Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

late mod latency

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
unmerged(15247)

unmerged(15247)

immortal technique
Mar 3, 2003
1.964
0
with the latest beta, the late game comes to a standstill if a historical spain present.no matter speed setting, it will only go as far as "very slow":(.

did some observation; if spanish capital gets sieged speed improves right away even if spain remains at war still. this does not to be consisten 100% but from 6-7 wars this was true for 4.

this was an issue since ever; however not as acute as it became since the last BETA was released. before could achive "normal" speed unders such circumstances but now is uterly impossible and usually this annoying eu2engine effects tarts soon after or around 1700.
 
Not sure this is because of latest beta. I observed it long ago. There is no change in beta that can justify this, especially in AI files. Last change for last Spanish AI file (SPA_1700_Bourbons.ai) was in december 2007.

Problem is indeed because of Spain and many calculations between mainland and empire in America for troops/ships movements (pathfinder to capital?). Spain is the only country in such configuration.

Maybe problem could be in some values of the 1700 AI file and troops willing to go back to capital too often as a consequence. Maybe Toio could tell.
 
Last edited:
YodaMaster said:
Not sure this is because of latest beta. I observed it long ago.
Click to expand...
as i been saying, this is well KNOWN issue as you say as well that goes way back. however with the latest beta i DEFINATELLY see the problem compunded to a literal STANDSTILL at times past 1700(i use same computer, etc as i did long before so it cant be a technicality just in my case)
 
YodaMaster said:
Not sure this is because of latest beta. I observed it long ago. There is no change in beta that can justify this, especially in AI files. Last change for last Spanish AI file (SPA_1700_Bourbons.ai) was in december 2007.

Problem is indeed because of Spain and many calculations between mainland and empire in America for troops/ships movements (pathfinder to capital?). Spain is the only country in such configuration.

Maybe problem could be in some values of the 1700 AI file and troops willing to go back to capital too often as a consequence. Maybe Toio could tell.
Click to expand...

I am no AI genius :D

but try this change...........a 30 in expansion is to try to find 30 new areas to colonize, by 1700 I think there are not many available

#
# AGCEEP
# Bourbons AI
# Spain 1700-1819
# Fodoron 2005
#
region = {
CarribeanSea
WCAtlanticSea
WPacificSea
}
area = {
Cuba
Haiti
Panama
Orenoque
"La Plata"
Azteca
"Costa Rica"
Ecuador
Inca
Florida
Texas
Louisiane
Kansas
Nevada
Sonora
Paraguay
Chili
Lucon
Patagonia
California
}
expansion = 3 30 #6
tradingpost = 20 #40
neighbour = 0
enemies = 0
traders = 100
monopoly = 10 #-100
war = -100
ferocity = no
counterreform = yes
combat = { GRA ARG NAV CAT MEX COL LAP HSA }
base = 2.0
front = 5.0
conquer = {
enemy = 5.0
supply = 0.2
distance = 35.0
owner = 1.0
notsupply = 3.0
base = 13.0
}
garrison = {
fortress = 1.0
strategic = 4.0
size = 1.0
supply = 2.0
war = 5.0
}


This will help in calculating less.............keep me informed
 
Isn't it because armies always try to go back to the capital after a successfull siege? I observed such behavior with other countries (not all). Couldn't it be in conquer or garrison sections instead (or too) then?
 
It could be related to that first base value. 2.0 is a bit higher than we have in a lot of AI files. According to IDLF's ai bible and a related post by Daywalker it is generally good to keep that much smaller than the front value. (so like base = 0.1 and front = 5.0)
 
Garbon said:
It could be related to that first base value. 2.0 is a bit higher than we have in a lot of AI files. According to IDLF's ai bible and a related post by Daywalker it is generally good to keep that much smaller than the front value. (so like base = 0.1 and front = 5.0)
Click to expand...

that will help also because at the moment that 2.0 over 5.0 = 20% of current troops numbers to go back to capital, a 0.1 as Garbon will force only 2% to go back to capital.

the conquer and garrison are fine
 
YodaMaster said:
Base to be reworked then. We will have to check all AI files in order to fix such unwanted behavior... Toio? :)
Click to expand...

there is no "error" in having a base higher than 0.1. it all depends on what you want the AI to do in peace time.

Maybe the initial idea for this SPA AI file was consolidate the capital for the future spanish succession wars :)

Small , non colonizing states actually benefit if the base and front numbers are close to each other , as it gives this small state a ready "prepared" bulk of troops to rush to its frontier, instead of sending them in dribs and drabs to be massacred

On the expansion number, any number over 6 is a waste of time for any state at any point of the game.
Tests by daywalker and myself confirmed this and it was agreed by IDFL .
 
intrigued by the "return to capital" ai behaviour:cool::

spain as compared to france at least, is horrible at defending her capital, especialy in late game as i noticed. landing in valencia there is almost no sight(not counting 1k's) of any spanish troops:confused:. i assume return to capital AFTER war has started??
 
beregic said:
intrigued by the "return to capital" ai behaviour:cool::

spain as compared to france at least, is horrible at defending her capital, especialy in late game as i noticed. landing in valencia there is almost no sight(not counting 1k's) of any spanish troops:confused:. i assume return to capital AFTER war has started??
Click to expand...

base and front combo , only applies in peace time
 
I understand the base argument but Spain is not a small country.
Seeing armies going back to capital each time a province is captured during a war is strange too. Such wasted time...

For expansion, I'm not sure. Some countries must spread as soon as possible (Spain, France, England and Russia) and paint the areas that are defined for them. I remember I made some tests too and low values (under 10) were not very satisfying. Maybe I'm wrong but result is current colonization for majors and it is are far better than with previous values in older AGCEEP versions where AI colonization was undoubtedly too weak.
 
YodaMaster said:
I understand the base argument but Spain is not a small country.
Seeing armies going back to capital each time a province is captured during a war is strange too. Such wasted time.
Click to expand...
..
thats an engine issue and not the Ai file

For expansion, I'm not sure. Some countries must spread as soon as possible (Spain, France, England and Russia) and paint the areas that are defined for them. I remember I made some tests too and low values (under 10) were not very satisfying. Maybe I'm wrong but result is current colonization for majors and it is are far better than with previous values in older AGCEEP versions where AI colonization was undoubtedly too weak.
Click to expand...

if u check the expansion numbers for other colonizing states, they are all at 6

I asume you know how expansion number works, if not then a quick summary as foliows

lets say the number is 6 for expanasion, then the Ai will find 6 empty province and place TPs in them, they will not colonize until they have found 6. They will then place more TP in these 6 till the max for all, ( but not always) and then start sending colonists to these 6 provinces

If the expansion number was 30, then the AI will TP 30 provinces before it starts to sent colonists, this is how daywalker, IDFL and I have found how expansion works, granted we argued about the number in that IDFL favoured a high number so that SPA could "claim" these lands before another state did, while I favoured low numbers, so that the proivnce could be a colony and a town in quick time.
 
Last edited:
Toio said:
they will not colonize until they have found 6.
Click to expand...

Are you sure this is actually true? That doesn't seem to gel right from what I've seen when trying out different expansion values with the Dutch (formed from a non-colonizing country).
 
Garbon said:
Are you sure this is actually true? That doesn't seem to gel right from what I've seen when trying out different expansion values with the Dutch (formed from a non-colonizing country).
Click to expand...

its all documented via daywalker and IDFL notes.

test it use a 3 ( minimum as stated by IDFL) and see how quick they can make a town and then use 10.
 
YodaMaster said:
Problem is not making a town but painting an area as quickly as possible and thus preventing colonization of foreign countries, especially players.
Click to expand...

thats correct, as I stated above, so someone needs to say what number is best for each colonizing nation, but my issue is and i stated it years ago is to use a number between 3 and 9.
The issue I had with IDFL in was his number of 15 was. is was too slow to colonize and far to expensive for the AI .

Also, if you do not keep this expansion number the same through its AI file for that state, then the AI gets confused, of course if the file are far apart in years then there is no issue.
 
Toio said:
its all documented via daywalker and IDFL notes.
Click to expand...

Can you point to me the threads that they might be contained in? I can search for the posts. (IDLF's AI bible doesn't say anything about that.) (In fact our notes on the expansion value in one of the stickyed threads in this forum suggests that there is some volatility in the expected effects of that value.)

Toio said:
test it use a 3 ( minimum as stated by IDFL) and see how quick they can make a town and then use 10.
Click to expand...

That's not what I'm questioning though. I'm curious about the notion that if an AI had an expansion value of 6, it won't do any colonizing until it finds 6 available provinces.
 
Garbon said:
Can you point to me the threads that they might be contained in? I can search for the posts. (IDLF's AI bible doesn't say anything about that.) (In fact our notes on the expansion value in one of the stickyed threads in this forum suggests that there is some volatility in the expected effects of that value.)



That's not what I'm questioning though. I'm curious about the notion that if an AI had an expansion value of 6, it won't do any colonizing until it finds 6 available provinces.
Click to expand...

bible thread, post 5 and post 15 for starters, I will need to check the long daywalker to IDFL conversation in which daywalker explained it to him.

It will find 6 available province to place a tp in each, then it will think about placing more tps in these 6 , until one or 2 of these 6 has a max of 6 tp , then it will start to send a colonist to one of these that has 6 tp.

all wasted money for the AI, especially when a human , will place maybe 1 tp then a colonist
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back