I think the K-mod ai is a bit overtuned - it just feels that in reagrds to military I am in a constant prisioner dilema where both I and the Ai are just dumping resources in the military without significant AI gains. Would it be possible to modify Ai priorities as to make it less psicopathic with Dow's and see when they need to prio other elements or go for different targets (specially if a civ is getting ahead of then)
I thought this was intended. Every time the AI wears me out in a long drawn war its always because that side is more comfortable waging a war than I am. The result being my side is worst off and their side better off because they can afford a long war and do other things, while I can't. Of course, if this is just the AI being brainless then it should be changed.
It could also just be a natural result of no tech trading. With tech trading you can bribe civs to peace.
----------------
On a side note, my own feedback for 2.0:
1) "Protective" feels worthless on Coastal land. Not having tiles pillaged is useless when a single naval vessel can blockade 10 tiles. I tried making Protective add promotions to naval units too, and it feels pretty good in my game. So I'd recommend that.
2) Traditionalist idealogy should definitely be a hard, but viable path in the late game. No doubt such a civ would and should suffer huge unhappiness penalties, and Traditionalist civs should not get opinion bonuses with one another, but a civ that persists through should be rewarded in some way. I'm thinking a strategy revolving around Tall/Mega Capital city gameplay, and/or perhaps religion/priest-focused gameplay would fit such a role. I tried adding a national wonder that can only be built in Capital city (unlocked with Mass Media), that gives huge bonuses but only when using Dynasticism/Theocracy/Absolutism. It doesn't feel
very good yet... but that's the idea I'm proposing and hope can be worked on.
3) Pyramids feels like a poor version of Stonehenge. Is this intended?
