K-Mod: Far Beyond the Sword

For everyone else: My understanding of the three options that karadoc mentions above:

0 = Standard BtS rules for defensive pacts

1 = Defensive pacts are NOT automatically canceled upon war declaration on you (they are canceled when you declare war on someone else). This should protect against the pacts being canceled in my scenario a few posts up.

2 = Defensive pacts are NOT automatically canceled upon war declaration on you OR when you declare war on someone else. This turns pacts into "alliances" - where pacts are not broken if you declare war on someone else.

Example:
Team 1, 2, 3 have pacts with each other
Team 4, 5, 6 have pacts with each other

Team 1 DoW on team 4. Standard BtS ends all Team 1's pacts at this moment. This option does not. Therefore: Team 1 DoW on Team 4. Team 5, Team 6 DoW on Team 1. Bc team 1's pacts remain in tact, Team 2, Team 3 now DoW on Team 5, Team 6. Team 4 then DoW on Team 2, Team 3.

Now...the world is at war.
 
What kind of mega cheats does the ai get in extremely early combat...since you've shot down my other ideas en masse.
*rage*

My neighbor got early chariots and I rushed and got early iron. A chariot attacks my swordsman on open ground, both with one strength promotion...the enemy chariot wins no damage. OK maybe thats a fluke and then...

An archer with city defense promotion ATTACKS my full health swordsman on a hill (with one strength), wins, and loses 0 health in the process. The swordman seemed to get stuck in the first strike animation and was literally shot to death without swinging once...

Can you explain?

I suspect the 100% win odds for the ai in extremely early combat are something that was there in vanilla as wel, to prevent very easy lucky games...

edit:

And if your questions arent rhetorical from before, because you answered my questions with questions...

I definitely am below 100% of my threshold burden for GW, I rarely can find a good reason to bother with preserves rather than lumbermills, I meant to say "Extra resource bonus" for GP city specialists rather than +1 GP points, so my bad there,

those two saves had two fat stacks of riflemen leaving 5 or 6 Cannons behind to defend newly acquired cities rather than some of the rifles...in fact, they left their only seige equipment behind both of those times, and several others, so maybe you should take another look at that, even if it is specific to the crush strategy (fix the crush strategy to leave a couple rifles behind imo).

My idea for increasing the speed of fishing boats after navigation is to help distant settlements in/near the ice, where they wouldnt be making their own fishing boats because there is no production (or trees) except for the main city plot.

You made musketeers have the 15% flee from combat (ty for that)...which is a special exception, so your comment about not wanting to do special exceptions (like let musketeers promote that skill with experience) confuses me. Unique units are the exceptions type unit. Praets being power 8 is exceptional amongst swordsmen for example...but I can understand it from a "balance" standpoint possibly so w/e. I wont push the issue. Although if you could up it to 20% flee chance :D kekeke.

Last point: Let monastary let you make one citizen a priest and reduce the number of priests allowed by religious wonders to 2 (from 3). This will help civs that miss a religion founding who still want great priests...or maybe include priests in the caste system...hard to balance for multiple religions I guess.


Christmas season is coming guys! Gl hf in your games!
 
For everyone else: My understanding of the three options that karadoc mentions above:

0 = Standard BtS rules for defensive pacts

1 = Defensive pacts are NOT automatically canceled upon war declaration on you (they are canceled when you declare war on someone else). This should protect against the pacts being canceled in my scenario a few posts up.

2 = Defensive pacts are NOT automatically canceled upon war declaration on you OR when you declare war on someone else. This turns pacts into "alliances" - where pacts are not broken if you declare war on someone else.

Example:
Team 1, 2, 3 have pacts with each other
Team 4, 5, 6 have pacts with each other

Team 1 DoW on team 4. Standard BtS ends all Team 1's pacts at this moment. This option does not. Therefore: Team 1 DoW on Team 4. Team 5, Team 6 DoW on Team 1. Bc team 1's pacts remain in tact, Team 2, Team 3 now DoW on Team 5, Team 6. Team 4 then DoW on Team 2, Team 3.

Now...the world is at war.

Defensive pacts (imo) should never draw anyone into someone else's war of aggression. So in this last example, Team 2 and 3 would not be drawn in. In all other respects, I think it would be 'better' if your defensive pacts were not cancelled when you declare war - and certainly not when you are DoWed against.
 
Originally Posted by Fluffy_Rabbit
[...] perhaps the best answer is:

"Senatus Populusque Romanus te salutamus" though "... te salutant" equally good

Gratias ago tibi, Yudishtira
Alright. That sounds convincing. I'll use that if there are no objections.

If we're talking about Julius Caesar, he was not emperor so I'm pretty sure he would not have used 'salutamus', which suggests that he is the senate and people (I know he had a pretty high opinion of himself, but that's not the point here). If we're talking about Augustus or another Caesar who was emperor, I don't know if they used the "royal we" implying that they were Rome personified. If they did (it does seem quite likely, and has more poetry/flavour to it), 'salutamus' is correct. If not, it should be 'salutant'.
 
Defensive pacts (imo) should never draw anyone into someone else's war of aggression. So in this last example, Team 2 and 3 would not be drawn in. In all other respects, I think it would be 'better' if your defensive pacts were not cancelled when you declare war - and certainly not when you are DoWed against.

Maybe I am reading your post incorrectly. I am not saying what I "want" the settings to be in my post. I'm explaining the three settings that are options in GlobalDefines (see the previous page of posts).

0=standard
1=variation one
2=variation two

With the corresponding descriptions as to how those settings work.
 
My vassal is keeping a stack of troops near lyons, Im curious as to why.

I hope I havent pissed you off or anything Karadoc, you dont reply to my posts as much as you used to. If I offended yee, I apologize.
 

Attachments

Question for us Kmod players: How often do you guys win via peaceful means in Kmod? I still struggle a bit with Kmod monarch but I'm getting the hang of it now, but the vast majority of my wins are conquest/domination. I just have 2 culture wins and I haven't won by space yet. Last night I really wanted to win by space and I was lightyears ahead in tech, but the AI's were insistent in attacking my navy SEAL defended empire with huge stacks of rifles/grenadiers/cavalry. I ended up killing 100's of AI units in my own land, thinking they would make peace and back off, but no...so I abandoned the idea of a ship and just killed them with SEALs/artillery. Seems very difficult to win by peaceful means. I had an ally but he got dogpiled and I sent my SEALs to help him, but his whole empire (8 cities) was basically burned to the ground in the time it took my troops to get to him :/
 
Code of laws, caste system, Artist specialists->great artists, get early religion/wonders in cap (statue of zeus for great artist points for example), in fact get as many religions as possible in your 3 cities youve chosen for culture duty and spam temples and monastaries and cathedrals.

If you have a neighbor on your continent, kill him and take his land asap and then focus on culture/defensive war units for the rest of the game. keep track of who your main threats are, and keep scout naval units around your land to keep an eye out.

If you are solo on an island, idk, because you usually get bad land from the map creater...

If you are behind, you are gonna have to death drop someone, so dont neglect your military. If you just make tech and culture, you are gonna look like an easy target to everyone.
 
no it's not that I'm losing games due to not building military - it's just that I find in Kmod my games are almost like "always war" games. It seems that 3/4 of the turns are spent at war, even when I really would rather not be at war, it just seems that every game is like this. Don't get me wrong, I think Kmod is great, and wars are fun, but when you're always at war for the duration of the game, it moves very slowly and it becomes a drag when game after game is like this. Then again, it's not just Kmod, it's also probably because I play with random personalities, so I don't know who the warmongers are beforehand.
 
Karadoc how different is the vassal decision making in Kmod vs the unmodded game? I could be off here but it seems to me in Kmod that civs are much more likely to become voluntary vassals of other civs. In the middle ages the whole world seems to coalesce into 2-3 blocs of masters/vassals and I really don't remember that happening in the unmodded game. Capitulations, yes, but voluntary vassals were rarer, if my memory serves me correctly.
 
I - I finally got around to trying this, after a bit of a cIV haitus. I horse-rushed Rome (because thats what any persian would do to a rapidly expanding Julius with iron in his borders) and he held out until with 3/5 cities until he had an archer army. My lord, a horde of archers simlply came rolling out of the blue and into my city! They are certainly more capable now. . .
 
I hope I havent pissed you off or anything Karadoc, you dont reply to my posts as much as you used to. If I offended yee, I apologize.
I don't know if I'm responding less or not - but I will say a couple of things about that.

Firstly, you must understand that as more people post on these forums I'll become less likely to respond to any individual post; partially because it would take too long to respond to everything, and partially because I think it's healthier to players to talk to each other rather than everyone just talking to me. Especially on the topic of balance changes, I think it's best to have a general discussion rather than a dialogue because different people play with different styles and goals.

Secondly, you tend to repeat a lot of your suggestions. I tend not to want to respond to that. When you're suggesting the same stuff over and over, directing it explicitly at me, it comes across as nagging rather than suggesting; especially when we've already talked about them.

Thirdly, you've posted a lot of save files to demonstrate dubious AI behaviour. That's fine, but you shouldn't expect that I'll respond to them. There's no shortage of AI problems to solve. The AI makes lots of bad decisions in every game. These bad decisions are sometimes deliberate risks which may or may not pay off, sometimes they are systematic problems which are difficult to solve, and sometimes they are caused by bugs. If I don't respond to some particular issue, maybe it's because I already know about it, or maybe I don't think it's important, or maybe I just don't have anything interesting to say about it.

Also, I'll tend not to look at saves where you've just said "what's the AI doing here?" It can take a fair bit of time to load a save, work out what could give rise to the observed AI behaviour, and then post it on the forums - and that's generally not what I feel like spending my time on. You can post that stuff if you want, but you shouldn't expect that I'll always respond. Maybe it would be better if you could try to work out what's causing the strange behaviour yourself (or with the help of other forum members) so that you can work out whether or not it is a common problem, or a bug, or a predictable exploitable behaviour, etc. So that when you do tell me, you've got some information about what kinds of situations will/won't causes the AI to do those things.

That brings me to my final point, which is basically you can post that stuff if you want, but you shouldn't expect that I'll always respond. As I already mentioned, I don't appreciate being nagged with repeated suggestions; and similarly, I don't like being nagged to respond to things. This is a bit tricky, because sometimes I do intend to respond to certain things but forget to do so, in which case it's probably good to remind me. In general though, I think it's safe to assume that I've read every post, and that I'll consider what everyone has to say even if I'm not explicitly posting about it. And in general, I prefer it when posts on the forum are addressed to the whole forum rather than just to me. For that reason, I might not respond or I might be slow to respond just so that other people can get involved in the conversation.

--

Question for us Kmod players: How often do you guys win via peaceful means in Kmod?[...]
I usually win with either space or culture. Typically what happens in my games is that I fight one war sometime in the mid-game, and then win peacefully. Generally I try to peacefully expand, but if I can't get enough land for myself, I'll try to find an opportunity to wipe out one of my neighbours, or if one of my neighbours attacks me then I'll usually keep the war going until I've taken most of their land. Sometimes I don't end up fighting any significant wars in the whole game, but usually I conquer one neighbour and take it from there.

Once I'm in a winning situation, I tend to just peacefully do my thing to get to victory. If the AI attacks me towards the end, then I'll usually just kill one of two of their invasion stacks and then make peace again.

In my most recent game, I was expecting to have a completely peaceful win - but then one of the AI's won a diplomatic victory! :crazyeye: When the vote came up, I actually though I might have a chance of getting the diplo victory myself, because I was the other candidate and few of the big civs were friendly with me - but I guess they were even more friendly with the other guy... It was a very friendly kind of game.

Karadoc how different is the vassal decision making in Kmod vs the unmodded game? I could be off here but it seems to me in Kmod that civs are much more likely to become voluntary vassals of other civs. In the middle ages the whole world seems to coalesce into 2-3 blocs of masters/vassals and I really don't remember that happening in the unmodded game. Capitulations, yes, but voluntary vassals were rarer, if my memory serves me correctly.
It's not much different. I wouldn't expect it to be significantly more common than in the unmodded game. The only thing that would directly make vassals more common is a change from BBAI in the way that 'average power' is calculated when evaluating vassal deals. The change is that some of the power of existing vassals to their master's power rather than being counted as an independent civ. This means that the 'average power' estimate will be higher when there are already some vassals around, and so civs will be more likely to feel like they need a master to protect them.

But on the other hand, in K-Mod I've actually tweaked the thresholds a little bit to make it less likely for civs to want a sign a vassal deal. I guess I thought voluntary vassal deals were a bit too common as well. Maybe they still are more common, I'm not really sure.

I've also made some changes to how signing vassal deals interacts with peace treaties, but that would have almost no effect on how common the deals are.

Aside from that, I think there would only be second-order effects. For example, maybe in K-Mod it's more likely for there to be a power imbalance between civs, in which case vassal deals would be more likely. It's hard to say if that is actually happening or not, but if it was, that would explain it...
 
That makes me think about a certain situation...

I love to chew ice occassionally...a nice big glass of distilled ice water. And I'll chew the ice after I drink the water. Thing is, people can sometimes not like the sound of crunching ice cubes. And there are two types of people. Person A says immediately "I'm trying to listen to something, can you stop?" And I have no problem stopping. Person B waits until they are very emotional before they manage to say something like "Wont you ever stop?!". And I laugh, because Im very considerate and if it bothers people I can stop no problem. It's just a mystery to me why people wait, until they work themselves up, to say something.

I have alot of respect for your mod, and alot of times previously, I'd point out an ai behavior and you'd say something like "I had not noticed that" and whether or not you thought it was worth fixing. I felt involved and like I was helping you. Sometimes you'd say "try out the new changes and tell me what you think", "you" meaning everyone ofc.

And sometimes I get really, really, bored and, I guess, post too much with ai saves or random notes I wrote down while playing. I had noticed before you viewed this as "complaining" or saying that the kmod was bad or something like that. Which I dont think at all. Its the only reason I play civ4 right now.

And I do have a bad memory related to a couple medical conditions I have, so my "nagging" is not as intentional as it seems and again, I apologize. I'll try to not post nearly as much, because the last thing I want is to stress you out. I hope we have "cleared the air".
 
Kara, I thought you and the others might like to know that embryodead has incorporated several code functions into SOI & now Sengoku.

I'll prob try to incorporate it again into some of my mods later.

Thanks for all the fixes. Looks like you've found tons of hidden bugs, fixes.:)
 
@Charles555nc that's fine. I'm glad you like playing, and feedback often is helpful. I just don't want to feel like I have to personally respond to every bit of it. That's all.
[edit]
Actually, there's one more thing I'd like to mention in the spirit of 'clearing the air': I disliked the way you handled your argument with NobleZarkon awhile back. That was harsh.

@stolenrays. Thanks for that. I maybe that helps answer a question Deadeyetim asked earlier.
 
Ah yes, that makes sense Karadoc - about the power calculations affecting the decision over whether or not to vassal. I find that it Kmod games it is more likely for a civ to voluntarily vassal to another, which games the game more challenging, but I'm not one to complain about a challenge (that's why I play this mod after all).
 
Is there a alternate civ4handicapinfo.xml file for k-mod? I have modded the noble difficulty under the default BTS directory so the AI has NO advantages and I'm still getting my @$$ handed to me. Granted I started on a small continent and got cut off by one of the AIs early on, but I've been playing this game since its release and I've never had the AI steamroll like these guys are doing. 2 of the AIs have over 25 cities and the city maint. cost is @ 100% for all of us in the .xml file and we haven't got to state property civic yet. One thing I would like to see is some code that says " If I have attacked this city x-y (random)number of times and not succeeded, then reevaluate my battle plan." After 3 monster boatloads of attackers Pacal tried to bring a fourth armada and I had 10 frigates waiting for his caravel/galley invasion force and I was talking smack the whole time that I sent him to Davey Jones' Locker...heh heh. I do find myself talking to the PC much more now with your mod and I'm not sure if that is necessarily a good thing!!! At least my friends have stayed loyal so far which is a nice change from vanilla BTS....Again....good job and we do appreciate all the work...
 
Just an unscientific observation - one thing I have noticed with Kmod is that winners win bigger than in the retail version. When I played BTS emperor if I lost it would usually be a close game and when I won it was also somewhat close, a lot of the time, but with Kmod I still have close games but most of the time the game is not close at all - I either get completely wrecked by some runaway AI, or I completely wreck the AI. It's weird. I'll go three games in a row losing, 2 of them getting owned by dogpiles, and think "geez Kmod is too hard" and then on the fourth game I'll get WAY AHEAD of the AI and be fighting with tanks vs cavalry or something absurd.
 
Back
Top Bottom