I think it is good that there is a 'hidden' value for those interactions with other nations, which goes somewhat deeper than the normal relations, as long as it is reasonable... Every player should know who his enemies ar anyway.
-
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.
What would be better?
The problem is that one country shouldn't be allowed to dominate the world. All that is needed is a counterbalancing power, but this needn't be another nation - it can be an alliance. So, if one country grows to large (perhaps measured just like in the above), the AI should try and build an alliance to match it.
I agree. That actually was the case in the era in which this game begins.. circa 1500.. the Treaty of Cambrai was a League of Nations opposed to Venice (organized by the Papacy) bc Venice had become too strong as an Italian Republic and threatened to dominate the peninsula. There are many other examples thru-out this 300 year period of coalition formed just as you describe.
------------------
~ Salve ~
The problem is that one country shouldn't be allowed to dominate the world. All that is needed is a counterbalancing power, but this needn't be another nation - it can be an alliance. So, if one country grows to large (perhaps measured just like in the above), the AI should try and build an alliance to match it.
I agree. That actually was the case in the era in which this game begins.. circa 1500.. the Treaty of Cambrai was a League of Nations opposed to Venice (organized by the Papacy) bc Venice had become too strong as an Italian Republic and threatened to dominate the peninsula. There are many other examples thru-out this 300 year period of coalition formed just as you describe.
------------------
~ Salve ~
I stated most of my opinions on hartmans thread in FAQ. but I would like tstress that I think that the negative value really should decrease with distance and be dependanmt on religion. a protestant countr defeating a catholic country should get positive or at least only slightly negative reactions from other protestants (and vice-versa from catholics of course). also, RotW should not affect european powers relations with each other. I even would like a state of war in RotW while at peace in Europe.
------------------
Arngrim
------------------
Arngrim
i agree with those who like the new AI
the game is more challenging and interesting now. it was much too easy before.
the game is more challenging and interesting now. it was much too easy before.
It is merely challenging to be at war with everyone- I can for example even pick my enemy, by offering peace to everyone else (who will accept it), and just killing then the smallest coalition out of them. This setting of the AI is, if I would play a real 'powermonger' strategy, even easier- I need not to declare war (no stability loss) and annex the next small country or even his allies as well. It unfavors even the more peaceful players, who are rather trying to build than anything else, and only take if they DO get attacked themselves (or they try to get land from the non- european countries)! I am also annoyed that the computer has a badboy value which is way worse than mine, but to him (in this case France, I should perhaps set it to a 1000 for fun), nothing happens.
I am getting kind afraid here. I intend on invading Saxony with Brandenberg as soon as possible, will I find myself quickly overwhelmed?
------------------
History is a lie agreed upon. Napoleon
------------------
History is a lie agreed upon. Napoleon
Hehe, yes, you will have some fun as soon as you grow large. 
As Hannover I ONLY attacked the Hanse (to get some harbors- Bremen and Holstein), and that was enough to shoot my badboy value up by a lot. I didn't even take over another country!
As Hannover I ONLY attacked the Hanse (to get some harbors- Bremen and Holstein), and that was enough to shoot my badboy value up by a lot. I didn't even take over another country!