New Official Version - October 7th (10-7)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Depends how many cities you have, who it's currently allied with etc. Personally I'd much rather have city-states allies (or friends) than conquer it, unless I'm going for domination.

The Authority / Fealty / Imperialism AI and players usually want to take the cities and are somewhat going for domination. The AI on the current patch is impressive. I played a game on Emperor where Sweden took 26 cities and controlled 4 capitals.
 
Okay, after several games, the AI offers brokered war deals all the time that seem almost broken. In addition, I've never had one fried ask me to go to war jointly with someone. Is this by design?

I think I'd rather see joint wars than all of this brokering stuff (talking to you, Germany). Or maybe I just don't understand it.

Is there a way to revert this back to the old way on my end? I thought I saw a post on that but can't seem to find it.

EDIT: Found the thread to change it. :)

EDIT2: Wow, all of these options for Diplomacy that can be easily changed. Seriously, you guys rock with how you have done all of this. :hatsoff:
 
Last edited:
Read a few posts back. Many people reporting (hopefully false?) positives with AVG and Avast and sometimes MS Defender.
So if these files are not corrupted is it than possible that I “force” my virus program (I think I have alg) to accept these files?

PS so far I have never had problems with instelling Vox Populi mode. This is the first time. Has something changed or is it just my virus program acting up?
 
It can be the open flat tundra table too. Forests are added after.

The distance is already 0-2. With such a high frequency of deer (6 or 8), the adjacency impact won't be strictly observed already. Increasing the numbers won't have much effect.

Tundra absolutely requires those deer to be worth settling on, anyway.
Nothing dramatic, just changing the range to 0-3.
 
Okay, after several games, the AI offers brokered war deals all the time that seem almost broken. In addition, I've never had one fried ask me to go to war jointly with someone. Is this by design?

I think I'd rather see joint wars than all of this brokering stuff (talking to you, Germany). Or maybe I just don't understand it.

Is there a way to revert this back to the old way on my end? I thought I saw a post on that but can't seem to find it.

EDIT: Found the thread to change it. :)

EDIT2: Wow, all of these options for Diplomacy that can be easily changed. Seriously, you guys rock with how you have done all of this. :hatsoff:

Ya, bribed wars are not in a good state right now. I assume what the AI offers you to do it, is what they are offering other AI and they are accepting.

The most common war request I get is 2 gpt and an open boarders. I turned bribed wars off until it can be fixed.
 
Okay, after several games, the AI offers brokered war deals all the time that seem almost broken. In addition, I've never had one fried ask me to go to war jointly with someone. Is this by design?

I think I'd rather see joint wars than all of this brokering stuff (talking to you, Germany). Or maybe I just don't understand it.

Is there a way to revert this back to the old way on my end? I thought I saw a post on that but can't seem to find it.

EDIT: Found the thread to change it. :)

EDIT2: Wow, all of these options for Diplomacy that can be easily changed. Seriously, you guys rock with how you have done all of this. :hatsoff:
Does anyone know if it's possible to turn off after starting a new game? I'm only in turn ~10 but have an interesting map.

\Skodkim
 
Last edited:
I think its not related to this version, maybe, maybe not, but I saw something strange in my game:
Spoiler Building Priority? :

I was wondering why this city had such high population with only so low food sources and checked it with the ingame editor.
City placement looked first terrible, cause Korea had 2 other good options to place a city, but with a second look, it isnt that bad, especially in respect to the strategic ressources and the luxury.
The reason why the city was bigger than the food source was a trade route, so all fine.
But I find the build order really strange.
After a monument/well and market, they directly construct an amphitheater (not seen here).
Should this be really the next option for their construction order? I find that strange and really suboptimal. Theres also one of the citizens working as laborer.

 
Bribed wars are phony wars in my experience from last two patches. 9-2 and 10-7. AIs kill one of my scouts and i kill one of theirs. In a Domination game it does not matter but I'll option them out if i'm going for another type of victory with Progress or Tradition.
 
Bribed wars are phony wars in my experience from last two patches. 9-2 and 10-7. AIs kill one of my scouts and i kill one of theirs. In a Domination game it does not matter but I'll option them out if i'm going for another type of victory with Progress or Tradition.
Its not only an annoying aspect, that you permanently lose trade units/treaties/research agreements/etc. cause of useless war declarations.
Its also, together with the permanent ressource question spam the AI are doing, really annoying.
I will not imagine how you want to play this with a lot of fun in a 43 civ game. (Iam not playing this way nor do I think it should be balanced around it, but getting around 4 request with 12 civs each turn in my game let me ask myself, whats happening in 43 civs games...)

Edit:
The AI is still terrible in defending their own religion...
Iam playing India on an Oval map, have chosen Cathedrals and Mandirs, but no other pressure increasing option. Never have used any prophet to spread.
My capital has a pressure generation of 450. The far most east city of the french (capital) gets a pressure of 300. Not sure if this is intended
Spoiler Religion going easy :
 
Last edited:
for me it's ok that the AI accepts a cheap bribe against a player that is conquering the world, maybe they wanted to anyway but just needed that small tip. You need a dogpiling mechanism to challenge snowballing conquerors, and no single civ will suicide against the military leader, they need to be sure others are in. Phony wars also allow this, if a player is far away from the warmonger, it is safe to declare war and see. If no one joins, it is a phony war, but it opens the window for dogpiling. The issue is if an AI has absolutely no interest in a war against you (it's not a warmonger, you are not a threat, and you are well defended) but accepts a cheap bribe for the DoW.
 
Phony wars also allow this, if a player is far away from the warmonger, it is safe to declare war and see. If no one joins, it is a phony war, but it opens the window for dogpiling
Bribing others to war isnt a bad thing. But this sentence alone might show how wrong things can go.
A civ, which is far away and safe from a warmonger declaring a war might send a very wrong signal. Cause its very unlikely that this civ is contributing any military force to a fight. Other AIs bordering the target civ might think, that the initiator civ will send military units to join their fight, even the intention was never to attack. The result would be a civ, which would alone never attack cause of the inability to win, but beeing now exposed to the war hardened warmonger civ, which is probably able to turn the defensive war in a killing spree versus a neighbor, that isnt prepared to fight alone. (cause of never happening reinforcements from far away civs)
 
In my current game as Germany, I'm playing against a multitude of aggressive AIs and around turn 105 I was at war simultaneously with every single AI due to bribed wars (only my two neighbours attacked me on their own), even though I only had 5 cities and didn't denounce or do anything to invoke their wrath. It makes for a really tough challenge, but so far I'm handling it well.
 
I just got crushed by early-game Persia. I had a decent military too (before the war), but I was using spears and archers vs. horsemen, immortals, catapults and composite bows (they were 4 techs ahead of me). Persia had taken Authority while I took Progress. Don't feel I really had much of a chance in that fight.

I probably could have settled less agressively, but there seems to be issues with razing cities you capture, so I wanted to establish my territory early. I suppose next time I'll rush Masonry for walls and buy that horse tile so I can build horsemen. I would also have deployed my military towards that front pre-emptively, but a barbarian horseman with double movement through jungle was harassing my capital and I had moved troops to take it out. I'll try a few more games - hopefully next time Ghandi won't claim Goddess of Springtime. I may end up going back down a difficulty anyway though - we'll see. On the plus side, I'm learning to play with more civs on the map. I'm only at +1 (13 on a Huge map) and the difference is already noticeable in terms of competition for religion, wonders, and territory.

Spoiler :
20201013224335_1.jpg
 
So, apparently we are having psychotically different results. I am in a Turn 137 game as the Huns. On a Standard Map (at standard speed), NO ONE has ever declared a war. Except me. I declared one war against Austria. No denouncements (other than Austria after taking her capital, she has 1 city left). Even then, after taking her capital, nothing other than trades and rainbows and puppy dogs.

We are all on the same landmass. I have met all 12 civs. This is a game with 12 civs, 22 CS, where there should only be 8/16 (again, standard map).

I even made the adjustment to get rid of brokered wars, and at the same time this one:

SELECT 'DIPLOAI_AGGRESSIVE_MODE', '2';

Which means the AI should be crazy against everyone else. But they are not.

Again, I have never been asked to join a war (from a friend) against another AI. Ever.

Totally confused. I have saves if needed, but at this point I'm just discussing ideas (not specifics).
 
So, apparently we are having psychotically different results. I am in a Turn 137 game as the Huns. On a Standard Map (at standard speed), NO ONE has ever declared a war. Except me. I declared one war against Austria. No denouncements (other than Austria after taking her capital, she has 1 city left). Even then, after taking her capital, nothing other than trades and rainbows and puppy dogs.

We are all on the same landmass. I have met all 12 civs. This is a game with 12 civs, 22 CS, where there should only be 8/16 (again, standard map).

I even made the adjustment to get rid of brokered wars, and at the same time this one:

SELECT 'DIPLOAI_AGGRESSIVE_MODE', '2';

Which means the AI should be crazy against everyone else. But they are not.

Again, I have never been asked to join a war (from a friend) against another AI. Ever.

Totally confused. I have saves if needed, but at this point I'm just discussing ideas (not specifics).
In my game, large oval map with 12 civs, there are permanent wars.
But something I noticed, is probably wrong diplomatic modifiers.
All my direct neighbors, even those with very close borders have a POSITIVE modifier for not having contested borders. Could you check this maybe in your game?
 
In my game, large oval map with 12 civs, there are permanent wars.
But something I noticed, is probably wrong diplomatic modifiers.
All my direct neighbors, even those with very close borders have a POSITIVE modifier for not having contested borders. Could you check this maybe in your game?

Well, it's funny, the last Austrian city is offshore slightly. As a result, there is a +15 for having no constested borders. Otherwise, there is nothing constested. You would think owning their capital would make it a bit different, but maybe not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom