countered with Ceasefire and a demand for over 18k as well as the town I had just taken. I countered that offer with a Protectorate demand and over 44k (my entire treasury). They accepted.

At that point, Dacia still had 2 un-threatened towns, but I don't believe they had any field armies. The town I was besieging at the time contained their largest force. Probably the biggest factor was that they were under attack from multiple sides - and perhaps the fact that we were an allied coalition (me, Scythia, Thrace) all ganging up on them helped convince them further.

Dacia has been a really lame vassal, though. The turn after making them my protectorate, I got only half of my cash back - somewhat over 22k. They haven't sent me any tribute since. A look at the faction graphs indicates that they were totally broke. My 44k bumped their income up a bit, but it dropped back down to zero right afterwards. Of course, it could be that their financial situation was also a factor in their accepting of protectorate status.

This is all on a different exe than Fourth Age, obviously, but it looks like the basic principles still apply.

[Wambat]

The basic principles do apply. The major differences between the two mods are likely to be military power and income calculations. In most mods the asymmetric balancing is made with multiplayer in mind, such that any two armies with equivalent numbers of equivalent tier units will have a chance at beating one-another; DOM is not balanced in that way, so that may have a significant effect on the power balance calculations the AI may use in deciding on diplomatic proposals.

As for income, mods very wildly in that area, with some leaning toward something like 10% of settlements generating 90% of income. For Dacia to have a -22k deficit per turn, I expect the settlements you seized from Dacia to have been accounting for a tremendous amount of income for Dacia to have established a standing force that consumes that much upkeep. I expect the only way you could reliably address that is by causing Dacia to lose a lot of troops, either by war or bribery. Of course, all protectorate income will tend toward zero due to the AI always producing units until it simply cannot anymore because upkeep has consumed all its income/reserves.

[CountMRVHS]

Just got Rhun as my protectorate (playing as North Rhun).

Year is around FO 390.

This one is notable mostly because I wasn't sure if I was going to survive this campaign, let alone be in a position to get a protectorate. In terms of the general principles, it follows the (by now!) predictable pattern. I had steadily beaten Rhun back until they owned just 2 settlements: Adel and Amrun Megor (I think that's the name - the initially rebel-held settlement to the east of Lond Nurnen). I had made a couple of protectorate demands, offering ~60k and ~80k in exchange, but was rebuffed. One time I offered Amrundor (their SW settlement) back as well, but again no luck.

Finally I was able to gather 3 full stacks and concentrate them on those 2 provinces. I eliminated all of Rhun's field armies, and left the 2 settlements with small garrisons of just a few units each. I believe their only FM was their elderly faction leader, and the units they had were low- to mid-tier at best. I waited out the sieges until they had just 1 or 2 turns remaining, then found a stray Rhun Emissary. I offered my entire treasury (over 90,000 mirian) and demanded protectorate status. They accepted.

Next turn my treasury showed 135,000, so a nice profit was made.

I wonder if part of the equation involves *active* sieges. That is, I wonder if it is easier to get a faction to submit if you can keep all their settlements under siege *during negotiations*. Of course, that requires that they have an Emissary somewhere outside the town. A working hypothesis might be that the AI partly decides to submit based on whether you actually have them under siege at the time of the demand. This could explain why we (or I, anyway) sometimes have trouble getting a single-province faction to submit: I often have to lift the siege to initiate diplomacy, and then the AI perceives that it's not besieged currently anywhere in its (single-province) realm, and figures "pfft! We're not even under *siege* right now, you idiots! No way!"

If this is correct, it might be actually easier to get a multiple-province faction to be your vassal, because you could have a higher proportion of their settlements besieged even if you need to lift one siege to initiate diplomacy.

Of course, as always, a ton of money probably doesn't hurt either!

This protectorate is rather tenuous because Rhun had around 5 allies, several of which I was at war with. IIRC, Rhun was allied to Rhovanion, Dorwinion, the Beornings, Khand, and Rohan. At the time of their submission, I was allied to just Dale and the RK, and at war with Rhun, Dorwinion, and Rhovanion. I was able to keep Rhun as my protectorate next turn by attacking both Dorwinion and Rhovanion; Rhun sided with me instead of them. But if the Beornings or Rohan - both my neighbors - decide to attack me, I'll probably lose Rhun. Unless I shift some borders around, that is.


Edit: lol.

About 3 or 4 turns after getting Rhun as a protectorate, the faction was eliminated - their faction leader died and there was no heir!

So now my southern border is pretty much open. Oh well; I did get some nice profit from them anyway.


And a few turns after Rhun died off, I managed to (finally) get Dorwinion to submit. I had them sieged in Rathwin since the very early stages of the campaign, and whenever the siege was about to end, I'd lift it and offer a ceasefire or protectorate status (with cash attached). They always denied it, but I didn't mind too much since keeping Rathwin besieged seems to have kept the other AI factions in the area off my back. I have a feeling that if I had just taken Rathwin and eliminated Dorwinion, the other factions would have pounced.

So I was moving 2 full stacks up from the southern front, and as they passed through Rathwin I tried again to offer protectorate status and 100,000 mirian (the most I'd offered them). This time they agreed, probably due to the troops on their doorstep.

[Wambat]

I wonder if part of the equation involves *active* sieges. That is, I wonder if it is easier to get a faction to submit if you can keep all their settlements under siege *during negotiations*. Of course, that requires that they have an Emissary somewhere outside the town. A working hypothesis might be that the AI partly decides to submit based on whether you actually have them under siege at the time of the demand. This could explain why we (or I, anyway) sometimes have trouble getting a single-province faction to submit: I often have to lift the siege to initiate diplomacy, and then the AI perceives that it's not besieged currently anywhere in its (single-province) realm, and figures "pfft! We're not even under *siege* right now, you idiots! No way!"

From the "@05 – Protectorate" section of the Diplomacy Guide:

It is a good idea to make sure you have access to one of the faction’s emissaries so you do not need to lift a siege to initiate diplomacy.

If you are playing one of those factions with lots of inexpensive units it can be helpful to find one of the target faction's emissaries on your territory and corral it; as you might if you planned to squish it; so that you will know where to find it when the time comes. The problem with that is that cheap units are easy to bribe, and the enemy emissary might do just that. It is also frequently the case that wars will drag on for so long that the enemy emissary will die of old age.


Given the potential complications, I elected to keep the commentary on this factor in the Diplomacy Guide brief and simple. I might have included the speculation that the AI considers the proportion of its settlements under siege, as it does seem probable, but I cannot see any way of verifying that, so I elected to keep idle speculations to a minimum in the guide.

[CountMRVHS]

Just got my first protectorate in an Elven campaign. This was the Beornings, a faction I'd had my eye on as a target given their geographical position and their likelihood to attack me.

My first moves in the Anduin region were to take Andlang, north of Lorien, and leave Feorfeld and Langwyke alone. Those last 2 provinces are fiefdoms for the Elves, but they're also targets for the AI, and it takes a long time to make them productive. In my experience Adunabar throws a lot of resources at you if you take those places, and you end up fighting for decades over a barely-developed village.

So this time I left them, and took Andlang, then the Gladden Heights fort, and by then I felt secure enough to strike at the High Pass Stronghold (with help from Glorfindel). The Beornings attacked me at the Gladden Heights, which gave me the opportunity to take Oldford easily enough. (Those starting troops in the Elvenking's Halls are just about all you need to deal with the Beornings, if you add in a unit of Scouts and a unit or 2 from Lorien, plus assorted mercs for garrison duty.)

Having Oldford is great, and in my case it limited the Beornings to 2 settlements: Grimhold and Holt. I besieged Grimhold, and then got a ceasefire request. At this point I didn't have the cash or military power to force them into protectorate status - I probably had around 20k in the bank, and I didn't have any soldiers near Holt. So I decided to get a little money from them and accepted the ceasefire.

I think accepting peace deals like this will improve your relations with the AI factions. It would make sense, anyway. It certainly goes against the normal player inclination (well, mine anyway) to simply destroy the jerks who attacked you - but it might make the AI more amenable to other deals in the future, e.g. protectorate status, if you show that you can give a little. And at this point, I was happy to keep them as a submissive trading partner while I made more money and developed a bit.

Later in the campaign Rhovanion attacked the Beornings in Holt, and then the Beornings attacked me again. I'm not sure exactly *how* we ended up at war ... I suspect they stumbled into my troops in the woods, but then withdrew before the battle. Very strange. In any case, we were officially at war again, and now I had ~75,000 in my treasury, *and* they were at war with another faction on the opposite side of their realm. Perfect conditions for a protectorate.

I cleaned out their troops in the area and besieged Grimhold. Holt fell to Rhovanion, which left Grimhold as their only settlement. My besieging army was smaller than their garrison - I think I had around 3 units of Greenwood Bows, 1 unit of Galadhrim Warriors, a FM, and maybe 3 merc woodmen vs their 2 FMs and quarter- to half-stack of basic Beorning soldiery. But the Elven troops are rather intimidating to the AI, as you can see on the campaign map when the AI will often retreat from your far smaller host. I had wondered if quality of troops counted when the AI was determining whether you are a threat; thankfully, that seems to be so.

After maybe 3 or 4 turns of the siege, I was approached with a Beorning emissary with a ceasefire offer. I countered with a protectorate demand and an offer of 45,000 mirian. They accepted (grudgingly, with a 'you'll regret this' comment). Next turn I made back most (not all) of what I had paid out, and I got a small tribute the turn after that - but nothing thereafter. Makes sense - they're dirt poor, and only have the one province right now. I plan for that to change, as I am marching troops to Holt currently. I'd like to give the Beornings Holt, Thrimfeld, and the Brown Lands before it's all over - let 'em be my southern buffer.

Pretty straightforward, and one of my easier protectorate gains. I was helped, I suspect by the Beornings being at war with someone else, the intimidating nature of Elven troops, and probably also the fact that we had concluded our first war peacefully.

[Wambat]

There is good reason to believe that factions will be more likely to accept protectorate status when pressed by wars from multiple directions. I am glad you are enjoying such an interesting campaign.

[CountMRVHS]

While testing out the new rebellion mechanic as Harad, I managed to get a couple of protectorates: Harondor and Khand.

Nothing too surprising, considering the posts already in this thread. The only surprising thing was that my original goal for a protectorate was Far Harad, but I ended up accidentally wiping them out instead.

First moves were to send troops toward Far Harad's westernmost settlement. My mumakil army just held the bridge near Harondor. In previous campaigns as Harad, I've attacked Harondor ASAP; this time, I went against Far Harad first, because Harondor is easy to contain (just the one crossing into your territory, along with the naval assault they always send to Tolfalas).

I rolled up FH easily enough, taking their 2 westernmost cities, which left them with their capital and one more rebel settlement they had acquired. I needed their capital anyway, so when the opportunity arose to attack an army standing adjacent to it, thus bringing out the garrison as reinforcements, I rushed at the chance to wipe out both armies and walk into the city without a siege.

Unfortunately, in that battle all of Far Harad's family members were killed. Oops!

Harondor duly attacked me on the bridge and at Tolfalas, and I saw them off. Got them down to 2 settlements (the NW coastal one and the NE one at the Poros crossing), besieged them, marched up another army to look scary, and after a few negotiations was able to buy them as protectorates for my treasury (under 50k). They've been giving me some decent cash ever since.

That was the straightforward protectorate, though - I still wanted to have another puppet state on my eastern flank.

So I attacked Khand. Attacking Khand was also necessary because Harondor & Khand were allied. If I waited until Khand attacked me first, Harondor would wriggle out of their protectorate agreement. But if I was the aggressor, they'd stay with me, and that's what happened.

It took me some time to subdue Khand, although I had lots of troops in the area. They offered ceasefire twice, and I took it on both occasions (with cash), again thinking that "good faith" agreements like ceasefires seem to prime the AI to accept other diplomatic overtures. Additionally, the ceasefires allowed me to ally with Rhun - Khand's only ally - and thus, when I attacked Khand a few turns later, strip them of Rhun's support.

I had 3+ stacks moving in Khand's territory when they submitted. I had taken from them Parchereb (a nice grab in 3.3 due to the unique Tribesmen that can be trained there - and necessary for Harad anyway for strategic reasons) and Caras Agar, then managed to get an army to besiege Naur-imloth, Lhug, and Acharn (their capital). Lhug fell to starvation, so I moved that entire army toward the last remaining Khandian city, Muldin. With the army standing just adjacent to Muldin, and Khand's other 2 cities under siege and close to falling, I made my offer: 85,000 mirian plus Lhug back (public order in Lhug was terrible but it hadn't rebelled yet). Khand accepted.

I'm now making crazy amounts of money, probably because my protectorates have their infrastructure largely intact.


So this seems to suggest that, as I think I've supposed elsewhere, the AI might be *more* amenable to protectorate status if they have a few cities left. It seems to grease the wheels a bit if you accept ceasefires now & then.

I was happy to get Khand - I remember previous campaigns where they seemed particularly stubborn. Now the question is, what next? Both flanks are secure. I guess I should finish attacking Gondor... but part of me wants to sail up to the mouth of the Isen and burn my way toward Edoras.

Or, hmm, maybe an invasion of Dwarven lands would be fun? Set up the Black Serpent banner over Erebor ...

[Wambat]

This makes me wonder if there is a military strength to territory ratio that the AI considers when protectorate status is proposed. Perhaps by reducing the enemy's territory one is working against oneself because fewer territories make the AI faction feel it needs fewer armies to remain viable. That would be clever.

[CountMRVHS]

Yeah, a ratio like that seems quite probable. It also occurs to me that, on the one occasion I know of where a dev weighed in on the mechanic (back before BI), his example involved an enemy faction holding *multiple* settlements.

If that's true, it's funny how the psychology of (apparently) most gamers has made the protectorate mechanic super elusive: rather than beating the AI into submission in the field and besieging their towns, we're taking their towns and then only considering mercy when they're down to one final settlement.

[athanaric]

In my current Dwarven campaign, Dale has forced a peace deal between myself and NR twice, by making the latter a protectorate. I think that's because in Dwarven campaign mode, Dale is set to not actively attacking other factions at all (like the Elves), which in my case caused them to eventually have gigantic armies milling about their starting territory.

[CountMRVHS]

Interesting.... I never would have thought a passive AI Dale would get a protectorate! Did they actually take any of NR's territory (from bribery, e.g.)?

[athanaric]

Interesting.... I never would have thought a passive AI Dale would get a protectorate! Did they actually take any of NR's territory (from bribery, e.g.)?

Only the ones I'd given them. Early on they also retook Eodor from NR, I don't remember how that happened though. I have seen AI Dwarves and Elves bribe hostile provinces with some regularity, but rarely if ever acquiring protectorates.