Protectorates broken?

[Quirinus]

One step after you.... hee. Oh well.

[Cruelsader]

It turns out the critters were allied with everyone except other Romans and some factions on the other side of map from me. I have to give credit to the weasels and the Senate: a beautiful trap and I stepped right into it. I know it is all random but it seems like a plot of a mastermind:

1) The Senate is praising my conquest but growing fearful of my power. They strike a deal with Numidians who are down to one province.

2) Numidians ally themselves with all my neighbors and factions beyond them. Then the Senate asks to negotiate a protectorate with Numidia.

3) As a true Roman I dutifully obey only to discover that any further conquest is frustrated - I cannot attack any allies of my little pet kingdom without "betraying" those I have sworn to protect. My standing with plebs does not allow me to attack Rome.

4) The Senate has checked my power and Numidians have saved themselves from a certain destruction. Not speaking of swimming in cash - I had to grant 30 000 denarii to "convince" them to become a protectorate.

However, the Senate was too clever for its own good. Six turns later Britons achieved victory shaming Rome. Truth to be told I had completely forgotten about the victory conditions of a short campaign and was aiming for the seat of Emperor but ...well victory is victory. My first RTW defeat.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

There is a chance that by attacking these new "neutrals" that the protectorate will not actually be cancelled. Attacking one of your allies' allies automatically gives them a choice between you and them. Most of the time it seems a bit random and 50/50 either way, but there is a chance of their loyalties lying with you.

As said, protectorates are rather worthless, so it probably would be easier to turn your back on Numidia and crush them rather than worry about your current problem.

This is an issue I've always had with R:TW protectorates. They are too breakable and the protectorate is not easily controlled. This makes it a bit of a glorified alliance rather than one faction exerting it's might over another.

I've always thought that protectorates should be comparable to the senate to Roman faction relationship. The protecting faction could be able to set (realistic) missions with rewards or penalties. Also the protecting faction should be able to demand alliances to end or, even more strictly, force them to have the same diplomatic status' as themselves.

[artaxerxes]

I've always thought that protectorates should be comparable to the senate to Roman faction relationship. The protecting faction could be able to set (realistic) missions with rewards or penalties. Also the protecting faction should be able to demand alliances to end or, even more strictly, force them to have the same diplomatic status' as themselves.

That would be SOOOO COOOOOL !!! ;)

[Quirinus]

This is an issue I've always had with R:TW protectorates. They are too breakable and the protectorate is not easily controlled. This makes it a bit of a glorified alliance rather than one faction exerting it's might over another.

I agree. I've even seen guides for Numidia advocate becoming a client state of Egypt within the first few turns, just to keep them off your back while you build up. Not sure if it actually works, or if it applies to other factions, though.

I've always thought that protectorates should be comparable to the senate to Roman faction relationship. The protecting faction could be able to set (realistic) missions with rewards or penalties. Also the protecting faction should be able to demand alliances to end or, even more strictly, force them to have the same diplomatic status' as themselves.

Oh, my, that would be cool.... the rewards should possibly be set, though-- for example, maybe if the Greeks are a protectorate, and the Roman player asks them to, say, take Athens, there should be three options: a direct cash reward, an exotic/advanced unit reward (say, maybe Armoured Hoplite in this example) or just a 'consideration' reward (analogous to raising 'Senate approval'), like "You have the thanks and gratitude of the Senate and People of Rome. Your service will not be forgotten." which is free for now but means that future missions will be more expensive, or something. Of course the difficulty of the mission should also be taking into account-- taking a hostile faction capital would obviously be more costly to 'purchase' than a simple 'blockade port'.

Ah..... if, if, if.

*drools*

[Praetor Rick]

Oh, my, that would be cool.... the rewards should possibly be set, though-- for example, maybe if the Greeks are a protectorate, and the Roman player asks them to, say, take Athens, there should be three options: a direct cash reward, an exotic/advanced unit reward (say, maybe Armoured Hoplite in this example) or just a 'consideration' reward (analogous to raising 'Senate approval'), like "You have the thanks and gratitude of the Senate and People of Rome. Your service will not be forgotten." which is free for now but means that future missions will be more expensive, or something. Of course the difficulty of the mission should also be taking into account-- taking a hostile faction capital would obviously be more costly to 'purchase' than a simple 'blockade port'.

Ah..... if, if, if.

*drools*

And don't forget, if your client is *TOO* successful, they may start to reevaluate whether they want to be your client any more - and turning those juicy mission rewards you've given them against you could be painful.