Acken's Minimalistic Balance for singleplayer (and AI improvements)

[yung.carl.jung]

I concur with this. I'm not really sure what's the point of diplomacy when war is inevitable.

No offense to you, but now that is just dumb. What is the point of diplomacy when war is inevitable? It is to bribe the warmonger into wars he cannot win, it is to make him everyone's enemy by denouncing him and causing chain-denounces from the AI. It is to make him your scapegoat, to form alliances purely based on having a common enemy.

Your goal is to recognize the threats and treat them accordingly. If you think one particular AI is going to DOW you why not sell him all of your luxes? As soon as he DOWs you your empire is back to full happiness and you've made sizeable gpt. You might even get one of your "own" luxuries in a city state quest or wltkd.

Know a friend is going to backstab you? Sell him all your GPT, all your strategics and maybe even a city that previously belonged to the enemy that you know you can retake and raze in just very few turns. Get thousands of gold that way. As soon as he DOWs you you take the city back and he already "lost" a city, which will make him more likely to give you higher peace deals.

You think a realtively weak AI is going to try to double DOW you with another neighbour? Invest all hammers in troops, fight a standoff for 20+ turns and get gold, luxuries and more in a peace deal.

Diplomacy is more than exchanging embassies, granting open borders and taking loans from the AI. Acken Mod needs a lot more.

If you want to survive on DemiGod and higher you will have to be much more actively diplomatically. As soon as an AI gets denounced you pick a side and chime in. As soon as you have more than 20GPT n the bank you spend all that money on bribing. Often times I am hovering between 50GPT and 100GPT for the first 150 turns of the game just because ~100GPT is constantly spent bribing multiple AIs.

Just because you cannot bribe Shaka for 2 Horses or a single Luxury anymore doesn't mean it is impossible, far from it actually.

@Acken: I really hope you think carefully about this decision in particular. I think the AI is in a really sweet spot right now: Not passive at all yet not really psycho. You cannot cater to everyones taste and DemiGod and Deity aren't for everyone. Hell, after winning my Mayans game I don't even play Deity anymore.

 

[SirWhale]

Those are definitely things you can do on the diplomatic screen, but it's not my ideal of what diplomacy should be like in a civ simulation strategy game. Everything you point out has to do with the notion that war is inevitable. But if war is inevitable, then this seems both unrealistic and unhealthy from a game perspective, because it limits your playstyle.

There should be a way for the AI to value longstanding trade partners/friends/allies more, as well as value building up long-term trade relations.

 

[Chum]

Carl and I are on the same page, as usual.

I got so bored with the passive AI in the base game. The game should not be me vs barbarians with some other people around. I really enjoyed the guaranteed double DOW on turn 40. The AI is in a good middle ground now where you can still provoke them while not being super aggressive. The AI should be trying to win, not being friends with the winner.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Those are definitely things you can do on the diplomatic screen, but it's not my ideal of what diplomacy should be like in a civ simulation strategy game. Everything you point out has to do with the notion that war is inevitable. But if war is inevitable, then this seems both unrealistic and unhealthy from a game perspective, because it limits your playstyle.

Now, see, I just don't know where you are getting this "War is inevitable" feeling from.

I have successfully played multiple Deity games where I wasn't DOWed even once before T100. If that isn't enough time to prepare then what is?

I've been saying time and time again that war is only inevitable when your military score is low. Why shouldn't war be inevitable when all you have is two Archers and your neighbour has a dozen Artillery, Cavalry, Riflemen and Bombers? It's not the AIs fault you are neglecting military.

Peaceful victories are not about clicking next turn until you win, they're also about defending your borders. In domination games you conquer, in peaceful games you defend.

If someone like me can stop the Deity AI from DOWing then surely it is not inevitable that the Immortal or DemiGod AI will DOW you, no matter how often it is said.

There should be a way for the AI to value longstanding trade partners/friends/allies more, as well as value building up long-term trade relations.

Now this on the other hand is a very good point and I support you 100%. I, too, think that long lasting relationships should have more of an impact on trade and foreign policy.

 

[SirWhale]

Hmm..you point out you weren't DOW-ed before T100 in your multiple Deity games. I take it this implies you were eventually DOW-ed at some point in the game. This is enough for my point that war is inevitable. Furthermore, you point out that "in peaceful games you defend" (that has indeed been my experience). This still implies that war will come at some point.

And that itself implies you got to shore up your military (which indeed I have been trying to do), and determine the right balance of deterrent forces to keep.

What is the problem with that then? The problem, I am thinking, is the AI thinks of war as the primary means to get ahead. But that's too one-sided. I could imagine a case where the AI reasons that "I could maintain healthy trade/diplomatic ties with my neighbours and keep my own deterrent forces, and let others come after me instead. If they don't I will shoot to a strong cultural/scientific lead". This forces the player to decide between keeping pace non-militarily or going on the offensive militarily, which I think is an interesting decision to make.

In any case, it has been my experience that the AI sometimes doesn't wage war on you if they're already far ahead culturally from the industrial age on, and you've got a passable military score. But this seems to be more a 'retrospective' decision rather than a conscious strategy on the AI's part right from the start (correct me if I'm wrong).

 

[Acken]

And if such a turtling AI exists then stronger non turtling ais will become unstopable or useless if they just keep sending units on a brick wall. Also wouldnt that simply imply that youd have to go to war yourself to stop it ?

My biggest issue nd fear with a less greedy ai is that you end up with a very static game. Not necessarily without wars but without evolution. Thats a situation I dislike in BNW and in many mods. I enjoy being in a race with the guy on the other side that slowly eat others and having to really rack my brain on how to stop it before too late.
That said im keeping a watch on not having everybody attacking at random all the time which is why id like to improve relations effects. At least with non conquest civs. Conquest civs should always try to achieve their domination goal which is your capital.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

The reason I get DOWed post T100 is because I allow my military score to get lower, therefore expecting a DOW.

When you look at the highest military score via demographics and see that yours is 1/4 or even 1/5 of that you know you will get DOWed eventually.

I mean, you are not wrong, of course war is inevitable if you never build any units, but that's pretty much a given, right?

What I was proposing is that war is not inevitable if you just keep your military up and abuse diplo to the fullest.

 

[SirWhale]

What I was proposing is that war is not inevitable if you just keep your military up and abuse diplo to the fullest.

And what I'm proposing is war be made not inevitable if you just keep your military up and the AI values mutual trade more. So the combination of deterrent military score and prospective benefits will push the AI to value not declaring war on you. I'm also definitely not suggesting a situation of zero military units.

@Acken Yup, but now the strategic decision to race through war or through other non-military means is placed in your hands. In current games the decision seems to be taken out of your hands, simply because to keep pace with the AI non-militarily your military score will dip, and the AI weighs that so much he'd declare war. So you kind of know the pattern, and it feels static.

I'll explore the 'diplomatic' measures yung suggested though. Get more games in and see how it goes.

 

[Acken]

@Acken Yup, but now the strategic decision to race through war or through other non-military means is placed in your hands. In current games the decision seems to be taken out of your hands, simply because to keep pace with the AI non-militarily your military score will dip, and the AI weighs that so much he'd declare war. So you kind of know the pattern, and it feels static.

I guess there is a divergence of opinion here as I'm preferring surviving through a game rather than controling its flow. Also like i said I find more static game maps rather boring.
That said a lot of the changes are in sql format and can be modified if someone is unsatisfied with the official version.

 

[consentient]

My own 2p on war in ModAcken

1. I like that conquest becomes a valuable part of any VC for the human player
2. I'm a bit unhappy with how 'the rest of the world' (meaning all the AIs that the human player is not currently at war with) is usually at constant war.

On a standard sized map, if the human player is, at T120, involved in a war that we wlll assume make victory easier, this leaves 6 civs. Let's also assume one has been taken out already. So that means that 'the rest of the world' is 5 civs.

My feeling is that if more than 2 wars are taking place between these 5 civs, it seems a bit too much.

But I don't know if it's possible to incentivise conquest for the human and make war harder without making it so the AI just wants to go to war ALL THE TIME.

Or if it's something that anyone (least of all Acken) wants?

 

[Acken]

My own reasoning is that if more civs make it to the end how likely more than 2 of them can be a threat to victory ?
Civ is intrinsecly a FFA game. Therefore I believe some should disapear throughout the game so that a few super powers emerge and battle it out in the end. The main goal is to make sure you are in a good position yourself.

That said it should not be nonsensical either. Ideally for immersion there should be rivalries and alliances but civ5 doesnt have such a system and making something is pretty difficult.

 

[miaasma]

just played my first game on your mod. sort of. i got surprise DOW'd by 2 people at around turn 40 and got obliterated

deciding to take your advice and play a difficulty level lower than usual

edit: forgot to mention that i'm really enjoying the mod. and i haven't even played through a full game yet

one thing i am particularly enjoying is the changes to AI behaviour, specifically that i'm noticing more denouncing and warmongering. this might be a source of complaints from some people, but personally i like my AI crazy and foaming at the mouth. i've gone through games where most AI just sit back and snowball and those get really tedious, so it's nice that this changes it up

 

[Acken]

Welcome miaasma dont hesitate to relate your experiences or participate in the community game in strategy and tips.

 

[consentient]

My own reasoning is that if more civs make it to the end how likely more than 2 of them can be a threat to victory ?
Civ is intrinsecly a FFA game. Therefore I believe some should disapear throughout the game so that a few super powers emerge and battle it out in the end. The main goal is to make sure you are in a good position yourself.

That said it should not be nonsensical either. Ideally for immersion there should be rivalries and alliances but civ5 doesnt have such a system and making something is pretty difficult.

OK, I think I get where you're coming from. In this way, all VCs will have a similar path, part of the balancing act, and whichever one you choose in the end, you'll have a legitimately robust empire.

So maybe I should go back to that DemiGod game where I had fought off the 3 DoWs and see if I can win it!

 

[consentient]

I didn't go back to the Egypt game with the triple DoW. Instead I started a new game with my current favourite AckenMod Civ, which is Assyria.

For those of you who have more experience of the mod, I'd appreciate generic advice about my current position. Would you continue pushing the war with the immediate Western neighbour with Pikes, XBs, Knights and Siege Towers? Or would you take this opportunity to concentrate on moving in the direction of a non-Domination VC?

Thanks. Save file attached. If you have any questions about my game, just ask.

I also recorded an LP, albeit with annoying graphical bugs, which I will upload at some point.

 

[Acken]

Yes I would go for Morrocco, staying on 5 cities is often risky especially with a Shaka in the game.

But the war may not be easy considering he has the same military techs as you. You'll have to be patient and make sure you don't lose much while still teching.

Also yes, pikes to muskets will be a thing in v7 and have uploaded a new version 7 experimental to reflect this change.

 

[gunnergoz]

Is this mod compatible with the non-DLL 22-civ YNAEMP huge earth? When I try to load that map I end up with non-TSL.

 

[Acken]

Is this mod compatible with the non-DLL 22-civ YNAEMP huge earth? When I try to load that map I end up with non-TSL.

Try deleting the map folder in misc folder in my mod. Then try again.
That's the only incompatibility I can think of right now.

 

[gunnergoz]

Thank you for the prompt reply and for this Mod and all your hard work! I'll try that for sure.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

Also yes, pikes to muskets will be a thing in v7 and have uploaded a new version 7 experimental to reflect this change.

If pikes upgrade to muskets, what would be the point of swordsmen and longswordsmen?

Also, I will try to give a domination attempt to the posted map, though this is Demigod and last game NQ Deity Shaka was able to deal with 3 AI's all at once even in the Atomic era.