Vassalization better than annexation?

[Kris Rhodes]

It seems as though, when dealing with smaller nations, vassalizing them is better economically than annexing them. This is because as vassals, they have traders, which they can use to generate more income than you would be able to by simply annexing them.

Is this accurate?

What tells against vassalization? Suppose I vassalize, with an intention to annex later? Is this workable? Is there a special penalty for declaring war on a vassal after letting them be independent?

-Kris

[FrankishHero]

Yes, a very high kingdom power penalty.

I usually just annex, because if you vassalize someone, they can become independent again.

[Elvain]

You cannot declare war at vasal, but once you grant him independence, it's just upon your will. There might be some small KP penalty because of DOW on a kingdom with good relations, but not more than 2 points

I think that vasalisation is generaly much better. If you provide them some support, they can also become great powers and so vote for you in Emperor election (where vasals and kins are the most important partners/electors
That's wy I usualy prefere making larger contries my vasals and eliminate the smaller, but it always depends on geostrategicyl location og the country

U just realized one more thing (might be a question on Frujin if they changed anything in vasal relations)
My vasal Teutonic order was at war with Samogitia so in order to help my vasal I joined them in the war, having (just) NA pact. And by accident I fond my marshal reinforcing Teutonic (vasal) army in a battle against Samogitians.
That means you can reinforce your vasal's armies? that's amazing :go:
--
Yes, a very high kingdom power penalty.

I usually just annex, because if you vassalize someone, they can become independent again.
but if you build up good relations and sign some agreements, they only bring you positives :go:
For instance, if you are powerfull, they have high income from trade with you, so you have doubble income from your kingdom's economical power - you get the money twice, isn't it sweet?

[Lord_Nick]

It seems as though, when dealing with smaller nations, vassalizing them is better economically than annexing them. This is because as vassals, they have traders, which they can use to generate more income than you would be able to by simply annexing them.

Is this accurate?

What tells against vassalization? Suppose I vassalize, with an intention to annex later? Is this workable? Is there a special penalty for declaring war on a vassal after letting them be independent?

I think vassals are definitely the way to go.
I like keeping large Vassals on all my frontiers, while using my Marshals to conquer 1- and 2-province (non-vassal) kingdoms.
I only sign Trade Agreements with my Vassals .. no other kingdom gets that privilege.
I also give regular gifts to my Vassals to keep our relationship as strong as possible. This helps maximize trade and ensure they vote for me in Emperor elections. To further increase Trade Income, assign a Merchant to trade with the Vassal.
If your Vassals start fighting against one another, don't get involved (unless you absolutely have to ... ie, you've married the princess of a Vassal and want to inherit some land).
If a Vassal has a lot of internal rebellions, send your Marshals to clean them up. Your relationship will suffer a bit, but it's better to nip a rebellion in the bud than have a new kingdom appear out of nowhere. Send your vassal some gold after defeating the rebels.
An easy way to justifiably declare war on a Vassal A without taking a KP hit is to marry your Prince to the Princess of Vassal B. When Vassal B asks you to declare war on Vassal A, your KP won't fall.
Another way to declare war on Vassal A is to marry a princess off to one of his princes. If Vassal A presses an Inheritance Claim when your King dies, deny it and declare war.
Once you are ready to expand your frontiers, the best way to annex a Vassal is by "Spy Flooding". Send 3 to 5 spies to infiltrate that vassal. The best time to send a Spy Flood is when the Vassal king is young (no heirs) and poor. Send your spies, give him a small amount gold, and watch him hire your Spies. Make sure he has enough gold to keep them all employed.
If a Spy-Merchant succeeds, you can absord the entire vassal at once.
If a Spy-Spy succeeds, don't assassinate anyone until you are sure you will inherit the kingdom.
If a Spy-Cleric succeeds, you can start converting the other kingdom to your religion or hand over a single province.
If a Spy-Marshal succeeds, send your Marshals to shadow him. Keep him alive in battles and during sieges. If the real king dies without an heir, a well trained Spy-Marshal may become Puppet-King.
Absorbing a vassal is also much easier if you can completely surround them or isolate them against the edge of the map. Some kingdoms seem to lose their role in world affairs when they are isolated in this way.

[Dobber]

Every vassal I have ever had was no benefit to me! I have never received any income from a vassal, no matter what I did to support them.

[mammix]

but if you support your vassal, you have good relations. if it becomes powerful, you have another ally while choosing emperor. vassalization gives +10 respect while choosing, for 99% your vassal will choose your option as a emperor ;)

[Lord_Nick]

U just realized one more thing (might be a question on Frujin if they changed anything in vasal relations)
My vasal Teutonic order was at war with Samogitia so in order to help my vasal I joined them in the war, having (just) NA pact. And by accident I fond my marshal reinforcing Teutonic (vasal) army in a battle against Samogitians.
That means you can reinforce your vasal's armies? that's amazing :go:


I think the converse is also true ... your vassal's armies will also reinforce your Marshals if they are close by.