Quite strange bug

[Per Ole]

Anyone else had this bug? I got a mission to annex a settlement, took it and then I get mission failed:
https://img59.imageshack.us/img59/6600/missionbuglg2.jpg

[Didz]

Hi Per Ole,

This occurs when the game gives you a diplomatic mission to annex a settlement and you respond by sending an army. A similar result occurs if the game gives you a mission to murder an enemy general with an assassin and you kill them in battle instead.

Not so much a bug as a stubborn attitude towards the method used to acheive the goal.

[Per Ole]

my bad, sorry :P

[Budwise]

I think its a little extreme as well but I believe its there to expand your playing style. For instance to assasinate a person you could just kill them in battle but by assasinating him you would have to apply other tactics to do it.

[WhiskeyGhost]

if only they could add in a ton of new quests, like perhaps some spy missions, or some "Defeat this Enemy Army" kinds would be nice too. Of course, it would also be neat to see a "Soldiers demand a brothel in XXX" which if failed would result in a penalty of losing some troops garrisoned there :laugh4:

[hoetje]

I totally agree Whiskeyghost,however we might get into a situation then where we are fully dependant to these quest and become 'slaves' of the game... I just mean we might lose our freedom, our own chosen style of playing,when the game bombards us with tons of quests like that.

But still,it's a good idea that should give CA people food for thought :)

[Slug For A Butt]

@WhiskeyGhost. I personally think that is a fine idea. more interesting too than the Council Of Nobles (or whatever they are called) telling you take a settlement or they'll be displeased with you. More tangible results if you succeed or fail, I like it.

[Philbert]

What exactly does 'annex it' mean, when it doesn't mean take it?

[Didz]

What exactly does 'annex it' mean, when it doesn't mean take it?
annex to seize territory by conquest or occupation, to take without permission, to join or add something to something larger. [Latin: annectere - to attach]

The key point here though is that this is a diplomatic mission, therefore it expects the mission to be completed by a diplomat.

[Philbert]

So it means you need to bribe the settlement? Or can you also buy it from the faction?

[Didz]

So it means you need to bribe the settlement? Or can you also buy it from the faction?
I think you need to use DEMAND:GIVE REGION option on the diplomatic menu. Bribe might work but I've never tried it to be honest.

[DesertEagle]

Yeah I think it absolutely has to be by a diplomatic treaty, not bribery. To me it seems the key is right there on the screen posted above - "There is no longer a need to send a diplomat to this faction."

This also would, as has already been explained, rule out military conquest. In the failure, comes the wisdom necessary to succeed. </Confucious>

[WhiskeyGhost]

Take note that when you receive the quest, it states : You can offer them a less valuable settlement in exchange"

Also, one of the many tactics, is your at war with them, is to offer a ceasefire for it (works sometimes, usually when they come offering a ceasefire to you)

Just remember though, if you trade off a settlement for it, theres some sort of cooldown time from when you gave it to them to when you can attack it. If you attack too soon, you lose rep big time for it