Vassal States

[sethbest]

@Lysimachos Yes, you pointed out the flaws in my example. That is what I meant by the "though the regions culture (buildings, cohorts, generals) would remain the original nations which would be inaccurate in the case of Rome, but wouldn't be far from the truth for some Persian or Greek nations."

Persian and Greek nations for instance often left conquered nations semi-autonomous, and did not impose their cultural military structure on regions. This is one of the proposed reasons for the boundaries of the Persian empire, as they had very little success holding territories with cultures that were too conflicted with their own (Think the short lived conquests of Egypt and Greece), though it is also attributed to the empires longevity through lack of interference with its culturally similar regions. The only reason I would say it could be used in the Roman campaign as well would simply be due to player choice.

[bobbin]

Rome had plenty of vassals throughout its history, Armenia, Galatia, Numidia, Mauretania, Thrace, Nabatea, Judea, Bosporos, a ton of germanic and british tribes etc.

The problem with the vassal mechanic from the game is that it only provides money, you don't get any control over what goes on in the vassal state or its relations with the other factions in the game. Its basically just a faction that gives you money.

[ziegenpeter]

I rather ignore the vassal function and resolve these issues with lvl 3 or 4 governments. Protectorates are in my EBI games more like allies with some kind of imbalanced relationship due to a former conflict and very rare.