New Beta Version - November 8th

[Coffee Monopoly]

How is this possible?

 

[Omen of Peace]

They had a CS alliance that they lost, or a mine that got pillaged, ...

 

[AndreyK]

But 0 used?

 

[Coffee Monopoly]

I'm using no iron whatsoever.

 

[airbse]

Hi, not able to swap great works with AIs. Looks like they are not creating any in this version. Is anybody else experiencing this, too?

 

[Coffee Monopoly]

Hi, not able to swap great works with AIs. Looks like they are not creating any in this version. Is anybody else experiencing this, too?

Hmm, I don't see any either. I'm sure they have them. Must be a bug.

 

[Coffee Monopoly]

Got another weird bug: When I become the new ally of a city state and am at war, the CS automatically declares war on my enemy as they should, but it also declares war on a bunch of other civs that I'm not at war with. Happened at least twice this game.

Btw the only other mod I use is Quick Turns, and I don't use the EUI.

 

[Recursive]

Got another weird bug: When I become the new ally of a city state and am at war, the CS automatically declares war on my enemy as they should, but it also declares war on a bunch of other civs that I'm not at war with. Happened at least twice this game.

Btw the only other mod I use is Quick Turns, and I don't use the EUI.

It's triggered by Defensive Pacts, and I reported it on Github.

I've completed my diplo changes for the next version (whenever that may be), here's the overall changelog:

Substantial boost to AI aggression, including use of coop war and third party war against competitors (aim is to be intelligently aggressive)


Improvements to GetBestApproachTowardsMajorCiv (factors in religion, ideology, World Congress resolutions, approach guesses, game difficulty, bonuses towards war)


Moved functions throughout GetBestApproachTowardsMajorCiv so that multipliers to approach scores occur after all the additive modifiers; conditions which zero out weight occur after the multipliers


Unless blocked by a sanity check, if they're stronger both militarily and economically, AI will always declare war if a demand is refused


Added AI sanity check to war declarations to avoid going bankrupt (for normal and coop wars, also factors in instant yields & gold reserves)


Fix more AI backstabbing bugs


Fix "you forgave them for spying" modifier not being applied


Tweaked AI sanity check for additional wars to exclude people the AI is already targeting (should result in more wars)


Zero out approach weight for FRIENDLY and DECEPTIVE if there's been a denouncement or the other player is an untrustworthy friend (transfer to GUARDED or NEUTRAL based on opinion, if applicable)


Improvements to approach guess mechanic (should now gauge human & AI approach with reasonable accuracy)


AI now has a robust function to define major competitors


AI now considers the possessor of their capital or Holy City an untrustworthy friend, unless they're that player's vassal


Increased penalties for land dispute in the early game and for warmongers; also increased bonus for having no land disputes


AI should form early DoFs & blocs a bit easier


Tweaks to IsWantsToConquer to increase AI tactical aggression (encourages AIs to succeed in the early game, and at Domination Victories)


AI should be overall less exploitable

In regards to World Congress resolutions, I've noticed the AI isn't exploiting them for their full potential, so as of next version:

- United Nations = once it's built, AIs who are going for or close to diplo victory will become more friendly

- Casus Belli = more wars, less friendliness

- Global Peace Accords = less wars, more friendliness

- Sanctioned players = will be preferentially targeted for wars, since they're easy targets

- Cold war = more hostility towards ideological opponents, less otherwise

- World religion = if you're following the world religion and the AI controls that religion's Holy City, they will be more friendly to you.
They'll also be more friendly if you share the same religion (note: neither of these applies if you captured their Holy City)

 

[General_Drax]

Hi, not able to swap great works with AIs. Looks like they are not creating any in this version. Is anybody else experiencing this, too?

Last two version of the mod AI swapped 1 great work from me through 3 hole games and nothing on culture swapping screen from them. Go for Heist.

 

[pineappledan]

Not sure if this is even a bug.

I had 2 barbarian horde events begin on neighbouring CSs and they seemed to be sharing a single spawn point. Every 5 turns or so I had 9 tercios spawn on my border. It wasn’t a problem for my military, thank god I wasn’t tied down in a war at the time, but damn. It was an absolutely silly number of barbarians constantly pouring into my land.

I would have gone authority if I had known I was going to get 4 waves of 225 served hot and fresh in renaissance

 

[Recursive]

Not sure if this is even a bug.

I had 2 barbarian horde events begin on neighbouring CSs and they seemed to be sharing a single spawn point. Every 5 turns or so I had 9 tercios spawn on my border. It wasn’t a problem for my military, thank god I wasn’t tied down in a war at the time, but damn. It was an absolutely silly number of barbarians constantly pouring into my land.

I would have gone authority if I had known I was going to get 4 waves of 225 served hot and fresh in renaissance

Think you just got lucky

 

[pineappledan]

Think you just got lucky

Well I was on King. If I was on a higher difficulty playing vs competent, aggressive AI on my borders, and lower/no barbarian bonuses, I think that would have been a ragequit.

 

[Recursive]

Well I was on King. If I was on a higher difficulty playing vs competent, aggressive AI on my borders, and lower/no barbarian bonuses, I think that would have been a ragequit.

The AI should be substantially more aggressive in the next version.

Also, regarding the opinion modifier for stolen artifacts, it is actually in this version, however there was a merge error for the text key displaying it in the opinion table. Will be fixed for next version.

 

[usadefcon1]

I've flipped City States with a Great Diplomat and noticed the CS immediately declared war on their old ally, even though I'm not at war with them. Is this a bug or intended?

 

[Recursive]

I've flipped City States with a Great Diplomat and noticed the CS immediately declared war on their old ally, even though I'm not at war with them. Is this a bug or intended?

Bug, unless the old ally is a teammate/master/vassal of someone you are at war with.

If they have a DP with someone you're at war with, that's probably the cause; if not, please report on Github.

A few more upcoming improvements:

Fix stolen artifacts modifier not being displayed

AI will reset certain war-related diplo penalties when a player capitulates to them, to avoid unnecessary aggression

Vassals of the same master gain +50 positive opinion and +FRIENDLY approach with each other

AI is friendlier to people they've resurrected

AI is friendlier to people when they're at war with a common foe (including soon-to-be coop wars)


AI approach bonuses to bloc formation:
DoF or DP with any friend: +FRIENDLY
Denouncing any friend: +HOSTILE
DoF or DP with any enemy: +HOSTILE
Denouncing any enemy: +FRIENDLY


Masters will no longer accumulate warmongering penalties with their vassals (resets upon vassalization)
Capitulated (not voluntary) vassals also don't get the common foe opinion bonus, and it is reset upon vassalization

- Warmongering penalties and the common foe opinion bonus were illogically dominating vassal opinion; removing these will make vassal treatment more important


Reset warmongering penalties for vassal players and on player death


More tactical aggression improvements


Misc fixes

 

[cerk]

removing these will make vassal treatment more important

Requirements for rebellion could be relaxed a little. By medieval era all the good city spots are taken, and reaching 3x population than when the civ was vassalised seems a bit much.

I needed around 75 population to build Oxford when playing with 6 cities. On a standard map an AI capitulates when it has only around 2 or 3 non capital cities, with let us say around 10 pop, similar to what I had in medieval era. Now look at a non vassalised Poland barely managing 300% of a 30 population, with 7 city progress 3 eras later. A vassalised civ would take at least another era.

Spoiler :

Masters will no longer accumulate warmongering penalties with their vassals (resets upon vassalization)

The reset upon capitulation is fine (which is how it works already I presume) but further warmongering penalties with vassals should be a thing because nobody likes someone dragging them into a war. Or if we are doing away with such penalties maybe vassal public opinion should affect the master. This would also incentivise tenets like Iron fist a lot more because as it stands I've never had a civ rebel against me while my team screeches in freedom.

 

[Bromar1]

Spoiler :

View attachment 539066

Isabelle plopping holy sites in puppet city states must be some next level, galaxy brain ****

 

[cerk]

Wow. never noticed that. Guess I'm just glad that she didn't spam them prophets at me.

 

[civplayer33]

Requirements for rebellion could be relaxed a little.

I disagree. I've seen rebellions several times already; with the AI's propensity for settling on tiny islands in the sea and in other really niche places it will found at least a couple more cities as they discover Astronomy, so it doesn't have it that difficult to grow its population and I'm consistently finding it hard to hang on to early-game vassals past mid-game unless I'm starting to snowball in a major way (or pick Iron Fist, which I've done multiple times for expressly that purpose; besides, the yield bonus is also quite nice).

 

[Recursive]

Requirements for rebellion could be relaxed a little. By medieval era all the good city spots are taken, and reaching 3x population than when the civ was vassalised seems a bit much.

I needed around 75 population to build Oxford when playing with 6 cities. On a standard map an AI capitulates when it has only around 2 or 3 non capital cities, with let us say around 10 pop, similar to what I had in medieval era. Now look at a non vassalised Poland barely managing 300% of a 30 population, with 7 city progress 3 eras later. A vassalised civ would take at least another era.

Spoiler :

View attachment 539066

The reset upon capitulation is fine (which is how it works already I presume) but further warmongering penalties with vassals should be a thing because nobody likes someone dragging them into a war. Or if we are doing away with such penalties maybe vassal public opinion should affect the master. This would also incentivise tenets like Iron fist a lot more because as it stands I've never had a civ rebel against me while my team screeches in freedom.

I disagree. I've seen rebellions several times already; with the AI's propensity for settling on tiny islands in the sea and in other really niche places it will found at least a couple more cities as they discover Astronomy, so it doesn't have it that difficult to grow its population and I'm consistently finding it hard to hang on to early-game vassals past mid-game unless I'm starting to snowball in a major way (or pick Iron Fist, which I've done multiple times for expressly that purpose; besides, the yield bonus is also quite nice).

The concept for the existing system (as far as I can tell) is that once you vassalize the AI, they become a semi-autonomous puppet state and clear all past negatives. They do not seriously compete in the game anymore - usually they've lost their capital and stand no chance of success.

They can rebel or hate you if you mistreat them or if they do become more powerful than you, but generally speaking, the intention is that they become a state which depends on you for protection and that you can push around, in exchange for you not outright destroying them.

Meanwhile the intent of warmongering penalties is to punish players who are too aggressive and successful in war, so the AI resists their victory, recognizes them as a threat and doesn't just roll over and die.

These two game mechanics are somewhat at odds, IMO.

To me, it makes no sense that you get huge negative penalties with your vassals where they fear you sinking the world into a new Dark Age and where they become constantly hostile towards you because of it, when you spared them, and they're supposed to be your protectorate who needs protection and support from you, if only to bide their time and rebel later. Getting furious about foreign wars seems counterproductive.

If you have a lot of vassals, you're usually going for a Domination Victory. While it makes sense for your enemies to resist you fiercely, if they've outright given up they have more to gain from friendliness than permanent hostility.

Maybe the penalty could be suspended while you remain their vassal and reinstated if they rebel?

I can understand them not wanting to be dragged into a war - hence eliminating the common foe opinion bonus - but I feel like the current penalties are excessive and unfun.

It's strategically more intelligent for them to at least attempt to be friendly so you don't tax and bully them as much - and if you mistreat them, hostility is justified.

Edit: For the next version, I'll dramatically increase the effect of vassal treatment on their approach, so masters are more incentivized to treat them well.