AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

With more regions available at once, who will you trade with? Who will you ignore? Will you trade for products, technologies, military designs or treaties? How much will you trade with your future enemies?

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend

Supreme67
Warrant Officer
Posts: 38
Joined: Jul 19 2008

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Supreme67 »

Balthagor wrote:Since the release of Supreme Ruler 2020 there has been lots of discussion about the game. Lots of suggestions have been put forward about possible directions for future development and lots of requests for changes have been made, although a good number of the requests have been either at odds with each other or at odds for priority. New features of our own have been added as well, with the addition of both content and features in each update.

This latest update however contains some core changes to gameplay, and in some ways balance, that are in direct response to feedback we’ve received. Some of the AI decision making processes have been notably changed for declarations of war and a new “provocation” value has been added to report to players how much chance there is of another region opening hostilities towards them. Much of this is based on data that has existed all along in the game but there has been confusion about how the data was used. The Causus Belli rating up till version 5.3.2 was a key factor in the AI’s decision to declare war on a region. It did look at other factors such as proximity, AI agenda, Diplomatic Relations and existing treaties but it would at times declare war when it had a high belli despite relatively good diplomatic and civilian ratings. Because of this the AI would act more like a player – declaring war when it could without penalty – and less like a real country would – declaring war based on relationships and political situations, consequences be damned.

We also have had lots of feedback challenging the amount of Belli that was given for certain actions. This is essentially unchanged as we still feel that if the US declares war on Syria with no justification, Israel would be justified to attack the US. They just wouldn’t want to due to other factors. Many of the players who challenged the system saw Causus Belli as being how justified a region felt itself to be as opposed to how what it actually represents; the justification for war when viewed by impartial third parties. This is why declarations of war without high justification will result in retaliation by other regions.

All of these two factors have lead to two key changes in the diplomatic system included in the latest version of the game. First, the AI now weighs Causus Belli less heavily but diplomatic and civilian factors more heavily, including government type, when considering if war is its desired course of action. This means that players could see a region with a very high Causus Belli remain neutral while a country with a very low value declares war because the second region is a neighbor that hates the other region due to other factors.

The second change can be seen in the Regional Atlas (hotkey <A>) and the Region Intentions section of the State Department. Since players were looking at the Causus Belli as if it was the AI’s want and probability to attack them, there is now a provocation value showing if the region is a low to high threat of becoming hostile. It uses many of the same factors that the AI does for deciding if war is a course to be considered but is not absolute, some uncertainty will still exist. It should now be a reflection of what players thought the previous value was showng. The Causus Belli of the player towards the region is still shown as players are usually more concerned with consequences than popular opinion or feelings towards a region. Of course in our multiplayer test games, our lead programmer George usually seems concerned about neither provocation nor justification in most of his attacks.

These changes to the interface players use and the decisions behind regional conflicts now mean that there has been a shift of AI regions acting less like “players” and more like “nations” but this seems to reflect what most players expect from the game. We have no doubt it will generate lots of new feedback.
I wasn't ignoring you but I got the answer to my question after seeing others post. Another question for you though, was it intentional to make Israel so aggressive or that's just how things worked out? Playing Shattered World.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22072
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Balthagor »

Just how things worked out.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
Thorgrimm
Captain
Posts: 108
Joined: Aug 08 2005

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Thorgrimm »

Supreme67 wrote:North America at what cost? A wrecked economy that will take time to recover from and it leaves the country vunerable from attack from some of the up and coming new powers. I've started a real game and I just watched my only ally in the middle east get wiped off the face of the planet (Israel). Brazil is kicking butt in South America and no doubt they are going to make their way northward. I don't want a war with Mexico and Canada right now. It will devestate me economically and hurt my goal of countering Brazil when they do make that track to my backdoor.
Not to be mean or anything, but if a war with Canada and a war with Mexico is killing your economy, you need to rethink what you are doing economically. The US in the beginning is so strong that it can beat both nations with what it has. And does not need to produce one single new military unit. The US economy is so strong that if it is tanking from such a small war, you may wish to rethink your economic policies.

The US is so easy to win with it is down right boring. Thats why I prefer the Shattered World Campaign. More of a challenge. There have been times I was so bored as the US that I declared war on EVERY single nation on earth, had not one trade partner, and STILL won. So, maybe it is your economic policies that is the problem, not free passes to conquer NA. :wink:



Cheers, Thorgrimm
Saepius Exertus, Semper Fidelis, Frater Infinitas
Sic Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Supreme67
Warrant Officer
Posts: 38
Joined: Jul 19 2008

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Supreme67 »

Thorgrimm wrote:
Supreme67 wrote:North America at what cost? A wrecked economy that will take time to recover from and it leaves the country vunerable from attack from some of the up and coming new powers. I've started a real game and I just watched my only ally in the middle east get wiped off the face of the planet (Israel). Brazil is kicking butt in South America and no doubt they are going to make their way northward. I don't want a war with Mexico and Canada right now. It will devestate me economically and hurt my goal of countering Brazil when they do make that track to my backdoor.
Not to be mean or anything, but if a war with Canada and a war with Mexico is killing your economy, you need to rethink what you are doing economically. The US in the beginning is so strong that it can beat both nations with what it has. And does not need to produce one single new military unit. The US economy is so strong that if it is tanking from such a small war, you may wish to rethink your economic policies.

The US is so easy to win with it is down right boring. Thats why I prefer the Shattered World Campaign. More of a challenge. There have been times I was so bored as the US that I declared war on EVERY single nation on earth, had not one trade partner, and STILL won. So, maybe it is your economic policies that is the problem, not free passes to conquer NA. :wink:



Cheers, Thorgrimm
Have you done this with the new update? Also, could you post in the AAR with pics. Not that I don't believe it can't be done but declaring war on the entire world seems an interesting game strategy. I've started posting my first game in the AAR and I'll add pics with the second post. As complicated as this game is, it's interesting that someone has found a way to defeat it as easily as you have suggested.
Opthalamia
Colonel
Posts: 458
Joined: Sep 12 2008

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Opthalamia »

Declare war on everybody and sell military goods, if you like exploits.

Even normal great powers like Germany can defeat all neighbors at once after 6 month of preparation.
User avatar
Ruges
General
Posts: 3408
Joined: Aug 22 2008
Location: Nearby, really I'll see you tonight when your sleeping
Contact:

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Ruges »

As long as you dont have large borders to defend. declaring war on the world does little except make you defend you sea hex's, and have money issues if you are not prepared to not get any income from exports. Since there is no amphibous assults you dont have to worry about defending your shores. So for NA all you have todo is conqure NA and keep Central america fortied. If you are SA conqure the rest of SA and keep central america fortied. For any island nation there is no need to keep ground troops defending. Not sure about europe since I have not had the pleasure to fight there yet. In asia you just have to worry about defending lanes of travel since there are large swaths of open non supplied land that the AI has difficulties keeping units in supply. Middle east has some nice choke points. Not sure about Africa, but they probly dont have all that to many high tech units down there so it should be easy to defend. Not like you are going to see the US army pounding down your neck if you are South Africa.

Since the AI does little in the way of attacking it is fairly simple to hold out combat wise. Your only issue is going tobe income.
Opthalamia
Colonel
Posts: 458
Joined: Sep 12 2008

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Opthalamia »

Germany has large borders. And even the AI managed a fight against all neighbors. I played India and payed about 7B war subsidies per week. After 1 year, the german AI start to capture large territories, 80% of denmark etc. Nobody has to fear any AI, conquer the whole world the still the mainfeature.
GIJoe597
Board Admin
Posts: 2918
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by GIJoe597 »

Supreme67 wrote:Have you done this with the new update? Also, could you post in the AAR with pics. Not that I don't believe it can't be done but declaring war on the entire world seems an interesting game strategy. I've started posting my first game in the AAR and I'll add pics with the second post. As complicated as this game is, it's interesting that someone has found a way to defeat it as easily as you have suggested.


Supreme67, I am new to SR and BG, I bought the game a month or so ago, no previous knowlegde on how ANY of it works (look around at my numerous questions), and I am at war with the whole world. Playing as U.S.A. a few years in to the game Canada and Mexico declared war on me. I took them out, then all of Central America declared on me, I took them out, then of course, South America declared. I was kicked out of the UN very early (in each case I was DEFENDING), I am in year 2060 and have NEVER even opened the diplomatic screen other than to try to get a peace agreement. No workie.

As someone pointed out earlier, since there are no sea invasions, you have ZERO to worry about once you own the America's. In fact I have zero ground forces left in the America's and have 1 plane stationed every 800 miles or so around the coasts to deal with the single ship the AI occaisionly sends my way.

I was tired of reading about the UN, and I read they are in Austrailia, I loaded up and island hoped from what used to be the South American Continent and worked my my to Tasmania. It would provide the perfect base against the hated UN. Several years later I own all the Pacific South of Japan and am currently working my way through the South of China from Vietnam.

Worry free for my home lands. So yes it is easy to play as the USA and rather boring at times. I am now at the point where 100% of all games eventually get to, there is no doubt who will win, but you have to slog it out to the end.


EDIT: I hoped destroying Austrailia/Un would have some sort of affect on the game, nothing. Also, anyone ever notice how far the UN is in the red and yet they keep sedning them supplies. Odd that.
https://www.youtube.com/user/GIJoe597


Older/retired gamers, who do not tolerate foolishness.
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/USARG
kirazzo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 21 2008

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by kirazzo »

Hat's off for a good update. I have been rambling on and on i several threads earlier about the huge web of world spanning AI alliances after a few years into a game. This issue is still there but I do see a massive improvement all in all. I guess further tweaks could be to stop the alliances that eventually is created sooner or later with all other nations, unless the AI nations are at war with oneanother.

New feature showing provocation is a nice to have, I like it alot!

BR
Kirr
User avatar
Ruges
General
Posts: 3408
Joined: Aug 22 2008
Location: Nearby, really I'll see you tonight when your sleeping
Contact:

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Ruges »

GIJoe597 wrote:EDIT: I hoped destroying Austrailia/Un would have some sort of affect on the game, nothing. Also, anyone ever notice how far the UN is in the red and yet they keep sedning them supplies. Odd that.
The msg you got about the UN being in australia is probly about the AI geting advisors from the UN.
User avatar
tkobo
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 12397
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: In a vast zionist plot ...RIGHT BEHIND YOU ! Oh Noes !

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by tkobo »

In every game ive played since the last patch, Germany has lost,France has lost, and N.K. has lost.
Russia and China still bog down,both unable to send enough force where needed, and their foes the same.

All were in world in crisis.

The U.N. has no forces on the map.Even the advisors are just a bonus, they are not actually on the map.

Deficit spending is what keeps the U.N. and AI regions going often.But where regions can collaspe due to this, the U.N. cant.
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM
Opthalamia
Colonel
Posts: 458
Joined: Sep 12 2008

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Opthalamia »

Germany, France, Nk and Israel allways run bankrupt. Give Germany enough money, and even the AI can defend herself and expend, against all neighbors.

France have another military structure. I dont know if money would be enough help. But Germany was a cold war border staate. Its Army is build up to stop the Warschauer Pakt before they reach France. Its strong enough to defend every border. But lack of money hurts every region.

In real-life germany have a trade surplus, since i was born...ingame it has a deficit. But, everybody knows that USA run a deficit, and ingame it has a surplus. Some years can change alot... in SR2020.
GIJoe597
Board Admin
Posts: 2918
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by GIJoe597 »

Ruges wrote:The msg you got about the UN being in australia is probly about the AI geting advisors from the UN.

Actually, its part of the story, its one of the news articles on Page 9 of the manual. Apparently it has no ingame effect though, sad :(
https://www.youtube.com/user/GIJoe597


Older/retired gamers, who do not tolerate foolishness.
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/USARG
oberkommando
Major
Posts: 195
Joined: Sep 21 2008
Location: Querétaro

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by oberkommando »

Supreme67 wrote:
Thorgrimm wrote:
Supreme67 wrote:I'm guessing that the United States could be in trouble from its southern border as well. The new update is changing the way I've played this game. Very interesting.
I got a really good laugh out of this statement here. Canada is 10 times more of a threat than Mexico, and no offense to any Canadians, and that is not much. :lol: I beat Mexico as California, by myself. So have no fear of La Estados Unidos De Mexico. :wink:

Consider any war dec by Canada and Mexico as a gift. It gives you North America, keeps the UN off your back, and if your relations are high enough with the UN they will even send their neat nifty 'advisors' to help out. :-)

So instead of cringing at a war dec from the small fry, act like a superpower and show them why they just made the biggest mistake of their nation's existence. :o



Cheers, Thorgrimm
North America at what cost? A wrecked economy that will take time to recover from and it leaves the country vunerable from attack from some of the up and coming new powers. I've started a real game and I just watched my only ally in the middle east get wiped off the face of the planet (Israel). Brazil is kicking butt in South America and no doubt they are going to make their way northward. I don't want a war with Mexico and Canada right now. It will devestate me economically and hurt my goal of countering Brazil when they do make that track to my backdoor.
Well, it is not that i wouldn´t like to own North America, i do, but i would like to have a few more years of peace between us, i am building my economy, trying to pay that billionaireeb debt, making myself independent (i mean resourses), getting better military units, improving the social assistance, lowering taxes, improving life quality by rising spendings on health etc. So the GDP and domestical aproval ratings get higher.
I engaged them the firsttime, but, i preffered to ask for peace.
Opthalamia
Colonel
Posts: 458
Joined: Sep 12 2008

Re: AI Relationships - Changes for Update 4

Post by Opthalamia »

Ask for peace is dangerous. Perhabs, they never declare war again. 8O
Post Reply

Return to “Diplomacy - 2020”