Quick Questions / Quick Answers

[Revolutionist_8]

Hello!
I have a question - I have a couple of great works acitve, but alltogether only 5 tourism output. It should be much more.
Does anybody has an idea whats the reason for it? Cannot find the reason for it ..
Thank you in advance!

Each city you own reduces Tourism (up to -75%, if I remember correctly) output - you can hover over it in City view.

 

[youngsteve]

Question about Vassals & domination victory. Until beta of 17th May, to win a domination victory a player had to control all capitals, including vassal ones. then it was changed to:
Vassals holding capitals now count towards domination victory.

I am currently playing an older version, but newer than changes of 17 May. This is 28 May version. I have been playing a nice game on Tiny map as America, with three other civs. Huns were strutting around so Ottomans decided to become my vassal. Later I attacked Attila & William who was in pact with him, & after a long campaign finally got both there capitals, & also my vassals. Meaning I had all 3 of them. Nothing happened, with victory screen saying I had 3, but not Ottoman capital. Played a few more turns & still nothing happened.

My question is does the chamge only apply to caputilated vassals, & not voluntary ones, or was this changed back again in the following patches. I think I have won & done what I am supposed to do, but it seems strange not to acknowledge this. That is I have won, when I take Ottomans capital, which puts you off having vassals. On the other hand, is this just a bug, that has since been resolved in later version. Just interested so I know what to do next time.

 

[andersw]

Question about Vassals & domination victory. Until beta of 17th May, to win a domination victory a player had to control all capitals, including vassal ones. then it was changed to:
Vassals holding capitals now count towards domination victory.

I am currently playing an older version, but newer than changes of 17 May. This is 28 May version. I have been playing a nice game on Tiny map as America, with three other civs. Huns were strutting around so Ottomans decided to become my vassal. Later I attacked Attila & William who was in pact with him, & after a long campaign finally got both there capitals, & also my vassals. Meaning I had all 3 of them. Nothing happened, with victory screen saying I had 3, but not Ottoman capital. Played a few more turns & still nothing happened.

My question is does the chamge only apply to caputilated vassals, & not voluntary ones, or was this changed back again in the following patches. I think I have won & done what I am supposed to do, but it seems strange not to acknowledge this. That is I have won, when I take Ottomans capital, which puts you off having vassals. On the other hand, is this just a bug, that has since been resolved in later version. Just interested so I know what to do next time.

Victory screen should show what capitals the game consider that you control.

 

[youngsteve]

Victory screen should show what capitals the game consider that you control.

It shows I control capitals of Netherlands & The Huns which I had conquered, but not Ottomans capital, even though they are a vassal, though a voluntary one. I know people had an issue with needing vassals capitals for domination win, but that seemed to have been changed in 17 May beta, but seems not in my game.

 

[AndreyK]

Playing with 6/7 beta does spy event giving +2 yield to specialists expire right? Didn't get any notice on expiration and number of yields just climbs, didn't see it gets smaller

 

[AndreyK]

Did go down only after same spy action by AI also seems permanent

 

[kriceless]

Quite a few questions:

(1) What are some of the reasons to split 6 policies early?
(2) How do you transition from early Authority wars to a bit more peaceful middle/endgame?
(3) I sometimes see the AI pick Fealty without religion, is this a legit strat or just AI strats?
(4) Is there merit in going two early game trees?

 

[stii]

Quite a few questions:

(1) What are some of the reasons to split 6 policies early?
(2) How do you transition from early Authority wars to a bit more peaceful middle/endgame?
(3) I sometimes see the AI pick Fealty without religion, is this a legit strat or just AI strats?
(4) Is there merit in going two early game trees?

Splitting polices mostly depends how good the finisher, as that is the cost when you split. Authority is pretty weak so going that and something else is more reasonable. That said in general you shouldn't split because it is a pretty big cost, the better polices need to make up a lot.

I guess the key is to not sacrifice too much to do the war in the first place. Need make infrastructure so your cities continue to tech up normally while you fight. Try to make people vassals instead of conquering too many cities, anything you can't afford to annex is pretty weak. Puppets are pretty worthless.

Fealty is often better without a religion you can use your otherwise wasted faith to buy the faith building right away.

Tradition /progress into authority is fine if not exciting.

 

[Gen.Washington]

How does one gain war score while defending? I was getting invaded by China and Mongolia and killed dozens of units but my war score never moved from 0 so the war never ended and lasted hundreds of turns. Is the only option for ending a war taking enemy cities?

 

[stii]

How does one gain war score while defending? I was getting invaded by China and Mongolia and killed dozens of units but my war score never moved from 0 so the war never ended and lasted hundreds of turns. Is the only option for ending a war taking enemy cities?

You can get it from killing units but it requires killing an awful lot.

 

[Gen.Washington]

You can get it from killing units but it requires killing an awful lot.

Will the ai eventually accept a white peace at 0 warscore if they’re not making progress? Or would the war go on forever until someone takes a city?

 

[stii]

Will the ai eventually accept a white peace at 0 warscore if they’re not making progress? Or would the war go on forever until someone takes a city?

So the problem is that this is very variable depending on a number of factors, lots of which you can't see. So based on my games and some guess work I think it works roughly like this,

Reason for war, if the AI has been bribed into a war it will be very keen to peace out once the timer has expired, you can tell if this is the case by seeing if the peace option in their dipolmacy is greyed out with this as the reason.

If they attacked you on their own the AI will generally fight for longer and it is hard to tell. It feels like they keep fighting as long as they think they are ahead. Which mostly seem to mean number of units. So if you kill enough they will peace out eventully, but if they are big and powerful this can require killing a lot of units. You never have to take a city but wars can drag on a long time if the AI doesn't feel under threat. If the war is lasting 100s of turns you probably need to push in a bit harder.

Even on the highest levels you can kill enough units the AI runs out but it can take a long time.

 

[Recursive]

How does one gain war score while defending? I was getting invaded by China and Mongolia and killed dozens of units but my war score never moved from 0 so the war never ended and lasted hundreds of turns. Is the only option for ending a war taking enemy cities?

It basically works like this, oversimplified:

War score is primarily based on "war damage value". This value is equal to (war value lost * 100) / (war value lost + current war value).

Your war score = their war damage value - your war damage value, reduced if the war has gone on for a long time without capturing a city.

Cities are worth a lot in current war value compared to units and they are much harder for the AI to replace, so as long as the AI has strong cities, unit losses are a small contribution.

You can get it from killing units but it requires killing an awful lot.

Will the ai eventually accept a white peace at 0 warscore if they’re not making progress? Or would the war go on forever until someone takes a city?

They will eventually accept white peace.

So the problem is that this is very variable depending on a number of factors, lots of which you can't see. So based on my games and some guess work I think it works roughly like this,

Reason for war, if the AI has been bribed into a war it will be very keen to peace out once the timer has expired, you can tell if this is the case by seeing if the peace option in their dipolmacy is greyed out with this as the reason.

If they attacked you on their own the AI will generally fight for longer and it is hard to tell. It feels like they keep fighting as long as they think they are ahead. Which mostly seem to mean number of units. So if you kill enough they will peace out eventully, but if they are big and powerful this can require killing a lot of units. You never have to take a city but wars can drag on a long time if the AI doesn't feel under threat. If the war is lasting 100s of turns you probably need to push in a bit harder.

Even on the highest levels you can kill enough units the AI runs out but it can take a long time.

I'll post a thread explaining the peace logic soon.

 

[AndreyK]

Is it possible to disable ban luxury proposal?

 

[Gen.Washington]

It basically works like this, oversimplified:

War score is primarily based on "war damage value". This value is equal to (war value lost * 100) / (war value lost + current war value).

Your war score = their war damage value - your war damage value, reduced if the war has gone on for a long time without capturing a city.

Cities are worth a lot in current war value compared to units and they are much harder for the AI to replace, so as long as the AI has strong cities, unit losses are a small contribution.





They will eventually accept white peace.



I'll post a thread explaining the peace logic soon.

Appreciate it, that’s something I’d love to learn in depth.

 

[JamItOnthe1]

Hi,

Currently playing a game as Inca with 7-1-3 hotfix and 3rd/4th components v71. I'm working Cerro de Potosi in my 3rd ring of Huamanga. Byzantium AI settles city Varna adjacent to Cerro do Potosi (4 tiles from Huamanga) on the next turn and claims my previously owned tile as their own as it is now in their first ring of Varna. Is this working as intended or should Cerro de Potosi have remained in my control?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Recursive]

Hi,

Currently playing a game as Inca with 7-1-3 hotfix and 3rd/4th components v71. I'm working Cerro de Potosi in my 3rd ring of Huamanga. Byzantium AI settles city Varna adjacent to Cerro do Potosi (4 tiles from Huamanga) on the next turn and claims my previously owned tile as their own as it is now in their first ring of Varna. Is this working as intended or should Cerro de Potosi have remained in my control?

Thanks in advance!

Not working as intended, you're not supposed to be able to settle adjacent to another player's borders.

 

[Kim Dong Un]

Is it possible to disable ban luxury proposal?

Yes, there is a mod(s) which does this. I've used it for ages and it works great. I'm not on my pc, but Google is your friend.

 

[JamItOnthe1]

Not working as intended, you're not supposed to be able to settle adjacent to another player's borders.

Thank you for the quick response. "AI settles adjacent to player's border #8142" has been opened up on GitHub.

 

[kriceless]

Fairly new, do AI's actually capitulate peacefully (without conquest)? I sometimes see AI's randomly becoming vassals of other AI. If so, is it possible for a human player to make an AI your vassal without war as well?