Vassalization for Mana

[Valkrionn]

Open up assets/xml/terrain/civ4BonusInfos.xml, and for each mana type edit the iAITradeModifier tag. It's currently set to 90, so they value it highly.... lowering it should make them more willing to trade it, both when vassalized and when in normal diplomacy.

 

[Rutee]

After all, what is best in life?

Victory. If you could actually coordinate with the AI better I think people would vassalize more often then conquer; After all, every Vassal is another set of National Units and a potential source of mana.

 

[Tlalynet]

Entropy was 30, and the rest of the hell terrain bonuses where 90, but most resources where 0, 10, or 20.

Can you offer any insights into what this means? Does it mean they want the equivalent of 10 resources per mana? I know I can get on averedge 2:1 on Iron (valued at 10) and 3:1 on gunpowder (valued at 20) so is the long list of things AI wants to trade mana the value of 10 things?


I very much agree with getting on the good side of vassals as you mention Jonathan.

Mr. Darkwood, It looks like most posters back then where that ToM should be the same as conquest but with the ToM. How do they wrap their minds around the altar victory that you can do without doing any warmongering? Its a different victory condition with different goals, I wonder if they realized they can win conquest without strength of will? You placed some very good arguments there. It seemed to boil down that Dwhee doesn't like the ToM victory all together.

I always thought Palace Mana was kind of an essence of their culture, and keeping them alive period meant it was still around, wiping them off the face of the earth meant their powers where also gone. Mana Palace vassilization works for me.

Overall I like how it is, mana should be valued pretty highly and should be hard to get. I am just looking for the best vassilization strategies. Looks like everyone has had problems with the Khazad, and it is very helpful to know that more aggressive leaders are more reluctant to give. I think its the fact that the Khazad where previously my main vassals that gave me the impression it was really hard, I have all but mind mana in my Amurite game now and no problems.

 

[Charybdis]

Burn down a capital, generate 2-3 lootable items corresponding with their mana source, which you can then settle in your city, easy!

Problem of vassalization for mana vs conquest to obliterate the lil gimps sorted out.

 

[Valerarren]

Another thought on why vassals stop giving mana I've noticed.

I feel like if I keep a good old stack-o-doom nearby, they'll keep giving me their palace mana. Once I move it (or if for whatever reason, they don't feel sufficiently threatened) they stop giving me mana.

 

[Thonnas]

Victory. If you could actually coordinate with the AI better I think people would vassalize more often then conquer; After all, every Vassal is another set of National Units and a potential source of mana.

WRONG!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo9buo9Mtos

Anyway, I would LOVE to see the civ capitals split into a generic capital and a world wonder that provided the resources and any other capital bonus (except maybe a few specific instances). The wonder part could be something like Bannor Homelands. You shouldn't get the bonuses if you destroy them, only if you conquer them.

We need more lamentations from the womenfolk, too.

 

[Rutee]

WRONG!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo9buo9Mtos

Because it can't possibly be that I think Conan's an idiot. ;3

Anyway, I would LOVE to see the civ capitals split into a generic capital and a world wonder that provided the resources and any other capital bonus (except maybe a few specific instances). The wonder part could be something like Bannor Homelands. You shouldn't get the bonuses if you destroy them, only if you conquer them.

I tend to be more diplomatic; I can honestly say I prefer negotiating with vassals. I just want them to be more useful.

You know what would make Vassals ridiculously useful? An expeditionary force function. I just remembered it from Victoria; Units from another country that temporarily are under your control, treating your territory as their own (For purposes of things like resupply and such). If you could demand an expeditionary force of their Phalanxes and the like, they'd be crazy useful..

We need more lamentations from the womenfolk, too

Some of us may have different ideas

 

[Tlalynet]

What problem between vassilization and conquest? Vassalize them if you want to make use of them and don't mind their cities being nigh useless, conquer if you don't want to be bothered by vassals. Conquest is less of a hastle and more flavorful for some civs, Vassilization is more in tune with what other civs would do.

I don't really see a problem, if you vassalize and want a good vassal it will take work to make them useful, if you just want their mana you still have to deal with diplomacy with them, and if you wipe them off the face of the earth then its simple. Three distinct options that are useful in different situations. It isn't as if you go for ToM every game, or necessarily even need or even want the mana the palace provides. I tend to leave the whole set of Necromancy mana alone if I'm playing good and not ToM.

 

[Avahz Darkwood]

Vassals can be a bit more useful if you use the diplomacy options. Go under "let me ask you something else" (or something like that) and you will get more choices. Choices like attacking a certain city, etc. They usually will send some troops there. If you really want them to help then let them keep/have about 5 cities. I would station a small SOD in there lands too keep them loyal though.

 

[FireBlaze]

After all, what is best in life?

Cookies?

What I usually do is have a bunch of military units surrounding their last city when I ask for it. That keeps em quiet

 

[WarKirby]

Burn down a capital, generate 2-3 lootable items corresponding with their mana source, which you can then settle in your city, easy!

Problem of vassalization for mana vs conquest to obliterate the lil gimps sorted out.

This is a brilliant idea.

It makes no sense that you can only get the mana if you vassalise them.

 

[Tasunke]

the best part about taking a vassal is to have just that tiny bit of leverage more against your next opponent. Yet what can I say, im a bit of a perfectionist

I once had a game as the Sidar on flexi-diff Diety, (started on diety, ended on diety, but had an easy spell in the middle) where I went for the Tower of Mastery win ... and every 10 or 20 turns one of my vassals would wanna break the mana deal and so would generally revolt.

Well, I ended up having to time their petty revolutions in such a way that I could complete all the Towers ... it was kinda like a musical chairs of mana.

The last revolt was by the Malakim, and I finished the Mastery before my army of death was fully re-entered into their lands.

 

[Emptiness]

Burn down a capital, generate 2-3 lootable items corresponding with their mana source, which you can then settle in your city, easy!

Problem of vassalization for mana vs conquest to obliterate the lil gimps sorted out.

This is a brilliant idea.

It makes no sense that you can only get the mana if you vassalise them.

I agree that this is a good idea, but I see a big problem:

1) Find an island big enough to fit two cities.  Quality is not a consideration.
2) Found two cities on the island.
3) Liberate them to form a colony.
4) Attack your colony, burning both cities to the ground.
5) Collect mana baubles.
6) Goto 2.

 

[ICanHasName?]

Don't colonies turn into Minister Koun versions of the starting civ? If not that would fix it.

 

[Charybdis]

Make each mana object a national wonder with X limit.

Sure you could colonization exploit up a few then, but it wouldn't be some ridiculous scaling (like 20 law/death/mind for example).

 

[Tlalynet]

Or, leave it as it is because it works well. This thread has been majorly de-railed... Anyone know exactly how the weighting factor works for trades?

 

[popejubal]

I give my vassals free stuff that I have available if I want them to be helpful to me. After all, if I'm going to declare war on someone (and if I have a vassal, I'm pretty obviously in a warmongering mood), then having a buddy along to take some of the heat would be handy - or at least giving my drudge enough military might to hold on to their small remaining territory. Donating Copper/Iron/Mithril to them for 10 turns is a very handy thing to do and I'll often do this even if I don't have more than 1 of the resource. This way, all their troops get the shiny new weapons and they keep the shiny new weapons even after I cancel the gift. I also play on Epic, so 10 turns is a lot less painful than on Normal/Quick.

I'll also gift spare and resources as well because I don't tend to trade resources nearly as much in FfH as in regular Civ. Why not boost up someone who is working for me if it's not going to actually cost me anything.

All of this has nothing at all to do with my demands, however. I demand all of the mana that they have that I want (I won't bother demanding mana that I don't plan to use in some way). I demand any metals that they have and I don't. I demand all the resources that they have and I don't. I'll especially grab up resources if I know that Blight is going to hit eventually. In any case, I just demand these because they make demands that are just plain silly if I offer something in exchange.

If you are concerned about your vassal breaking away when you make the demands, just declare war on someone before you make the demands. Vassals are far less likely to break away if they know something awful is waiting for them as soon as they leave your protection.

 

[Tlalynet]

Thats a good point about declaring war before making new demands, It sounds like a good rule of thumb to make demands as soon as they are capitulated and then whenever youre at war.