"You have grown too powerful for us"

[Fafnir13]

The thread title is the explanation Ethne is giving me for not wanting to make a permanent alliance which would win the game. Every turn takes forever and I know that, were I to declare war, she'd cast her world spell and make me wait the 30 odd turns it takes to go away. Gek....
So, what is up with this lacking of wanting of a permanent alliance with the biggest force around(me)? I've even gone so far as to get the relationship to friendly by getting her to switch to my religion, joined her silly overcouncil, et cetera. Is there any way to get her to ally up and end this agonizing game in a simple conquest victory?
Rest of the world are currently vassals (willing and otherwise) or destroyed. I'm about a couple thousand points ahead of everybody.

If not, could we look at getting rid of that "You have grown too powerful for us" limiter? It doesn't make the game more fun, doesn't make sense from a game world perspective, and seems rather artificial and arbitrary. Probably just another hold over from vanilla civ to keep an "easy" victory out of reach of the player...

While I'm at it, could we please oh pretty please nix colonial expense and all it's functions? Being locked to a single continent is annoying and makes me sad, especially when I remember my first FFH2 game wherein I (as the Lanun) had a globe spanning empire that accidentally declared war on the entire world with a single spell (scorch and all the jerks were allied). Made for some fun times which can't be repeated with that dern colonial limit.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

While I'm at it, could we please oh pretty please nix colonial expense and all it's functions? Being locked to a single continent is annoying and makes me sad, especially when I remember my first FFH2 game wherein I (as the Lanun) had a globe spanning empire that accidentally declared war on the entire world with a single spell (scorch and all the jerks were allied). Made for some fun times which can't be repeated with that dern colonial limit.

not sure what you are talking about here, could you explain? it sounds really interesting

 

[heisenberg]

i've encountered that annoying instance too, basically once you get strong enough and have perhaps a vassal, other weak civs do not want to end up being vassals too (to perhaps preventing you from winning?), but its kinda unrealistic. Of course there's the option of stomping all over the offending civ and forcing his capitulation... but it'll be nice if they would just vassal up when you dont wanna spoil relations etc.

 

[[NWO]_Valis]

That is an intended feature so you wont insta win if you team up with the bigest player beside you. There are mechanisms in the AI that prevent that :> Without it the game would be broken and too easy to win/lose.

 

[AljayBoy]

Think this comes down to how people play the game.

If they play it as a 'game' ie playing to win first and foremost; the use of an overall strategy that is used from the start; and making alliances with nations who probably shouldn't according to the lore, then things like the "You have grown too powerful for us" is needed for balance.

However others play it in a more role play type, were 'winning the game' is just a way to end this current game and not the main focus. The main focus may be building the finest cities with as many wonders as possible in the whole of Erebus, or having the largest empire and most vassals.

I think most people though would be somewhere in the middle like myself, like having a general strategy but not too fussed whether I win or not.

For example, in a recent game of mine, I had friendly relations with a couple of nations, and others were annoyed or furious, but once I started building the Tower of Mastery, everyone declared war, even the friendly nations. Now, as completing the Tower is a victory condition and method of winning I can understand this happening, but in a role play sense my allies shouldn't suddenly turn against me.

Sometimes I'd prefer it if the AI didn't want to win and played more it more like role play, meaning if I have a large empire and a vassal or 2, other AI nations wouldn't refuse my demands to also become my vassal because "we fear your enemies" when my own empire could crush them in a moments notice.

 

[Fafnir13]

not sure what you are talking about here, could you explain? it sounds really interesting

All right, here's what I know of it. When you found a city/cities on another continent, at some point they start to incur a maintenance cost in addition to distance from palace and number of cities that is called colonial expense. I think it has to do with number of cities on the land mass or perhaps the culture. I've had island cities without the colonial expense gain it after building a few more cities on the island.
Anyways, I believe that, when the colonial expense becomes the highest, your city/cities become another player. I think they start as vassals but I'm not sure. I've actually never had this happen, but that's only because the additional cost alone is enough to keep me tied to my starting location until late in the game when things are almost done.
As I was mentioning, my very first game was quite fun, what with a globe spanning empire. With colonial expense in place, you can't do that. You can't even colonize a good sized island right offshore your capital without worrying about it eventually leaving you.
The expense was implemented with Beyond the Sword as part of Vanilla Civ's attempts to better represent how the real world and history have played out. I don't think this feature really has any place in FFH2.

That is an intended feature so you wont insta win if you team up with the bigest player beside you. There are mechanisms in the AI that prevent that :> Without it the game would be broken and too easy to win/lose.

Not sure how it makes the game too easy to lose. AI's already seem to be in a rush to vassal up with the strongest guy around mid game (usually not me). Not much difference between that and making permanent alliances.
As for making it too easy to win, I'd have already have gotten a dominance victory a long time ago if I played with it turned on. I used to play with it on, but it seemed like I was always "winning" the game just when things were getting good.
As for breaking the game, if you are the most powerful by such a large margin, you've already won. Why not give the player a legit option to end things then and there rather than wait the turns it takes to crush your opponents meager forces, build the towers, or pop great prophets until you can build all the altars. Were it a multiplayer game, I'm fairly certain everyone on the losing sides would have quit by then anyways.

Meh, I know it's not a major deal. I just wish I could finish that game now rather then spend an hour or two of drudgery. As drudgery is not really my thing, I'm just starting a new game. I just hate to leave things unfinished.

Side note: if any modder might be able to point me towards how to change it by myself, I'd be happy to learn.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

All right, here's what I know of it. When you found a city/cities on another continent, at some point they start to incur a maintenance cost in addition to distance from palace and number of cities that is called colonial expense. I think it has to do with number of cities on the land mass or perhaps the culture. I've had island cities without the colonial expense gain it after building a few more cities on the island.
Anyways, I believe that, when the colonial expense becomes the highest, your city/cities become another player. I think they start as vassals but I'm not sure. I've actually never had this happen, but that's only because the additional cost alone is enough to keep me tied to my starting location until late in the game when things are almost done.
As I was mentioning, my very first game was quite fun, what with a globe spanning empire. With colonial expense in place, you can't do that. You can't even colonize a good sized island right offshore your capital without worrying about it eventually leaving you.
The expense was implemented with Beyond the Sword as part of Vanilla Civ's attempts to better represent how the real world and history have played out. I don't think this feature really has any place in FFH2.

oh I see. so AFAIK in BTS overseas cities have an additional maintenance penalty, but you can gift them indipendency as colonies, making them your vassal, in the domestic advisor. not sure how this works in ffh though, is it the same?

 

[Niveras]

That is an intended feature so you wont insta win if you team up with the bigest player beside you.

I can understand this from a tactical / meta game standpoing. But really, if the AI permanently allies with you, doesn't that mean he wins too?

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

I don't have a strong opinion on this yet, but I kinda agree that saying "you're powerful, so I'll never ever ally with you" makes no sense at all although, it might be good from a gameplay perspective - not sure about this :\

 

[Fafnir13]

oh I see. so AFAIK in BTS overseas cities have an additional maintenance penalty, but you can gift them indipendency as colonies, making them your vassal, in the domestic advisor. not sure how this works in ffh though, is it the same?

It's the same. At least, as far as I can tell, the team hasn't messed with anything yet.

 

[[NWO]_Valis]

Not sure how it makes the game too easy to lose.

Well, in my games I am not always the bigest civ in the world. Imagine that the two/three bigest AI joined up and bum, you lost to a conquest victory cause the AI wanted to screw you

As to the wining of the AI togheder with you you have to rethink what the AI is for in such a game. It does not want to win, it simply doesnt have any desires. But, it is programed not to let you win, almost the same but there is a diffrence. Wininig the game is only a part of acheawing that goal but there are other ways. Surely winning with you is not.

 

[Fafnir13]

Well, in my games I am not always the bigest civ in the world. Imagine that the two/three bigest AI joined up and bum, you lost to a conquest victory cause the AI wanted to screw you

Those are what I call fun games.
Nothing's actually in place to stop AI's from teaming up to smack you round. They just vassal up with the biggest power available and go from there. Most games I play usually end up with blocks of power all out to get me, the trumpets sounding endlessly as they all declare war. Such pretty music...

Anyways, I'm still sensing some resistence to getting rid of this annoying "You have grown too powerful for us." Perhaps I should better explain the relationship I've had with Ethne in the game I'm talking about. I'm playing as Order spreading Calabim, being the Good Guys for once. I've helped Ethne out quite a bit throughout my game. Sharing techs, gifting some when she asked, helping her out with her wars, et cetera. Yet, despite this long history of cooperation and friendship, the game has an artificial block in place that is keeping the game from ending with a logical conclusion. Good guys conquer the world and all is well? Nope, can't have that.
Oddly enough, from a lore standpoint, the Elohim should be more than happy to see the world ushered into a new era of peace and stability. I'm sure they're even tolerant enough to overlook the occasional peasant binges some of the overlord cast engage in.

 

[MiKa523]

Regarding oversea maintenance I suggest you disable Vassals in a game, if you plan on playing a map with many islands/continents, because without Vassals there is also no oversea maintenance and you can actually have fun as Lanun.

 

[Fafnir13]

Gurk!!! Why did I never know this before!
Thank you for that quick fix. I'll miss the capitulation and extra mana that brings, but I think I'll survive.
Thanks again.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

well, the AI definitely SHOULD try to win imho. something that it has kinda no clue how to do right now and an AI just trying to get you to NOT win is not fun... it's just unfair :\

 

[snarko]

The rule is if your power (incl vassals) plus their power (incl vassals) is more than that of everyone else combined then they will say you're too powerful or they're too powerful, depending on who has the most power. This is good in many cases where an alliance between the two most powerful would spell certain doom for everyone else. It's not as good if one is very powerful and the other weak or average, especially if the human is the powerful one as then it'll only delay the inevitable. I can't think of any good way to have it both ways.


The code is in CvTeamAI.cpp, CvTeamAI::AI_permanentAllianceTrade.

 

[Fafnir13]

Thankyou for pointing out where it is. I'll have to see if I can't botch something together for myself.

This is good in many cases where an alliance between the two most powerful would spell certain doom for everyone else.

Well, if the two most powerful happen to like each other, why shouldn't they join forces to crush the world? Japan and Germany certainly didn't feel any qualms of doing so in WWII.
This feels like a balance limitation that is stepping on the toes of logic and natural game progression.

Edit: So I've changed

"if ((getPower(true) + GET_TEAM(eTeam).getPower(true)) > (GC.getGameINLINE().countTotalCivPower() / 2))"

to

"if ((getPower(true) + GET_TEAM(eTeam).getPower(true)) > (GC.getGameINLINE().countTotalCivPower() / 9000))"

I doubt my power level will ever get that high.
I don't know if something else is going to call on this function, so I'm thinking that's the best bet.
Question for modders: will I need to get my friends with whom I play (we only play in our little group) to change their's as well?

Edit Yet Again: Doesn't seem to be having any effect on that one game, but is that to be expected? Having never edited the .ccp's before, I have no idea if only new games will show the changes or if what I did is messed up somehow.

 

[Niveras]

Japan and Germany certainly didn't feel any qualms of doing so in WWII.

To be fair, Japan and Germany were not either one twice as powerful as the combined output of every other nation on earth~

 

[Fafnir13]

True enough. I'm still saying the general logic of powerful guys teaming up to take on those weaker then them (both were conquering their given areas just fine until they aggroed the US) holds up.
Side note: I just noticed that the "You have grown to powerful for us" is also appearing under the vassalization option. To me, this makes even less sense. If I'm so friggin' powerful, shouldn't they be joining up to avoid my horrible, nasty wrath? At least the "We're doing fine on our own." excuse makes sense.
Once again the game trying to make it "hard" for the player. Utterly failing, of course, as the only time this function comes into play is when you are already ridiculously powerful. The game is already a cakewalk at that point anyways. Okay, so maybe if is working as intended. As it stands, I'm not playing that game anymore because it would be too tedious to wrap up. Since I tend to not delete my saves (really should go back and cull some of them) the AI gets to sit in potentia as a still existing entity which has not officially lost. Those clever buggers...

Update on my editings: either it doesn't work or it only applies to games before they start. Maybe 9000 is just to large of a number for that particular thing to run...
Meh, more testing, but it looks like that game is just going to remain in limbo.

 

[[NWO]_Valis]

But you did compile it, did you? :> Then replaced your dll with the new compiled one?

For your friends to have this effect too [and not to get an OOS error!] they also have to have a copy of your new dll.


To sum it up: It would just spoil the game. Playability is more important than fluf or logic. Such illogical [at first glance] things are unavoidable in games.

Oh, and I think you made a logical mistake. You changed 'my_team_power > all_civ_power/2' to 'my_team_power > all_civ_power/9000' so now your power has to be even lesser to fulfil this condition. Change it to "if ((getPower(true) + GET_TEAM(eTeam).getPower(true)) > (GC.getGameINLINE().countTotalCivPower()*2))"