Conquering protectorates

[arras]

The way you can conquer protectorates in war just does not seem right. You can conquer any protectorate province just by defeating its garrison. Which usually is not very hard. It is perfectly possible to lose war but gain lot of territory in this way.

Wouldn't it be more logical if protectorates were treated like normal provinces for this purpose and ownership be allowed to change only through treaties?

[evwalt]

You can only conquer protectorates by capturing their capitol.
 
Remember, these are actually your ALLIES (ie. independent powers).  They really aren't under your government control per se.  If someone occupies their capitol, their government makes a seperate peace.  Makes sense to me.
 
The problem is that, once conquered, the areas are rarely (ever?) liberated to become protectorates again.  This should be corrected once the patch returns the power of protectorates to build troops again.
 

[arras]

They are much more than just allies. They have no defence and army of their own, they rely on their protector.It doesn't seem to be logical that you gain them unless their protector recognises your ownership. And I do not think this can be done without defeating him.

Remember, once you occupy them, they are treated as your provinces by all players. Including their protector.

[evwalt]

You are incorrect.  Many protectorates DO have an army.  The ones that don't are SUPPOSED to but a bug came up in the last patch that prevented them from building or levying troops.  I believe this is going to be corrected in the next patch.

Protectorates are allies, nothing more.

[arras]

In my history books, there was difference between allied country and protectorate.

As for in game protectorates they do not have their own armies. Not ones they control. All of the protectorate units are under control of protector country. At last in my games.

[evwalt]

I wouldn't get hung up on the name "protectorate."  I doubt there was any country in Europe during this period that would call itself a protectorate or met the qualifications for one.  They were ALLIES of the major powers.  Some had more control (Bavaria, Holland) over their foreign policies than others (just about all the minor states in Germany) but each one of them would have stated that they were an ally.
 
And no, in game, the minor countries don't control their own armies when you are allied.  So?  Its a GAME, there has to be some representation as to how their armies integrated with your own. 
 
As to history, France wasn't defeated until 1814 yet many of her "protectorates" had joined the anti-French coalition long before its defeat and were actively fighting against her.  In game terms, this would be represented by the protectorate being conquered with control switching to the conquering country.  That country is then "freed" and made a protectorate under the control of its conqueror.
 
Under your proposal, that could never happen.

[arras]

ORIGINAL: evwalt

I wouldn't get hung up on the name "protectorate."  I doubt there was any country in Europe during this period that would call itself a protectorate or met the qualifications for one.  They were ALLIES of the major powers.  Some had more control (Bavaria, Holland) over their foreign policies than others (just about all the minor states in Germany) but each one of them would have stated that they were an ally.

Those countries however had full control over their army. They were not sitting defenceless.

ORIGINAL: evwalt

And no, in game, the minor countries don't control their own armies when you are allied.  So?  Its a GAME, there has to be some representation as to how their armies integrated with your own.

And it is another representation I am discussing. That of "conquering protectorates" while you lost war with its protector.

Can you show me one instance of Bavaria becoming part of Austria while Austria was defeated by France? Or any other similar example?

ORIGINAL: evwalt

As to history, France wasn't defeated until 1814 yet many of her "protectorates" had joined the anti-French coalition long before its defeat and were actively fighting against her.  In game terms, this would be represented by the protectorate being conquered with control switching to the conquering country.  That country is then "freed" and made a protectorate under the control of its conqueror.

Under your proposal, that could never happen.

It is not happening under current system either, does it?
Conquered protectorate doesn't "change sides". It becomes province of conqueror. That is hardly representation of what you described.

Besides what you describe is much better represented in game by diplomats causing province(s) to declare independence.

[evwalt]

Bavaria was an ally of France up until 1812, where it swtiched sides to join the anti-French coalition.  In the game as it now stands, this would be represented in 1 of 2 ways, Bavaria could be the target of a successful coup by Austria or Austria could conquer Bavaria through the occupation of their capitol.  Either way, Bavarian territory would become Austrian conquered.  The next turn, Austria turns Bavaria into a protectorate and it is in the fight against the French (and forming a new army after the patch).
 
Oh, and as for Bavaria and Holland having "full control" over their armies, I disagree.  Bavaria supplied France with troops for combat everywhere from Austria to Russia, where they were integrated into the French VI Corps.  I am sure the Dutch were about the same.
 
Your proposal would also prevent things like one of Napoleon's hopes during the 100 Days, where he planned to defeat the Brits (and their allies including the Dutch) and Prussians and get the Dutch to switch sides (in the game, to switch from a British protectorate to a French protectorate).
 
Irrespective of all of this discussion, I believe the patch is essentially complete and just in testing stages now.  I don't believe that anything like the restrictions on conquering protectorates that you propose are included.