New Version - May 19th (5-19)

[tu_79]

I've been at war for 13 turns, suffered a pillaging of one luxury resource, lost one knight, and have 15 war weariness. I'm playing a 5 city tradition Arabia on deity. I'm still happy because I'm tall but this is excessive.

Fun thing, we're talking about increasing it because it's still not deterring players from long grinding wars.

 

[dostillevi]

I'm in favor of increasing it slightly when a war is being won, since conquering cities can often lead to incidental happiness gains. Either way, for players to wage strategic wars there also needs to be a way to end the war. The AI is often unwilling to end, even if its "winning" the war, or the player might be forced to give something up to end the war, which doesn't balance with the idea that a limited objective has been achieved and the player should want to stop fighting.

Edit: I'd also add that the political consequences of shorter wars seem (and I could be wrong) just as severe as longer wars. Ending a short war while leaving the opponent mostly intact and angry doesn't seem smart.

 

[pineappledan]

Fun thing, we're talking about increasing it because it's still not deterring players from long grinding wars.

Yay! This has to feel like a major factor, or else the Huns' kit won't do much

I'd also add that the political consequences of shorter wars seem (and I could be wrong) just as severe as longer wars. Ending a short war while leaving the opponent mostly intact and angry doesn't seem smart.

Ehhh... You might think so, but short wars are very popular, especially if you win. Take the Franco-Prussian war for example. Prussia beat France quickly and handilly, and it was such a popular war that the German people signed on to a German unification shortly afterwards. Yes, France was steaming mad about it, especially with the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, but they ended up just getting throttled by Germany again in the next war. The Gulf War is another great example. Bush Sr. promised to kick Iraq out of Kuwait, and that's exactly what they did. Contrast that with the lengthy and ongoing occupation of Afghanistan and how unpopular and politically costly that war has been for Bush Jr. and Obama.

It's far more important to make sure your own people like you and your wars than it is to keep losers happy. The French and Afghanis were going to hate Germans and Americans, respectively, whether the war took 1 year or 10, but they can blame their own government and troops for losing just as well as they can blame the winners. IRL, the most important thing about wars is that you keep your own people happy by a) winning and b) win as cheaply as possible, and a shorter war is generally a cheaper war.

 

[tothePAIN]

Fun thing, we're talking about increasing it because it's still not deterring players from long grinding wars.

I don't mind increasing it but it's not acting as intended. And I understand and appreciate that this is not the place to report a bug. I'll look to see if I have the save file. But I shouldn't have 88 war weariness as a 14 city Progress / Artistry / Industry / Freedom China when I lose 0 units and have 2 tiles pillaged. Or 15 war weariness in the above scenario. I'll look to replicate this issue but it's clearly a bug unless I missed it being an intentional change.

 

[dostillevi]

I don't mind increasing it but it's not acting as intended. And I understand and appreciate that this is not the place to report a bug. I'll look to see if I have the save file. But I shouldn't have 88 war weariness as a 14 city Progress / Artistry / Industry / Freedom China when I lose 0 units and have 2 tiles pillaged. Or 15 war weariness in the above scenario. I'll look to replicate this issue but it's clearly a bug unless I missed it being an intentional change.

It's been reported and fixed for the next patch. There was a MAX instead of a MIN which was causing sudden unintended increases in WW.

 

[dostillevi]

Yay! This has to feel like a major factor, or else the Huns' kit won't do much
Ehhh... You might think so, but short wars are very popular, especially if you win. Take the Franco-Prussian war for example. Prussia beat France quickly and handilly, and it was such a popular war that the German people signed on to a German unification shortly afterwards. Yes, France was steaming mad about it, especially with the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, but they ended up just getting throttled by Germany again in the next war. The Gulf War is another great example. Bush Sr. promised to kick Iraq out of Kuwait, and that's exactly what they did. Contrast that with the lengthy and ongoing occupation of Afghanistan and how unpopular and politically costly that war has been for Bush Jr. and Obama.

It's far more important to make sure your own people like you and your wars than it is to keep losers happy. The French and Afghanis were going to hate Germans and Americans, respectively, whether the war took 1 year or 10, but they can blame their own government and troops for losing just as well as they can blame the winners. IRL, the most important thing about wars is that you keep your own people happy by a) winning and b) win as cheaply as possible, and a shorter war is generally a cheaper war.

Oh yeah in real life I completely agree. I'm thinking more of the centuries-long grudges that the AI carries in game. You very quickly become civ-non-grata after just a few strategic short wars and stay that way for a really long time.

 

[SpankmyMetroid]

On which difficulty? For me it was as per usual; some Civs delayed settling and others were very aggressive (policies and traits play a role). Although I haven't played island-heavy maps, I would assume on Archi that some Civs who don't prioritise Sailing would be delayed (though I believe AI's who want to settle across water would have a higher tendency to go for that tech). A thing I do sometimes to delay a Civ is steal a nearby Civ's early worker and refuse to make peace for a while, but I digress; it's been normal for me on continental maps.

Emperor for both. I agree that despite the best intentions the naval exploration for the AI is still lackluster, and on archipelago those cities were not perfect (they still ended up being powerhouses) but I was literally settling 10 or 15 tiles away from people’s capitals. On the new continents map I also overextended close to neighbors on the same landmass without getting punished for it, and really felt no pressure to settle the rest of the spaces in between my half of the continent that had 5 people on it. Again, the other 4 neighbors were very close to each other and constantly at war, so that might have let me get away with it.

 

[Txurce]

Take the Franco-Prussian war for example. Prussia beat France quickly and handilly, and it was such a popular war that the German people signed on to a German unification shortly afterwards. Yes, France was steaming mad about it, especially with the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, but they ended up just getting throttled by Germany again in the next war.

Their next war was World War One. The French regained Alsace-Lorraine in that one, and I believe some of the Rhineland to boot.

 

[pineappledan]

Their next war was World War One. The French regained Alsace-Lorraine in that one, and I believe some of the Rhineland to boot.

right, but the Central powers only began to lose in Western Europe after the UK had mobilized. If it hadn’t been for UK intervention at the Marne, followed by the race to the Sea, there is a good chance Germany would have knocked France out of the war only a few weeks behind their Schleiffen plan timetables. France was holding on by two fingers, and spent the next 4 years fighting tooth and nail pushing Germany back off their homeland.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

right, but the Central powers only began to lose in Western Europe after the UK had mobilized. If it hadn’t been for UK intervention at the Marne, followed by the race to the Sea, there is a good chance Germany would have knocked France out of the war only a few weeks behind their Schleiffen plan timetables. France was holding on by two fingers, and spent the next 4 years fighting tooth and nail pushing Germany back off their homeland.

The german army was at this time superior to every other army in the world, technically, tactically and by discipline. Unfortunatly the soldiers and officiers were skilled, but not the grand strategiest and the Kaiser. At the beginning of the war, the Schlieffenplan was the only plan they had, so they used it. The invasion of belgium needed much longer than the germans expected, so they were behind in their plan, while the russians were much faster in their actions and an invasion of east germany was feared. As a result, the west front was weakened, unable to hold the pressure long enough and conquer Paris. The Germans could have won the war, if they had played defensively in the west and pushed mainly in the east.

Backt to the base of this, WW doesnt works as intended. I got 3 times more WW than my enemy, even I was winning the war and hadnt lost much units or trade routes. I think, major problem is the WW reduction in the authority tree. It makes no sense to create a mechanic to control warmongers and then give them an option to deny a part of that control mechanic.

 

[Bhawb]

I think, major problem is the WW reduction in the authority tree. It makes no sense to create a mechanic to control warmongers and then give them an option to deny a part of that control mechanic.

I disagree with this. It makes sense both in gameplay and reality for a civ to be able to mitigate WW. And of course civs have the option to mitigate downsides of certain choices, that's literally the point of policy trees. Tradition gets to essentially ignore unhappiness from pop growth in its capital, Progress faces significantly reduced unhappiness you'd normally face when expanding.

Authority as a policy tree is representing your civ's culture being based on war and expansion, so it makes sense that an Authority civ wouldn't be as bothered by war as another civ.

 

[Txurce]

Has anyone else had units deleted if in enemy territory when peace is declared? I'm not positive, but think it's happened twice now. But if it has, not all units in enemy territory are deleted.

 

[pineappledan]

Has anyone else had units deleted if in enemy territory when peace is declared? I'm not positive, but think it's happened twice now. But if it has, not all units in enemy territory are deleted.

i lost at least 2 units in a peace treaty in my last game.

They were highly promoted too; I was really ticked off by it. A few units did get moved out of enemy territory, but somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3 of my units just vanished.

 

[DeAnno]

Has anyone else had units deleted if in enemy territory when peace is declared?

Sometimes units get sucked into small holes in enemy territory on a Peace Treaty too. I had that happen to a Great Admiral in one game, even though the ships escorting him all got warped out to the actual outside instead. It's an unfortunate piece of legacy code from vanilla in general, is the sense I get.

At this point I'm basically not willing to ever peace on the AI's turn anymore, it results in this stuff happening too much.

 

[Rekk]

Has anyone else had units deleted if in enemy territory when peace is declared? I'm not positive, but think it's happened twice now. But if it has, not all units in enemy territory are deleted.

This was supposed to be fixed a while back. Create a new big report.

It seemed to be working fine in January. I had a bunch of peace treaties that resulted in some very large troop displacements.

 

[Rekk]

I disagree with this. It makes sense both in gameplay and reality for a civ to be able to mitigate WW. And of course civs have the option to mitigate downsides of certain choices, that's literally the point of policy trees. Tradition gets to essentially ignore unhappiness from pop growth in its capital, Progress faces significantly reduced unhappiness you'd normally face when expanding.

Authority as a policy tree is representing your civ's culture being based on war and expansion, so it makes sense that an Authority civ wouldn't be as bothered by war as another civ.

Growth and City unhappiness are permanent fixtures that build higher and higher over time . War weariness is temporary. When war weariness is too much, the aggressor can reset the war weariness by suing for peace, then declare on someone else. The objectives between these sources of unhappiness are different.

Leaving aside that "it makes sense in reality", war weariness is there to curb warmongers, and the policy enables warmongers to use war weariness as a weapon instead. Reducing the effectiveness of one of the primary methods the game has slow down war mongers, accessible only by those war mongers does not "make sense in gameplay".

BiteInTheMark's "3 times" issue is likely due the bug ilteroi fixed for next version, so we'll have to see what it's like with the new version.

 

[elisec711]

Hi my game crashes when I mouse over the happiness% to see whats making it up.Any reason for this?

 

[Bhawb]

Hi my game crashes when I mouse over the happiness% to see whats making it up.Any reason for this?

There is a bug I noticed where the % happiness screen displays a lot of wrong info. Whatever background calculations are causing that might be causing your game to crash, similar to other "open this menu/display this thing and crash" bugs that have popped up occasionally.

 

[tu_79]

Growth and City unhappiness are permanent fixtures that build higher and higher over time . War weariness is temporary. When war weariness is too much, the aggressor can reset the war weariness by suing for peace, then declare on someone else. The objectives between these sources of unhappiness are different.

Leaving aside that "it makes sense in reality", war weariness is there to curb warmongers, and the policy enables warmongers to use war weariness as a weapon instead. Reducing the effectiveness of one of the primary methods the game has slow down war mongers, accessible only by those war mongers does not "make sense in gameplay".

BiteInTheMark's "3 times" issue is likely due the big ilteroi fixed for next version, so we'll have to see what it's like with the new version.

Completely agree.
I'd be OK with Authority increasing its supply limit so they can field a larger army but feeling war weariness the same as the others. Otherwise this mechanic is not doing what it is supposed to do.

 

[frktest]

First of all thanks a lot for your efforts to improve the game.
During the last gameplay I had in autosaves folder saves called 'autosave_turn number' and 'autosave_turn number_post' (or so)
Now I have started a new game after upgrading with 5-19 version and the 'autosave_turn number_post' is not shown anymore.
Is that a change of 5-19 version?