(2-42) Proposal: Base CS Influence Decay rate on Resting Influence

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
7,697
Location
Alberta, Canada
Part 1: Change Influence decay rate calculation
Influence decay rate currently gets exponentially faster the higher your Influence with the CS is.

The calculation for how much your influence decays each turn with a CS uses zero as a baseline. I suggest that instead of that, Influence decay be based on the difference between your current influence and your resting influence with that city-state.

In most cases, this is the same number, since resting influence for most civs is 0. However, there are policy and belief abilities that can raise your base influence rate with city-states. We removed most of them from the game because they are pretty much useless once influence rates for city states get higher in the late game. The only surviving resting influence bonuses are Defensive pacts (+5) and Abode of Peace (+35 resting influence for city-states following your religion), and it is not well-liked. However, if having a higher resting influence rate also slowed down your influence decay, even if your influence level exceeded the resting rate, then abilities that boost resting influence would have some utility in late game.

Part 2: Remove Influence Decay Freezing abilities
The change to an exponential rate for CS decay has overall been an improvement. It solved the problem of city-state influence competitions going into the 1000's of influence. It was not fun, or economical, to have to compete with AIs at those high influence levels.
The one drawback that abilities that arrest influence decay are much stronger now.

The two big Influence decay arresting abilities are Austria's Diplomatic Marriage (can spend gold to stop influence decay, and other bonuses), and Autocracy's United Front (Freezes Influence decay with CS allies while at war)
1. As a result of this binary, these two abilities don't stack
2. Because influence decay is so much faster now, abilities that stop it altogether get much stronger, much faster.

Suggestion: change these abilities to very large Resting Influence bonuses:
- Diplomatic Marriage gives +200 Resting Influence with that City-State.
- United Front gives +100 resting Influence with allied City-States while at War.

Cold War WC resolution can stay as is. The decay freezing existing on a late, reversible, global resolution is fine, and leaving that mechanic in at least 1 place makes that WC proposal special.

Part 3: Stretch Goal
Change Siam's UA ability from +40 instant :c5influence:influence when meeting a CS to +25 Resting influence with all CS (and instant 25 influence when first meeting them so that the influence rate snaps immediately to their higher base rate.)
That would give Siam a permanent bonus so their UA isn't so focused on an ultra-early, and unreliable 1-time bonus. Combined with a defensive pact, Siam could achieve permanent passive friendship. Father got to govern them children.
 
Last edited:

ma_kuh

Warlord
Joined
Sep 13, 2022
Messages
187
I think +200 resting influence might be too much. I get that the idea is that they become a permanent ally but how many extra diplo units does that amount to gaining for free, after comparing the exponential decay rates for two competitors (Austria and X)? I think the +100 benchmark might be a safer place to start.

100% agree on the direction of these changes, I'd support them as-is despite my concern.
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
7,697
Location
Alberta, Canada
In comparison to freezing decay on a CS that you had to be allied with for a minimum of 5 turns with already, it’s much, much weaker.

For your first few diplomatic marriages that might translate into the equivalent of 2 envoys that you get in free influence from your CS influence climbing passively from just above 60 to 200, but considering Austria’s double rewards from CS quests, she already gets 100+ influence rewards almost by accident.

Maybe just having it rest at +100 is sufficient, but I worry that Greece’s -50% decay rate becomes much stronger in comparison.
 

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,243
Does anyone know the decay formula? Just so we can look at how these new numbers might change some of the user experience.
 

azum4roll

Deity
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
2,049
Part 1: Yes please. This will make resting influence actually useful and discourage repeated war declarations on CS.

Part 2: +200 resting influence roughly matches freezing influence with the old formula. Why only +100 for United Front though?
 

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,554
Does anyone know the decay formula? Just so we can look at how these new numbers might change some of the user experience.
Base decay rate = -2 if player has declared war on 2+ City-States, otherwise -1.5 if Hostile, otherwise -1

Scaling decay rate = (Current Influence / 100, rounded down)^1.5 * -1

Decay rate = Base decay rate + Scaling decay rate

Multiply the decay rate by 3 if the City-State's capital is damaged and the player has pledged to protect them.

Apply % reductions to decay rate, such as the Greece UA. Decay is 0 if Autocracy tenet, Diplomatic Marriage or Cold War resolution are active.

Add flat Influence per turn (from policies, etc.) if applicable.

Don't decay below resting point.
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
7,697
Location
Alberta, Canada
example:

You have 525 :c5influence: with a 'Hostile' city-state.

Base rate = -1.5
scaling rate = ((525/100, rounded down)^1.5) * -1 == (5^1.5)* -1 == -11.18
Decay rate = -1.5 + -11.18 == -12.68 per turn

If this proposal was implemented and you had a resting influence of 135, your decay rate would be:

Base rate = -1.5
scaling rate = (((525-135)/100, rounded down)^1.5) * -1 == (3^1.5)* -1 == -5.20
Decay rate = -1.5 + -5.20 == -6.70 per turn
 

azum4roll

Deity
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
2,049
Scaling decay rate = (Current Influence / 100, rounded down)^1.5 * -1
I don't see a purpose of rounding that down, to be honest. You're already doing a floating point calculation with the ^1.5

I suggest also removing the base rate and turn that into a multiplier instead, to punish CS conquerors more.

@pineappledan are you also changing Cold War?
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
7,697
Location
Alberta, Canada
@pineappledan are you also changing Cold War?
The Cold War WC resolution is so late and rare that I forgot it existed.

Considering it’s very late, can be blocked and repealed, and is a global effect for all players, Cold War seems like the only acceptable place for decay freezing to exist. So maybe keep it?
 
Last edited:

axatin

Chieftain
Joined
Jul 24, 2022
Messages
42
It's good to change the decay rate calculation, having it based on the resting influence feels more natural and will lead to smoother decay rate changes. It won't have much of an effect on pledges of protection, though, the difference between 0 and 5 is just too small.

Is the Siam UA change an official part of the proposal?
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
7,697
Location
Alberta, Canada
Is the Siam UA change an official part of the proposal?
Amended Siam portion to be an explicit part of the proposal
 
Top Bottom