Diplomacy AI Development

All of these already into 9-18, am i right ?

 

Okay.

I always get that modifier immediately after settling another city. The phrasing really made me think it was about city number. So are you saying that if I build enough military units, it'll go away?

I also notice that territorial relationships tends to swing on and off when I'm adding cities. Is it a similar mechanic that also factors military strength?

 

A warning.
A very successful civ will scary to inaction all the other civs if your factoring of military strength is absolute.

Also, it is easier to not lose units when you start with 3x units in the field than your enemies.
I fear that your current method will make life very easy for runaways.

Military performance, I'd prefer to call it tactical skill, is how good you are with your units, in relation to the army strength that you possess.
The ratio of the combatants raw strength should be factored in.
It does not make you a bad tactician when you lose units due to being overwhelmed, nor it makes a good tactician to kill units when you can overwhelm the opponent.

I'd propose this small factoring:
Player strength is the army raw strength value for us, civ strength is the same for the enemy AI.

When you are killing enemy units
Tactical gain = unit value * (civ strength / player strength)

When you are losing units
Tactical lose = unit value * (player strength / civ strength)

This is a first approach. You could weight these values with a fixed value if numbers affect too much or too few.

What this means is that if I start a war with an army that is half the strong than the other civ, each unit that I manage to kill will count double, so you know that I am truly skilled (or I possess a very good defensive position).

 

Do other things, such as building a wonder they wanted, do this too?

I notice that territorial disputes tends to switch on when you do something an AI disliked, even if that thing had no connection to whose land is where. You get this odd thing where guys across the ocean have territorial disputes.

I'd consider dropping that aspect, or maybe just dropping the NONE to WEAK jump, because the explanation I see as a player (territorial disputes) tends to make no sense. This might also contribute to the dog piling of last patch, whenever I did one thing they disliked, I'd get more than one diplo penalty as a result, until eventually everyone has territorial disputes.

 

Thanks for explaining. You're doing great work.

 

Sure. Happy to test the changes! Just wanted to point our what it's for.

 

Perhaps once the basics are worked out we can add modifiers for things like Defender of Faith, civs specific unique abilities that make them strong in combet, Himeji Castle etc. !

 

Man you must have a wonderful broad australian accent if you say "combet"

OnT: Liking this a lot, but I see Tu's point too. Very exciting changes nonetheless.

 

I don't talk like that but I tried it out just now it was hilarious, thanks XD.

 

Glad to hear it!

 

Hey man if I can have reasonable unreasonable trades with other civs, and actually find a reason to ask for a declaration of friendship, I'm all in on w/e other ideas get thrown in.

 

Yeah you beat me to the punch. Really TR pillages have nothing to do with how successful you are militarily. You just can't realistically protect your TRs all the time, doesn't mean you will fall over and die when the units come in.

 

I'm really glad to see this implemented, Thanks for your hard work!

 

i don’t think it should be removed.