• 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.
I agree with Blobhemian about the taking ideas issue. It's pretty sad to see AI nations that by all metrics should be rich, and moreover, more than capable to pay like 3 ducats for basic lvl 1 advisors sitting around with 1 or 2 ideas taken in the 1530s.

I fired up a Mali game today to experience firsthand the supposed horror people are talking about in regards to the disaster, and ideas wise the game was a letdown. I took my first idea group, exploration, in 1496, took the first idea for the mission tree and I was able to steal colonization from Portugal in 1501 (we both satisfied the conditions in 1500, but it spawned a year later, and to be fair it was a tossup between us, because he had colonies in Brazil). It's in the 1530s since that in my game, I've completed both Exploration and Expansion, I'm sitting on 20 innovativeness from the ideas, caught up on tech (force spawned both Feudalism and the Renaissance) because other colonizers only have the first two from both (meaning Portugal, Castile and England), the Ottomans and France each have in Economic and one other from another group. And from what I can see, none expanded so much that they shouldn't have the points to spare for ideas (England has some of Ireland, France reconquested his home region, Ottomans have eaten the beyliks and the Balkans, Castile ate Granada and some of Morocco and Tlemcen). And they did this too in patches before 1.32 and still managed to fill out two idea groups and make headway in the third by this time in the game, supposedly in worse financial conditions.

And if this stays the same until next spring, it's really gonna be a cold winter for the AI and the game, since not having their ideas weakens them significantly in the long run. I was able to kick Castile (who has Aragon, Naples and Navarra as PUs, all of them having some numerical and all out naval advantage) out of Africa just by sitting on the highlands terrain Ceuta in neutral Portugal and waiting for ticking warscore and length of war. They didn't even try to naval invade me.
 
AI wastes mana in general, somehow. It's really noticeable when you have massively overextended subjects who can't core their provinces within 15-20 years, even though the math says it should be trivial with no advisers. I don't know what meme lord stuff the AI is doing when it has 50-200% OE or more, but if it's using that same logic while independent it's not surprising it struggles.
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Fair point about the AI dismissing/hiring troops which is too heavy a burden probably for a small to midsized tag. In that case I think it'd strongly prefer them to just lowering maintenance instead of drilling. I don't really see the point of the AI drilling troops as long as the AI can't handle to keep it's economy afloat. Low maintenance is probably the least bad choice I can think off; expecially if they can hide behind an active fort.
 
AI budgeting is in general a balancing act. The upside of this version is that the AI's economy is much stronger, the downside that it gets behind on ideas (too few advisors) and has too few forts. I'm personally a strong believer in the AI not cheating, so we don't have too much wiggle room. And to be honest, many players (including myself) do delete a lot of their forts in order to run a healthy surplus.

That being said, there is significant room for improvement, and hopefully we can get a better solution for the next major patch.

ofc cuz they delete every fort they have and don't use advisors anymore I wonder why their economic balance improved, it's not like the emperor of china is draining meritocracy to 0 in the first 50y. 1.32 Improvement of AI is such a placebo effect and I'm not saying there is no improvement whatsoever but overall AI is weaker than before just because you lowered AE so they can blob faster doesn't mean they will have proper footing
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
AI budgeting is in general a balancing act. The upside of this version is that the AI's economy is much stronger, the downside that it gets behind on ideas (too few advisors) and has too few forts. I'm personally a strong believer in the AI not cheating, so we don't have too much wiggle room. And to be honest, many players (including myself) do delete a lot of their forts in order to run a healthy surplus.

That being said, there is significant room for improvement, and hopefully we can get a better solution for the next major patch.
Sorry for late reply but we delete forts because there are no players against us in single player. But I don't delete forts in MP. If you don't have forts in MP. You lost the war. But ai always play against players. If ai doesn't have forts, it is more easy to conquer it. You may be add fort maintenance bonus for ai nations. It would be help for their economy. AI is terrible in everything. They need some cheats like that
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
AI budgeting is in general a balancing act. The upside of this version is that the AI's economy is much stronger, the downside that it gets behind on ideas (too few advisors) and has too few forts. I'm personally a strong believer in the AI not cheating, so we don't have too much wiggle room. And to be honest, many players (including myself) do delete a lot of their forts in order to run a healthy surplus.

That being said, there is significant room for improvement, and hopefully we can get a better solution for the next major patch.
Hello, Eu4 AI modder here.

Unlike most players I'm viewing AI in this game from a different angle, I'm trying to push AI to match experienced players with little cheats as possible.
And I'm very much inclined to view advisors change as a bug, the loss of AI monarch point efficiency is huge in this patch, and overall it's loss of functionality for me as modder.

In my opinion advisors should be always budgeted for or at least have very high budget priority.
Monarch points and Money are 2 extremely valuable resources in this game. Advisors in this sense convert Money to Monarch points, with low level advisors and cheap advisors it makes this convertion very very valuable.
An Experienced player would try to get all level 1 advisors asap even as small tag, and right now even very wealthy AI gets rid off advisers once he takes out a loan or two.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Deleting forts is good. Deleting all/too many is not.

Priority to delete should be given to adjacent forts. Priority to keep should be defensiveness, attrition, capital, and provinces that border many provinces or on border with enemy/rival. Some forts should be flagged as 'never delete'.

Otto is over-deleting. They have zero forts in my current campaign as well.

On a related topic, maybe the amount of gold you can get in peace deals should be limited to one year's income.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
We were already aware of a bug with advisors that we fixed internally a while back, but I have taken a deeper look at advisors and forts. And there were a lot of issues, many of which have now also been fixed. I'm very happy with the way advisor AI turned out, and fort AI is at least noticeably better than before. It will be out in the next patch.

I know it seems weird that fort AI gets worse without us knowing why. I still *think* it was triggered by trying to make it save more money, which is what I meant by the budgeting being a balancing act, but there were definitely some serious underlying causes that have now been fixed, without compromising savings.
 
  • 8Like
  • 1
Reactions:
And of course, thanks to everyone posting in this thread (and elsewhere) to make me aware of the urgency of these issues. We all play the game in different ways, and look for different things, so I had not really noticed myself. I'm sorry we can't bring the fixes live sooner.
 
  • 7Like
Reactions:
WHICH MEAN EVERYONE GRAB YOUR BYZANTIUM PLAYTHROUGH WE CAN BLOCK THE OTTOMANS AGAIN !!!!! (I will try after my Mughal playthrough (1549 : neighboor of Ottomans /Mamluks/Uzbek and Poland ; Owning only Delhi and Punjab in India andis the most powerful nation in the World)
 
Vs players, it has been a strat to jump mothballed Ottoman forts for a few years now in the opener as Byz for example. Compared to giving up the fort for free, OP's example is still actually better lol.

@Gnivom - Any consideration to changing how mothballed forts work? I never understood why it has to be a binary on/off mechanic. Why can't a mothballed fort function with a 1000 man garrison? That would help out in the above situations. May not completely prevent blindside attacks but should give a few extra months for AI to regroup. Plus allowing the money discount should help AI retain the forts without compromising their budgets.

I don't believe that change would cause any drastic shifts in game balance but would be a simple nudge in the right direction.