Sengoku Conquest. Puzzling behaviour.

[Nathiri]

I started a game on Sengoku again today. It's an old favourite of mine. I played it many many times when I was younger and pretty bad at civ3. I didnt really care about winning. I was a bit bored today, so I decided to load it up. I havent actually played it much once I learned civ3 better, so thought I would give it a go at Regent. I did beat it once before on Regent I think, when I was looking to complete the entire campaign. But it may have been Warlord. Something that I was always puzzled about is, the AI civs and the way they played. It seemed they all played rather similar from game to game. A few civs, always grow into the strongest. Others, expand very little, if at all. I cant really see anything in the editor that would dictate this. The ones that like to sit on 1 city, have enough growth to produce a settler just fine, but yet they almost never expand. There is no specific flags applied to the civs to dictate behaviour either. Is there code that controls them to play a certain way?

Some of their starting positions are pretty bad for sure, but yet someone like Hojo that has a bunch of normal grassland, and otherwise very few shields apart from forests, is able to grow just fine, when Oda cant seem to produce a 2nd city. I think in one game a long time ago, I did see Oda build a 2nd city however. Oda has quite a good start with plains wheat, fish, and then gets a dyes forest, cattle grass, a bg, and hills for fine shields and growth. I dont see how they dont play better. Even the Dates play better, when they have an etrocious start.

 

[Blue Monkey]

This seems to happen in quite a few scenarios / mods - some civs not expanding. I don't know the reason though.

 

[Bluemofia]

I notice that if the AI accidentally pops a goody hut that spawns barbarians, they just hole up in their capital city. This tends to ruin AI starts, because they build the settler, but they don't move out because of the presence of barbarians. Sometimes their start is bad enough that they build basic military units because they can't immediately start building population, and eventually they have enough garrisoned that they can move units out to fight the barbarians.

It gets really bad if they reach the unit support cap, and they keep building more without leaving. Then they run out of money, and things start randomly disbanding, like those settlers they built, so they get set really far behind.

 

[Nathiri]

I notice that if the AI accidentally pops a goody hut that spawns barbarians, they just hole up in their capital city. This tends to ruin AI starts, because they build the settler, but they don't move out because of the presence of barbarians. Sometimes their start is bad enough that they build basic military units because they can't immediately start building population, and eventually they have enough garrisoned that they can move units out to fight the barbarians.

It gets really bad if they reach the unit support cap, and they keep building more without leaving. Then they run out of money, and things start randomly disbanding, like those settlers they built, so they get set really far behind.

Well Sengoku has alot of barbarians, but still almost every single game? I still find that hard to believe. The same civs tend to triumph, and others always get relegated. Takeda is usually one of the strongest militarily from my experience. They dont have civ traits ticked in the editor, so its odd. They all have a high agression level too, apart from Hojo, Ryuzaji, and Mogami, which is 1 less, but I read somewhere where the 3 and 4 levels have little to no difference.

 

[r16]

sengoku is a favourite of mine , too . And ı will offer Mordor and Gondor from the LotM as consistent poor performers . But not always . The times they do good are rare but still happen time to time .