Patch M Mana slaves

[Tlalynet]

Anyone else having trouble keeping mana slaves in M? ? I've been having the most pathetic civs DOW on me when I demand their regular mana tribute. The only cases in which I've been able to keep their mana for a reasonable amount of time when I've killed them down to one weakened unit. The best was when I was fighting the Cabilim and had them down to one city defended by a 1\10th of a Str skeleton.

I got their mana for about 18 turns, they build an adept and decided they where strong enough to rebel...

Is vassalizing for mana dead in M? Anyone else having problems with it?

 

[Azhral]

Yea, appears to be an issue, but only with capitulation. If a civ willingly vassalises to you then they usually don't complain when you steal all their mana.

I don't think the capitulation mechanic allows the vassal to declare war on the master for 10 or so turns after capitulation, so they literally have to acceed to any of the masters demands, but are free to wage war again after 10 turns so cancel all deals so they actually can DoW once the master demands something again. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The AI simply needs to be slightly more aware about self preservation. Pretty suicidal at the moment, at least, they never give up if they don't want to, even if the alternative is complete annihilation. Still some civs should prefer annihilation thematically. Shieam for example (Even through our destruction you help to bring about our goals).

 

[Tlalynet]

They will instantly DoW when I make a demand even if its the same turn I capitulated.

It could be a negative diplomacy thing then, I havn't had any voluntary vassals under M and I've been having fun razing any city I dislike. -10 or -20 diplo might mean they would rather die than help me.

I agree the Sheim should rather die than help anyone, they sure don't need a self preservation AI. The Cabilim on the otherhand that do so much for life extension should possibly be more eager capitulators.

 

[Angel-Julia]

I just take their land, and manna allong with it!

 

[Calavente]

they're talking about palace mana and not mana nodes

I almost nevet have any vassal... so I won't know

 

[UncleJJ]

I think this has always been a problem with vassals when you demand their mana. I have been playing with several patches over the last few months and this has occured every time I demand mana after capitualation. I have never managed to get mana from an AI long term from capitulation. However, I have traded a spare mana plus other resources for one of their mana. That can be useful for building a tower of the right kind.

My technique to manage this rebelling situation is to make sure my adepts and mages take any promotions from the mana in the 10 turns or so before they rebel. Then I wipe them out and their palace goes with them. That way at least I get access to a few spells I might not otherwise have but it's not as useful as it could be or should be.

 

[Tlalynet]

I know I could get palace mana pretty consistently under J as long as I kept my power rating up and I really beat them down.

Promoting adepts while you have it is a great plan, I've been doing that myself now that I can't rely on my vassals.

I don't mind if vassalizing for palace mana is gone, I just don't want to keep trying it if it is.

 

[Tholal]

In my current patch M game as the Sheaim, I forced both the Elohim and the Lurchurip to capitulate. And even though they are 'Furious' with me, the Elohim gave me their water mana without a struggle (I havent yet asked for any mana from the dwarves). I am at the top of the scoreboard, so maybe that makes a difference.

 

[Tlalynet]

I got Cassiels mana, he voluntarily vassalized to me, and I've kept it for 20 turns so far. The Clan got beat down to one city and an axeman and they still preferred to die than to give their mana up.

 

[Angel-Julia]

yeah, it is a real pain that they chose death instead of providing manna.
maybe they should only be able to break free if they have at least 10% of your power rating(how are 2 axemen going to fight off an army of 200+ angels? well they still want war).

maybe it's a design intent, so that we dont all have 5+ manna slaves, and get all the spells in the book as free promotions (it was awsome when i had 3 earth manna, meaning my mages all got free stoneskin, which means large scale exp farming).

 

[mcwill123]

In my recent 0.41M game, mana never showed up on the Amurites side of the negotiation screen. I guess they wouldn't even consider trading it under any circumstances?

 

[Tlalynet]

Cassiel dumped me as soon as the war was over, he got Dowed on again and asked to be my vassal repeatedly.

It could be design intent, Mana slaves are kind of an exploit. I wounder if I could keep vassals if I didn't demand their mana, but then, I wouldn't really want them if I couldn't demand their mana...

Mcwill, Unless they are capitulated palace mana doesn't show up on their side of the trade screen. You have to demand it after they become a vassal. If they where you're vassal it is weird I agree.

 

[mcwill123]

That may be it. Its been a few days. Maybe I never vassalized them. In general I tend to wipe the civ out, far less "we yearn to join our mother country".

 

[Tlalynet]

Yeah, though the +1 We influence other civilizations is nice, it depends on how many cities that culture had and how important those cities are to me. I prefer to wipe civs out as Elo's since its usually newly conquard cities that become my production centers, but if I beat up a small AI in not so good terrain then I might prefer the universal +1 to the local -?

 

[Lade]

I almost nevet have any vassal... so I won't know

Same here. I probably would have never realized this was an issue.

Of course, its true, the AI is way to suicidal. You'd think at least some nations would be a bit more interested in self preservation.

 

[a_civilian]

They want to spite you? I don't see anything wrong with that. Not like having one worthless city is much better than nothing.

 

[Draconian]

That might be correct in game terms, but from a roleplaying view it's strange that they would prefer total annihilation to giving up their palace mana.

 

[a_civilian]

Perhaps it depends on the leader but I don't see the roleplaying problem either. They prefer to destroy their mana source rather than let you use it, knowing that with that mana you would more easily take out their allies or otherwise increase your nefarious influence. They're essentially gone as a sovereign state already so losing any remaining power is no significant loss.

I will note, however, that I usually don't have any trouble getting mana from capitulated civilizations as long as I weaken them enough first (such as leaving them with a single tundra city), and this is the opposite of what should happen according to this analysis. Whether roleplaying or metagaming, they should be more willing to give up tribute the more territory you leave them with, since it means a) they have more to lose and b) maybe you're not as evil as they thought.

 

[Lade]

Perhaps it depends on the leader but I don't see the roleplaying problem either. They prefer to destroy their mana source rather than let you use it, knowing that with that mana you would more easily take out their allies or otherwise increase your nefarious influence. They're essentially gone as a sovereign state already so losing any remaining power is no significant loss.

I will note, however, that I usually don't have any trouble getting mana from capitulated civilizations as long as I weaken them enough first (such as leaving them with a single tundra city), and this is the opposite of what should happen according to this analysis. Whether roleplaying or metagaming, they should be more willing to give up tribute the more territory you leave them with, since it means a) they have more to lose and b) maybe you're not as evil as they thought.

From a role-play perspective, generating palace mana makes little point in the first place.

Though there may be some logical explanation for it in Erebus that makes really good sense, I just don't know it.

 

[Angel-Julia]

I noticed the same, though in one case Shaim didnt cancel deals even though she broke free of captulisation(or whatever its called). however sheeba is a different story, she had a couple of units, vs 200+ angels+mages, and was gone in a blink of an eye.

i wonder if it makes any impact when you demant the manna, in sheeba's case i think i forgot to demand tribute in the first turn, and only did it a couple of turns later. mabe when breaking free they cancel all deals, though maybe at that stage they couldent cancel the manna trade as i made it later. and then forgot about it, so paid me their manna for the rest of the game.... and so they lived happily ever after. i guess it's not that lore-like with shaim being the ones that are willing to pay for self-preservation while the alternative of me raizing their city would be more in line with them achieving their goal of destroying the world.