Realism Invictus

I found forts to be a great way to help with defense. Rather then dropping units into cities, and praying they can hold out as resources get pillaged, a few well-set forts can provide defense bonuses rivaling a castle with additional offensive bonuses as well.

With forts sat up, I normally leave my cities with one defender, and leave the active defenders inside forts on the borders around mountains, on hills, and bordering rivers. This works really great defending the rear of the empire, or for turtling up during peacetime.

Of course, it all depends on the cards you have and the terrain your left with.

Another thing about archers...
Archers may be crappy defenders, but they do additionally provide a ranged defense bonus to the other defenders. I don't play the beta stuff, so if thats no longer true. too bad.

I'm surprised that worked because it shouldn't with K-mod AI and perhaps even BTS AI.
Unless the game was really coding that forts are literally cities, stacks target cities, not random forts and once a city reached, if too well guarded, then it enters in pillage mode around it.
At least, I know for certainty (code backed) that AI units only target cities. Yeah, sometimes, one individual targets one easy prey (opportunity frame), but at the most abstract level, stacks target cities. One reason barbarian units can be fend off by blockading a closed region with units...because when pathfinding, it can't reach a city.

And as Joker.ru dude said, god blesses his soul, barbs simply deviate from well-garded unit spots to go to cities. It's the same for AI stacks. The code isn't that different between both barb team and AI teams.

Now, do you have grounds of what you said or is it an hypothesis? :dunno:

Anyways *I know tl;dr about the huge text wall; I understand :) *, but my point was about quick counterattack against K-mod AI's. The way it is now, if the standby stack supremely fails at 60% chance of win, the consequences are rather big.
In BTS, we often say the best defense is by attacking; in K-mod, it is the absolute truth!

And good point Phoenix! I forgot about slave markets boosting mines, slave farms, etc. Ok, maybe it's not as weak as I pretend, but it's still the same...how to deal with cities with lotsa food and no production since slavery is weak when it comes to whip. Slavery was implemented mainly for that, not for anything else in the base game. And also quick emergency defenses. Let's imagine a scenario one starts on a peninsula with almost no hills, cows, flat copper, etc. Ouch! That's gonna be unwinnable. I haven't checked yet, but I suspect the conversion rate between food to hammers for a whip is rather bad. In base BTS, it was ~24-26 food for 30 hammers. Doing justice, it should be 30-30 or a ratio of 1. Now, it fells less than 1, which is no good because it penalizes those civilizations in hammer poor areas.

============================

Now about another point:

Nazca Lines and Angkhor Vat. Both wonders give +1 hammer to priest specialists. While the Angkhor Vat is useful to near the end of the game at least, Nazca line is rather expensive and furthermore useful only until medieval times (may delay the obsoleting tech though, but not indefinitely).

The problem is specialists cost a lot in the early game. In the base game, it was 2 :food: for an output of 3 (2 for engineers) and 3 :gp:. With prophets, the use of a GProphet is rather limited. One would prefer either a GScientist or a GEngineer for good reasons. And given the gains to a boosted prophet (Nazca Line) isn't the end of the world, especially for the investment cost, it feels the wonder is weak.

As I played, I saw the most powerful wonder to get early game is the Mids. Not because it gives +1 :hammers: and +1:science: to pagan temples, but for the engineer :gp:. It gives the chance of wonderwhoring early without much investment while disallowing any AI to get that GEngineer to do the same.
My typical strategy, which avers pretty strong (and that means other paths should be buffed), is going Mids (if failed, at least fail gold is welcomed and the rate is one hammer for one gold, which is better than building wealth!!) and wait for the GEngineer. While doing so, I beeline for Polytheism and get one of the best early religion. For one, the cows give +1 :health: and one wonder built giving +1 happy +1 health empire wide for no cost. Immensely powerful. And at the same time, you get the GEngineer and rush the ToA, which means +5 :gp: from the priest and wonder. That can get very far if lucky in successive GEngineers without much more cost than Mids. Anways, the point is, the Mids have proven strong path for 400 hammers (halved with stone!) while Nazca Lines gives few for 360 hammers and it obsoletes fast and too early for correct use of priests.

My way to boost it is to make bonus extended to GProphets! Yes, imagine wonderwhoring and settling a bunch of GProphets, allowing +4 :hammers: +5:commerce: with Nazca Line and Angkhor Vat (same bonus for that wonder too). Since GProphets are prevalent with early wonders, that should enable a new strategy, which is Great People Economy. Imagine 3 GProphets settled giving a whooping +12 hammers and 15 gold! Wow, that would lead a new strategic pattern!

My motion is to allow GProphets to be included into the Nazca Lines/Angkhor Vat bonuses.
 
Yeah, 'twas time I give a constructive scaffolding to counter the huge past rant!
I'll try to aid if possible regarding balance. Disappointed myself that I wasn't around for TAM mod (another founder mod), but RInvictus is still strong. So I can see if it can be buffed regarding the multiplicity of strategies (I'm not concerned about historicity, I'll let that to others) :)
 
Hey, I was thinking about something regarding newly captured cities having big problems regarding happiness. And same for cumulative era unhappiness.
The problem is transitory, but since it needs building to get over that and the pop available is so low (1-2 pop!), it is indeed transitory, but too long.

I have thought first to make some captured happiness buildings 100% to remain intact (no more 66% chance), but I have another way.

Since it is transitory, why not make a special unit (in the same way as the Guru) enabled by Monarchy civic called the King's representatives (or the King itself, but if he got killed, it's gonna be weird :lol: nope let makes him invisible like a Gspy. Should be a simple XML trigger...). Only capable to be built one at a time (of course, no doppeldanger King) and it triggers the "King's blessings" or something like the visit of the King in countrysides. It lasts 30-40 turns and it gives +2 :c5happy:.

It gives something like:
"The King visited us and gave us many blessings!"

That should help new cities to raise fast and somehow, historically, the King's presence reinforce the control over a city .
 
Anyways *I know tl;dr about the huge text wall; I understand :) *, but my point was about quick counterattack against K-mod AI's. The way it is now, if the standby stack supremely fails at 60% chance of win, the consequences are rather big.
In BTS, we often say the best defense is by attacking; in K-mod, it is the absolute truth!

So basically, you are complaining that AI is too good and puts too much pressure on players? ;)

In truth, I agree that frustration factor of constant warfare is quite high, but we're seeking a different solution to that problem - a more reasonable strategic AI that adequately judges threats. We hope to see an AI that, once beaten, will learn not to play with fire, removing that constant war spam. Current warfare balance on tactical level seems fine to me - you can hold out behind your city walls with your smaller force, but you'll lose the countryside - that's exactly what is supposed to happen.

A statement that you are supposed to be able to put up "emergency defenses" because it was like this in vanilla BtS is somewhat presumptious. You are supposed to maintain adequate defenses in your cities - if you are spending your cities' production on buildings and wonders instead of troops, you are basically having a gamble. You are trading off your immediate safety for long-term benefits. As with all gambles, there is a real risk of losing (to invasion by a stronger neighbor).

Basically, I don't see anything unbalanced or unfair in the situations you describe. Annoying probably - I myself being a builder type of a player am quite frustrated at times by constant AI military harrassment - but not unbalanced or unfair.

And good point Phoenix! I forgot about slave markets boosting mines, slave farms, etc. Ok, maybe it's not as weak as I pretend, but it's still the same...how to deal with cities with lotsa food and no production since slavery is weak when it comes to whip. Slavery was implemented mainly for that, not for anything else in the base game. And also quick emergency defenses. Let's imagine a scenario one starts on a peninsula with almost no hills, cows, flat copper, etc. Ouch! That's gonna be unwinnable. I haven't checked yet, but I suspect the conversion rate between food to hammers for a whip is rather bad. In base BTS, it was ~24-26 food for 30 hammers. Doing justice, it should be 30-30 or a ratio of 1. Now, it fells less than 1, which is no good because it penalizes those civilizations in hammer poor areas.

Whenever you are building shortswordsmen and other levy-type units, you are converting food to hammers 1:1. This unit line is introduced specifically for this purpose - aiding civs with no copper/iron and flat territories. Also keep in mind that an average farm outputs more food in RI than an average mine outputs production.

All that said, though, I agree that we didn't take a look at population rush costs after we rebalanced population growth, and it might be tweaked. I guess a raise to about 40 production could work...

============================
The problem is specialists cost a lot in the early game. In the base game, it was 2 :food: for an output of 3 (2 for engineers) and 3 :gp:. With prophets, the use of a GProphet is rather limited. One would prefer either a GScientist or a GEngineer for good reasons. And given the gains to a boosted prophet (Nazca Line) isn't the end of the world, especially for the investment cost, it feels the wonder is weak.

As I played, I saw the most powerful wonder to get early game is the Mids. Not because it gives +1 :hammers: and +1:science: to pagan temples, but for the engineer :gp:. It gives the chance of wonderwhoring early without much investment while disallowing any AI to get that GEngineer to do the same.
My typical strategy, which avers pretty strong (and that means other paths should be buffed), is going Mids (if failed, at least fail gold is welcomed and the rate is one hammer for one gold, which is better than building wealth!!) and wait for the GEngineer. While doing so, I beeline for Polytheism and get one of the best early religion. For one, the cows give +1 :health: and one wonder built giving +1 happy +1 health empire wide for no cost. Immensely powerful. And at the same time, you get the GEngineer and rush the ToA, which means +5 :gp: from the priest and wonder. That can get very far if lucky in successive GEngineers without much more cost than Mids. Anways, the point is, the Mids have proven strong path for 400 hammers (halved with stone!) while Nazca Lines gives few for 360 hammers and it obsoletes fast and too early for correct use of priests.

Interstingly, your strategy sounds quite flawed. You sink 400 production points early on into a wonder whose effects you aren't even going to use by the time it is built (since you are going for an early religion), only to have a GE later on to build ToA that you could have built naturally with all the production you expended. And we're talking very early game here, when all production is precious (you are basically expending more or less the same amount of time to build a ToA; it is about twice more expensive, but we should also take into account that your city had time to grow a bit and improve its territory more, leading to more production per turn). I think the sunken costs of your Pyramid strategy actually makes it less viable than beelining for ToA - while you are beelining you are spending production on something that actually brings you benefits. But that is of course rather beside the point that you are illustrating, which I actually agree with.

My way to boost it is to make bonus extended to GProphets! Yes, imagine wonderwhoring and settling a bunch of GProphets, allowing +4 :hammers: +5:commerce: with Nazca Line and Angkhor Vat (same bonus for that wonder too). Since GProphets are prevalent with early wonders, that should enable a new strategy, which is Great People Economy. Imagine 3 GProphets settled giving a whooping +12 hammers and 15 gold! Wow, that would lead a new strategic pattern!

My motion is to allow GProphets to be included into the Nazca Lines/Angkhor Vat bonuses.

It is an interesting approach, and I agree that NL could be buffed. But I think that's far from the only way to do it. That doesn't mean to say it is a bad one, but I think I would like to brainstom some alternative variants first.

Hey, I was thinking about something regarding newly captured cities having big problems regarding happiness. And same for cumulative era unhappiness.
The problem is transitory, but since it needs building to get over that and the pop available is so low (1-2 pop!), it is indeed transitory, but too long.

I have thought first to make some captured happiness buildings 100% to remain intact (no more 66% chance), but I have another way.

Since it is transitory, why not make a special unit (in the same way as the Guru) enabled by Monarchy civic called the King's representatives (or the King itself, but if he got killed, it's gonna be weird :lol: nope let makes him invisible like a Gspy. Should be a simple XML trigger...). Only capable to be built one at a time (of course, no doppeldanger King) and it triggers the "King's blessings" or something like the visit of the King in countrysides. It lasts 30-40 turns and it gives +2 :c5happy:.

It gives something like:
"The King visited us and gave us many blessings!"

That should help new cities to raise fast and somehow, historically, the King's presence reinforce the control over a city .

Teaching AI how to use that unit would be quite painful. But I agree that new city problem is real, and that some kind of solution is needed. I am actually thinking of a much easier solution - a temporary "building" (that would vanish afer a certain number of turns) that would allow us to grant certain cities autonomy - which would raise their happiness levels, but dramatically reduce their commerce outputs (=taxes they pay to you). This way, newly founded and conquered cities will have some time to build up sufficient infrastructure with a decent happiness level, if your economy can take that.
 
I agree with Tachy concerning Great Artist use. Great Works are still less beneficial compared to a settled Great Artist or a golden age. Maybe we should use GA to add something to a city for a given number of turns (without the GA dying). for example it can bring x happiness for 10 turns in a given city (a solution to the unhappiness in a newly conquered or founded city). Or x culture, or some thing else. That would make the GA an interesting GP and avoid the "Sh***" we all say when one pops :))

Now concerning slavery, I am not really agreeing because what Tachy is complaining about is :
1. Slavery was the solution to rise an emergency army. One of the things I like most in this Mod is exactly the fact that you can't do that. If you gamble not having an adequate military, than it's exactly that: a gamble and you need to take the consequences :) . Actually in this Mod, one really need to have a decent army all the time, so to be able to defend, deter AI from attacking, attacking when a good windows is there and more importantly because the only way to have a good "professional" army (ie with quality ie XP) is by fighting. XP in this mod is won through combat, no more settled GG or xp free civics, so you actually need to go to war. I am more of a builder by the way, I still fight in RI.

2.Slavery is there to convert food to hammers: I find the whole conversion system a bit weird (how are hummers converted to food by the way?). In my opinion, one should build cities in places where food, hummer (and in some cases commerce) are available. A city is supposed to be self sufficient in F and H. You don't build cities in 100% hill terrain; well you shouldn't build one in a 100% flat one either.
 
Interstingly, your strategy sounds quite flawed. You sink 400 production points early on into a wonder whose effects you aren't even going to use by the time it is built (since you are going for an early religion), only to have a GE later on to build ToA that you could have built naturally with all the production you expended. And we're talking very early game here, when all production is precious (you are basically expending more or less the same amount of time to build a ToA; it is about twice more expensive, but we should also take into account that your city had time to grow a bit and improve its territory more, leading to more production per turn). I think the sunken costs of your Pyramid strategy actually makes it less viable than beelining for ToA - while you are beelining you are spending production on something that actually brings you benefits. But that is of course rather beside the point that you are illustrating, which I actually agree with.

The reason of occasionally trying to get the Mids boils down that the noticeable increase of maintenance per city makes less appealing to have more than 3 cities early. To keep up technologically, it is sometimes better to refrain from mass settling. For instance, -4 right off the bat for a city 3 tiles away is a huge hit to the economy, thus mass settling won't happen until later. Or simply conquer. There's often a weak spot moment where the AI leaves one archer at certain cities, which means possible easy capture. Normally, I try to get my second city before starting the Mids. The idea behind the Mids is relatable to a strategy in vanilla BTS about wonderwhoring hurts the AI, especially getting the wonders that would allow them to get more wonders (GEngineers). At the same time, you take profit of the mass GPeople spawning by mass settling or other various purposes.
The idea behind the Mids is potentially creating a chain of wonders, which will increase the :gp: pool and gets heavier and heavier. Yes, 400 :hammers: Mids is costly, but less than a settler that will hurt the economy. And even if we get bigger production rates, 700 hammers are still hammers. And nothing ensures marble to make it cheap. And while you built the ToA, you may get another GEngineer or even a GMerchant. So for a single 400 hammers investment (or better 200 hammers with stone, which happened luckily in the last game otherwise I think I would have lost it on IMM) that may spiralling into more.

The point is: early warfare=costly. Expansion=costly. Remains infra or wonders. Cottages take time to grow for allowing more aggressive expansion.
There's also another hidden advantage in getting a GEngineer; no marble later for strong wonders like GLibrary. No problem, the GEngineer will take care of that.

Also, the Mids aren't that costly. Let's compare to vanilla BTS of a settler and the Mids. 100 hammers versus 500 hammers while RI is around 210 hammers for 400 hammers. Basically, while vanilla BTS has a ratio of 1:5, realism invictus is only 1:2.
If it was like vanilla BTS, the strategy would be entirely flawed and irrealistic.
 
I agree with Tachy concerning Great Artist use. Great Works are still less beneficial compared to a settled Great Artist or a golden age. Maybe we should use GA to add something to a city for a given number of turns (without the GA dying). for example it can bring x happiness for 10 turns in a given city (a solution to the unhappiness in a newly conquered or founded city). Or x culture, or some thing else. That would make the GA an interesting GP and avoid the "Sh***" we all say when one pops :))

Or simply free happiness. TAM mod did that. In that mod, that was irrelevant since happiness was plentiful, but on RI, it is different. Artistry was the happiness food of old times.


Now concerning slavery, I am not really agreeing because what Tachy is complaining about is :
1. Slavery was the solution to rise an emergency army. One of the things I like most in this Mod is exactly the fact that you can't do that. If you gamble not having an adequate military, than it's exactly that: a gamble and you need to take the consequences :) . Actually in this Mod, one really need to have a decent army all the time, so to be able to defend, deter AI from attacking, attacking when a good windows is there and more importantly because the only way to have a good "professional" army (ie with quality ie XP) is by fighting. XP in this mod is won through combat, no more settled GG or xp free civics, so you actually need to go to war. I am more of a builder by the way, I still fight in RI.

The problem lies in K-mod combined with Realism Invictus. Without K-mod, the problem is easy dealt. At least in vanilla BTS with K-mod, you can raise an "attacking" squad to avoid mass pillage. Here, especially on a map configuration squeezed between many bloodthirsty AI's, you have to maintain a huge army. Let's imagine been squeezed between three AI's and one attacks and bribe the two others (ok, if one chooses tech trading. I don't think it's default on RI, perhaps let's forget that). Let's say two or three of them attacks. On EMP, how do you expect to defend against that. With archers. With an army that equals those three combined. Well, that's quite a strait jacket game where all the time you'll have to pump units.
Sadly, diplomacy was robbed with K-mod. There isn't much anymore. And come to think, with OB giving bonuses and no tech trading, it robs even more. K-mod has tweaked diplomacy. Where's the diplomacy with an AI all centuries in war punctuated with precise 10 turns peace treaties. No there aren't. Where is the diplomacy where you're equal to the AI in power and, even in FRIENDLY, he attacks you, screwing 1000 years of buildup...to end up losing badly his stacks.
And deterring AI's. There is no such thing already in vanilla BTS. It needed something like twice their power (a.k.a an empire covering 1/3 of the world) to deter them. In K-mod, either it wasn't changed or is worse.

My only grips are:

Dealing one AI is ok. Dealing two and more. No. That's impossible if all those three mass pillage.
K-mod AI's pillage, thus we need an attacking party to take them out at rather bad odds. And those units are costly. For more than one AI. Let's forget that. Also, I prefer to take EMP as reference. Prince to Monarch levels are manageable.



2.Slavery is there to convert food to hammers: I find the whole conversion system a bit weird (how are hummers converted to food by the way?). In my opinion, one should build cities in places where food, hummer (and in some cases commerce) are available. A city is supposed to be self sufficient in F and H. You don't build cities in 100% hill terrain; well you shouldn't build one in a 100% flat one either.


Hummers are polluting the world. :joke:
As I said, we don't decide the area/spot the map generator decided to put us on. If we got flatlands, I can't make hills spring up. Yes, when whipping, a population should equate to a certain amount of hammers (it's like sacrificing citizens for their toils). As it seems, it is still 30 hammers. Problem is food bar needs more, even with a smoke hut+granary.
 
"Sadly, diplomacy was robbed with K-mod"

There's some truth to that, but if you try the Politician trait, its quite easy to manipulate the AIs, actually.
The trait that gives a diplo penalty (I forget) is a pain though.

I think there's plans to add advanced diplo?

Some small tweaks to food -> hammer conversion should do the trick to slavery civic, though. Afterall, its not like you can whip consistently like in BTS, because the unhapiness stacking can be much more troublesome.

Btw, does the AI understand the Stack Aid system in the latest SVN version?
 
Politician trait is a benediction from the heavens. :)

One way that would aid diplomacy, at least with our FRIENDLY AI's that backstab when there is no one else to attack is power rating. Just like cold war, no faction wished to push the button and trigger the war. It was mutual fear. In the same way, if you have a FRIENDLY AI with roughly the same power rating or is weaker than you, then, there should be an absolute denial of war. Because (s)he fears! As simple as that. And that needs almost nothing else than a new conditional structure of one line.

Indeed, respect stems from fear. I find it rather disrespectly from a FRIENDLY AI to attack when I'm having trice his cities.
 
"Sadly, diplomacy was robbed with K-mod"

There's some truth to that, but if you try the Politician trait, its quite easy to manipulate the AIs, actually.
The trait that gives a diplo penalty (I forget) is a pain though.

I think there's plans to add advanced diplo?

Yes, Stolenrays made a first merge of this advanced diplo mod. He is reviewing and hope to have in our mod in a future release.
 
Eerrr, how and when did that happen?...
You really didn't have any units then?:D
Hey, at least the AI tries to win the game:p

Actually it does happen very often :confused:
this and the never ending cycle of Dowar>10turns peace>Dow>10turns peace etc when the AI should really do some thing else (like attacking a weaker fella).
Backstabbing (either by the AI or human) should really be harshly sanctioned (with -10 penalty with every one) for example.
 
Actually it does happen very often :confused:
this and the never ending cycle of Dowar>10turns peace>Dow>10turns peace etc when the AI should really do some thing else (like attacking a weaker fella).
Backstabbing (either by the AI or human) should really be harshly sanctioned (with -10 penalty with every one) for example.

:lol:

Spot on. The AI, once hating you, will run into the Sisyphus cycle, incapable to reflect upon how wrong to their economy is to lose like n times. K-mod indeed made the AI annoying. And sadly, the diplomacy only extend when your "friend" is already busy elsewhere. :(
I think -10 is too harsh. And could be somehow bypassed by lowering his attitude towards you. Like spamming a bunch of spies and hope of many of them caught. Trade with their worst enemy, etc.

I would really like something like "respect" implemented. You got as strong as your friend: then it does't DoW.
 
Yes, Stolenrays made a first merge of this advanced diplo mod. He is reviewing and hope to have in our mod in a future release.

Is advanced diplo the new diplo actions we can see in Afforess' mod (Dawn of Mankind...). Not sure. Never tried that mod yet.

I've heard it allows special clauses like
trade workers,
special right of passage, etc.
 
Eerrr, how and when did that happen?...
You really didn't have any units then?:D
Hey, at least the AI tries to win the game:p

Yeah, I was 0.9 his power. And I checked "AI plays to win" option. I did all that could help the AI to become a ruthless annoyance.
And, the dude, Shaka, was one hell of an AI with two peacevassals that could either attack the forever alone roman guy in his island of 4 cities (wow, that's a harsh isolation) or me (on another continent too, but separated by one water tile).

I vaguely recall Karadoc saying that the AI starts to gang up against the growing superpower as a mean to rebalance the world powers.
 
Well, I feel stumped! :lol:
I was too used to the unit walling trick that I forgot the AI could make amphibious attacks. Anyways, I'll give it to Konrad dude. He's willing to accept it. :mwaha:

Spoiler :


Anyways, it is doing well after all for a first IMM game. Almost on toes to several nations and starting to grow empire-wide and technologically. I think IMM is the best difficulty for longer challenge. EMP AI tends to suck around Industrial Ages.
 
Hmm...I even lost my skirmisher at 80%....man...so many losses >60%. This game sucks compared to the previous one. Perhaps, that's the reason I feel so enraged and a lack of fairness.

You know wut? I'm tired to lose all sides. :)
Let's put some trick up my sleeve. See Adenauer! This is a fair deal!!! :evil:

Spoiler :


Yeah, that's a pretty horrible thing to do to any AI....nope screw them! K-mod AI or not, I'm still capable to abuse them.

Spoiler :
 
One way that would aid diplomacy, at least with our FRIENDLY AI's that backstab when there is no one else to attack is power rating. Just like cold war, no faction wished to push the button and trigger the war. It was mutual fear. In the same way, if you have a FRIENDLY AI with roughly the same power rating or is weaker than you, then, there should be an absolute denial of war. Because (s)he fears! As simple as that. And that needs almost nothing else than a new conditional structure of one line.

Indeed, respect stems from fear. I find it rather disrespectly from a FRIENDLY AI to attack when I'm having trice his cities.

So basically, you are complaining that AI is too good and puts too much pressure on players? ;)

In truth, I agree that frustration factor of constant warfare is quite high, but we're seeking a different solution to that problem - a more reasonable strategic AI that adequately judges threats. We hope to see an AI that, once beaten, will learn not to play with fire, removing that constant war spam.


I find this very annoying as well and would like to see some of those changes.

You can be certain if the AI has no one else near them to attack you will be next. That and the lose the war and peace out for 10 turns then attack you again and again endless cycle. Both of these situations can often go hand in hand.

It would be nice if you received a -1 "We don't trust you" relations penalty with everyone for backstabbing a civ you're friendly with (expect those annoyed/furious with the civ you backstabbed). It should be somewhat harsh.

----

In regards to deterrents from war. In any case I think an absolute denial of war is extreme, but in certain circumstances war should definitely be very unlikely. Also I agree Walter, these situations wouldn't really make sense to implement through the diplo system because they technically aren't negative, or positive relations. I see 3 situations worth mentioning.

1) After a civ loses a war against you there should be something in place to deter them from attacking you anytime in the near future, unless they have a really good opportunity.

2) Mutual Assured Destruction should be added somehow when 2 rival civs have nuclear weapons.

3) A civ who rivals you in power fearing a long brutal war.

----

This is onto another topic, but it is related.

I find that it is very difficult to have good relations, or to boost relations with civs. Coming onto the end game everyone always hates me. Which is why I go for a conquest victory nearly 100% of the time. Everyone is going to hate you anyway so you have nothing to lose if you backstab, and attack, attack, attack.

This mainly has to do with the fact that the current diplo system penalizes you far more than it rewards you. For example, when a civ demands you declare war on their enemy, if you do so you suffer a -3 relations for going to war and a -1 with all of their friends. All you gain is a boost in relations with you new ally, which doesn't make up for all the other civs you just ticked off. If you refuse you receive a -1 with the warmongering civ. The end result is a cumulatively negative hit to your relations no matter what you choose.

Civ demanding you cancel trade is a -1 for cancelling trade, and a -1 for losing opened boarders, so cumulatively a -2. Why do you not get a relations boost with the demanding civ for doing this? A simple +1 "You agreed to stop trading with our worst enemy" would suffice. It would still cumulatively be a -1 to relations.

Close boarders is another negative hit to relations. After years of peace this negative hit to relations should slowly decrease over time if the civ is pleased toward you or better. If the civ is friendly there should be no tensions. In this situation close boarders are a good thing. Think of the EU and Canada, USA.

The most useful boost to relations is same religion. The other small cumulatively positive boosts in relations comes from open boarders, accepting favourite civics, and long-term trade relations. Defensive pacts as well, but I'd wager that most people don't play with Permanent Alliances, so that just leaves defensive pacts from vassals and your relations with vassals are irrelevant. The only thing vassal states respect is power. The "change to my civic" civs are very inconvenient and annoying. I also should add that they rarely seem to take no for an answer. The only way players can initiate better relations are opened boarders, trade relations.

These few boosts really don't do much good when you are constantly being spammed with AI demands that force you to take negative relations hits nearly 100% of the time. Over time your relations inevitably deteriorate and quite quickly once free religion is discovered and especially if you fight a few major wars.

Why not give a boost to relations for denying specific AI demands? Say a +1 "You did not give into hostile demands" with the civ that you refused to cancel your trade relations with, or go to war against. Best case scenario you receive a -1 and a +1 and have to choose your friends.

---

Also just thought I had now... What if you added a +1 "We have a mutual enemy" to relations with civs who are not at war, but are furious with the civ you just declared war on? This could also be a somewhat temporary boost in relations that once the war has ended would start to expire, similar to "giving tribute."

And how about a +1 "You have wisely chosen your friends" for every civ in common that you are both friendly with. This could help create a group of allies which civ4 has always been lacking and give players a reason to want to keep good relations.

I think all of this would help balance things out better and give players a few tools to improve and manage their diplomacy because right now once you hit that tipping point you can never improve your relations with a civ. Also not constantly having to choose between bad and worse when you're faced with AI demands would be nice.
 
And it goes again...two losses at 90% with better units and Cetshwayo will pillage again. NON mais, ça pas d'allure merde!
This isn't grinding, K-mod is torture.
 
"EMP AI tends to suck around Industrial Ages. "

Is this true for other people as well in latest version? I don't remember being so.
Anyway, why whine so much Tachy? There's changes to this game every week.
 
Top Bottom