|
Frontspac posted:The AI really needs to be better at knowing when it's beat (or when it's won). I've been dragged into far too many wars that just drag on forever for no real reason because the AI for some reason has no interest in just taking it's wargoal and going home. The AI fights every war like it's all or nothing, which can be super frustrating. My Flanders game was hosed up pretty bad because I was called into a defensive/coalition war with my ally AI France, who then not only lost but insisted on losing badly. Instead of ending the war when it was obviously lost and making sane concessions, France just kept going until it was collapsing in on itself, handing the enemy a 100% warscore victory and releasing a bunch of my hard earned territory. If you're not a co-belligerent in a war, it shouldn't be that hard/costly to peace out. The AI should be a bit more keen on getting you out of the war so it can focus on it's objectives than extracting as many punishing concessions as possible at every turn. I actually started doing Ironman achievements just because I'd get so fed up with this BS in a regular game that I'd use the yesman cheat to enforce peace periodically. Eventually got so bad I had to go to Ironman just to stop myself from doing it.
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:04 |
|
|
Fintilgin posted:This, honestly, is my biggest long standing complaint with the game. Being stuck on a losing war sucks, but it kinda cuts both ways. The AI will allow you to take forever dismantling them and cripple them in the process. On any regional powers that are standing in the way the player can generate these kind of grinding wars and use them to bog down potential threats. There's two considerations: the AI of the countries attacking, and the AI of the countries defending. How aggressive should the defending countries be about settling peace? And when should the attacking countries accept it? The AI generally fights these indecisive, grindy wars and takes forever to resolve them, which happens all game long. The wars you start and the AI helps with are going to be effective because you'll help them conduct it properly. The wars they drag you into are going to be crappy AI wars that take 10 years and accomplish little. Having AI allies is going to entail having their armies help yours, but the downside is that their wars tend to last a lot longer and be less decisive. If you ally for the military support I think you will also get a lot of sub optimal wars that you either have to fight, or you have to break the alliance. In the 1.12 games I played I was pleasantly surprised that having an ally was a lot more of a mixed bag than it used to be when you could just rely on a friendly big power to bulldoze your targets for you. Are folks asking that the AI fight more decisive wars in general? Or that they don't get stuck in a 10-15 year losing war when their ally fucks up? I'm not sure how you get the second without the first.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Personally, the way you're describing AI desires for peace sounds like how a player would play. Which is a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
I want to do a Russia game, with the intention of crushing all other pretenders to the Roman title. So this means, taking Rome, Constantinople and subjugating the Ottomans, and dissolving the HRE, and probably taking Vien for good measure. Are there any other Romes I will need to crush to be recognized as Greatest Rome?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
WeaponGradeSadness posted:Yeah. They still have the increased tech costs but they no longer get penalties to monarch points and the units have been rebalanced to be competitive at tech parity. Also, while tech costs are hefty, if you get your ducks in a row before the Europeans show up you can instantly pop a reform when you have a Western neighbor and jump up to almost-parity in tech levels (I'm not sure exactly what the adjustment is). That gives you a ton of monarch points to play with in the meantime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:Are folks asking that the AI fight more decisive wars in general? Or that they don't get stuck in a 10-15 year losing war when their ally fucks up? I'm not sure how you get the second without the first. AI should be more of an rear end in a top hat in general. AIs should abandon their allies if they don't stand to gain anything from an ongoing war which is costing them resources, they should be willing to sign white peace if they're doing gently caress all in a phony war, and they should be willing to throw in the towel as soon as they have suffered a couple of significant military defeats. What they shouldn't do is play like their only aim is to piss you off and cripple themselves with debt and WE in order to make you spend more resources to beat them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:AI should be more of an rear end in a top hat in general. AIs should abandon their allies if they don't stand to gain anything from an ongoing war which is costing them resources, they should be willing to sign white peace if they're doing gently caress all in a phony war, and they should be willing to throw in the towel as soon as they have suffered a couple of significant military defeats. Well that seems like a good way of putting it. If the only challenge when facing a big AI nation is the sheer amount of resources they can throw at you and how long it takes to resolve it then yeah that's not very fun. I really like the fort system changes and the way they made combat more meaningful. I wonder what could be done to make the AI more decisive in wars - have it aim for less warscore, try to peace at 50%, try to keep wars to 3-5 years max? Be more leery of loans and war exhaustion? Be more willing to separate peace and break alliances? I do agree it's odd how often I watch the AI do a 10 year slog against an opponent, bankrupt themselves and wreck their manpower / war exhaustion, finish with a big warscore and take very little in the peace offer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:So apparently France can rival the Papal State at the start of the game No wonder ai France keeps getting their rear end kicked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Eimi posted:I want to do a Russia game, with the intention of crushing all other pretenders to the Roman title. So this means, taking Rome, Constantinople and subjugating the Ottomans, and dissolving the HRE, and probably taking Vien for good measure. Are there any other Romes I will need to crush to be recognized as Greatest Rome?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
 In the grim dark world of 1670 there is only war and people standing around with their giant stacks taking attrition for no reason
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
 Well played, Paradox, well played 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Occupied territories gain a lot of war exhaustion. Never noticed this before.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
I just started a 1.13 game up and noticed that the government type change events are gone. RIP Russian Orthodox Theocracy  Did they get taken out already or did I just manage to do something that prevents me from ever switching now? I haven't turned into Russia yet, but I do have a bunch of provinces/development.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
VDay posted:I just started a 1.13 game up and noticed that the government type change events are gone. RIP Russian Orthodox Theocracy They buffed the provinces Muscovy starts with so you are probably above the development threshold, you would need to release some stuff most likely.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
VDay posted:I just started a 1.13 game up and noticed that the government type change events are gone. RIP Russian Orthodox Theocracy
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:They buffed the provinces Muscovy starts with so you are probably above the development threshold, you would need to release some stuff most likely. James The 1st posted:I think you need to finish Religious and Diplomatic ideas which than gives you a decision?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
Poil posted:The British? Did the Brits ever claim to be heirs to the Roman Empire like Russia, the Ottomans, and the HRE did? I guess I could see doing what Caesar could not but I want be sure I get every pretender to the Roman Title. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
VDay posted:Do you know what the threshold is by any chance? I'm assuming that's the problem and I probably won't release enough stuff to get back under it but it'd be nice to know for future reference. You have to have <20 provinces.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Eimi posted:Did the Brits ever claim to be heirs to the Roman Empire like Russia, the Ottomans, and the HRE did? I guess I could see doing what Caesar could not but I want be sure I get every pretender to the Roman Title.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
VDay posted:Do you know what the threshold is by any chance? I'm assuming that's the problem and I probably won't release enough stuff to get back under it but it'd be nice to know for future reference. They stop appearing if you have too many provinces and don't qualify for them anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:AI should be more of an rear end in a top hat in general. AIs should abandon their allies if they don't stand to gain anything from an ongoing war which is costing them resources, they should be willing to sign white peace if they're doing gently caress all in a phony war, and they should be willing to throw in the towel as soon as they have suffered a couple of significant military defeats. There really should be a check for:
If enough of those are "yes" the ally should be more willing to peace out so I dont have to stay at war for 5 loving years after 100% occupying the wartarget in less than a year and stand zero chance of losing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:This, honestly, is my biggest long standing complaint with the game. I think a big part of the issue is the way the AI scores length-of-war. If things go badly at the outset and you know your'e beat, you can't just give the AI an easy win. Instead the war has to be dragged out until by the time the AI is willing to accept concessions your original concessions they've already won super hard and now want everything. In conjunction with the length of war modifier, the AI really doesn't give a poo poo about warscore if you're the one losing. The AI could have 0% against you, stand to gain greatly from having you out of the war, but still because of length of war or some other modifier it'll refuse to peace you out unless you release half your territory, annul all your alliances, and pay them your entire treasury. Length of war, and maybe some of the other modifiers need to have their scaling changed. In addition I think that the AI needs to much more strongly consider how much warscore it actually has against you (especially if you're not a co-belligerent) and adjust it's expectations accordingly. I think maybe it would help to make white peacing out of a war easier, but make the diplomatic/prestige consequences for doing it really early and cowardly more severe? Eh, I wouldn't be surprised if this is already going to be addressed with the changes to how AI allies assess your helpfulness. I should relax and trust the Wiz. I'm hoping that next patch (if it's not China stuff) is diplomacy and espionage focused. Won't have to worry about waiting out truce timers when you can pursue war by other means. 
Pinback fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
How the heck do I install the 1.13 patch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
Ran into another bug: These 3 guys retreated all the way to Kongo and got stranded there. I guess that made that country's AI bug out somehow cause the other half of that vassal's army seems to be AFK ever since. Reloading didn't fix it. Also you can't take losses from natives, ever. You can walk a single unit from Kongo to Benin at 0 maintenance in 1444, and you'll take no loses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
Frontspac posted:I should relax and trust the Wiz. I would really like to see navies re-worked as the next big patch. That and China stuff, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:How the heck do I install the 1.13 patch. Find Eu4 in your library, right click and go to properties. In that window, go to the Beta tab, then select the 1.13 beta from the drop down list.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
I want to do my first Ironman Byz run. What are the criteria for Basileus, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Guildencrantz posted:I want to do my first Ironman Byz run. What are the criteria for Basileus, exactly? http://www.eu4wiki.com/Achievement_conditions
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:I would really like to see navies re-worked as the next big patch. I've noticed I think they're obviously not ideal but back when they didn't annihilate each other every battle and you had to spend half your attention each war going on hunt-a-ship 50 times it was way worse. Especially now that ships take longer to make, I like that the battles are actually decisive and can give you naval supremacy for a good while.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
Frontspac posted:Find Eu4 in your library, right click and go to properties. In that window, go to the Beta tab, then select the 1.13 beta from the drop down list. The dropdown doesn't seem to work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Steam beta broke dropdowns 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
Should I risk my Baltic Crusader game in the home stretch to update to 1.13 or is there a chance it could get hosed up. I'm rich enough to pay for all my forts, and want that sweet Army trad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I've noticed  I mean between AI suiciding boats out of port to attack you when you tell a navy to leave the seazone, Naval battles being annihilation combat, the fact that non-Europeans didnt use the same kind of boats (primitives cant build boats, heh), Naval Morale is a bad thing and you should avoid it at all costs, and to top it all off naval combat is super boring and/or tedious (in part because of what you are saying) compared to how land combat works now, yes I think it should be brought up even more than Dibujante's awesome China gimmick I'm by no means trying to get on a soapbox here or something; someone else even brought up "wanted changes".Knuc U Kinte posted:Should I risk my Baltic Crusader game in the home stretch to update to 1.13 or is there a chance it could get hosed up. I'm rich enough to pay for all my forts, and want that sweet Army trad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
Best part of the new patch is how you can actually see morale during combat now. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:Is trade supposed to go from Aden to Zanzibar and not the other way? Yes, because otherwise the only route from the east back to Europe is via Alexandria, and would not be able to funnel into the English Channel
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Am i right in thinking that it is impossible to prevent the "shadow empire " event if you do not border Venice and the Papal States? I'm not allowed to take provinces i do not neighbor, right? So it would be impossible to take the italian kingdom region and make it a part of the HRE...
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
Allyn posted:Yes, because otherwise the only route from the east back to Europe is via Alexandria, and would not be able to funnel into the English Channel You can go Alexandria -> Ragusa -> Wein -> Saxony/Rheinland -> Lubeck -> English Channel... but you'd get pennies on the ducat for what you put in if you don't control those nodes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
WeaponGradeSadness posted:Yeah. They still have the increased tech costs but they no longer get penalties to monarch points and the units have been rebalanced to be competitive at tech parity. I was actually asking about vs Common Sense release. (I don't remember a monarch point penalty and I'm pretty sure the unit buff was a long time ago.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:I was actually asking about vs Common Sense release. (I don't remember a monarch point penalty and I'm pretty sure the unit buff was a long time ago.) The unit rebalance was in Art of War, about nine months ago. The removal of monarch point penalties was Res Publica, the patch before. It all feels like yesterday to me, but I've been playing since HTTT. So many hours sunk into these silly games...
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:04 |
|
|
I think he meant how development was useless to non-Western tech. No they didn't change that.Bort Bortles posted:I think that is the second time I have mentioned it Oh sorry I didn't mean to sound so harsh, I've just been noticing a lot of boat chat lately  Why do there need to be different kinds of boats for non-Europeans though? What would that add? The whole game is an abstraction; it's not like Europeans only used four different types of ships either, or for that matter, relied on armies of entirely longbowmen and knights that exclusively used the "line up in giant rows and poke each other" tactic. And how is naval combat boring or tedious? It's simple for sure, but the whole oceanic and trade systems are abstracted to an extent that without vast overhauls (which they've said aren't possible in EU4) I don't really see how having the naval stuff necessitate more of your attention being away from the land would be a good thing at all. I agree the suiciding boats thing is super dumb though, but that seems like more of a bug than anything else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:47
|
|