• Crusader Kings III Available Now!

    The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.


    Real Strategy Requires Cunning
Dec 29, 2004
636
0
I was thinking about how to improve the AI. Particularily prevent it going bankrupt and staving its POPs. I'm not sure how far along the mod has come in tackling these (there is a very old post which touches on the subject). Looking around, it seems the AI still taxes at 100%.

Anyway, I was thinking about giving all AI nations (or at least the poor ones) a lassie-faire govenment. This would limit taxes to 50%, thereby preventing the AI from overtaxing its people. This is not far off the interventionism most nations start with. Also, it will allow the nation to collect tarriffs, which usually dwindle to 0 as the 100% tax takes all the money from the POPs. I think tarriffs are better than taxes (bring in more money) due to some multiplyer or base value. So it is better for uncivs and AI as they will have far more money. I tested it. Loaded AI persia. It had 100% taxes for poor, 50% for middle and 0% for rich. Tarriffs were at 100%. Total earning was around £6. Lower poor tax to 50%, and bam the tarriffs shoot up and Persia is now earning £8. So clearly the AI thinks taxes are the way forward when tarriffs are.

So what do people think about the idea of changing all AI nations (at least the uncivs and other nations that struggle a lot) to lassiez-faire? Or is there something else I have missed, such as the AI ignoring such things when it plays?
 

unmerged(131989)

Field Marshal
20 Badges
Jan 13, 2009
5.324
0
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • March of the Eagles
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • East India Company
  • Deus Vult
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
For uncivs the value of: "primitive = 0.25", could be altered in the "...\db\economy\misc.txt" file. With respects to other changes... I think we should have historical parties and policies at the beginning.
 
Dec 29, 2004
636
0
But the 100% issue is not just for uncivs, many civs do it as well.

Looking at how the nations work, they seem to try and have rich taxes at 0% and middle taxes at around 50%. They then seem to move the poor taxes around a lot (they will move the others as well). Not sure if it is nation dependant, or AI type or something but some nations will have 0% taxes for all and other wont (eg UK and Bavaria). This seems independant of how much cash they have in the bank (I gave Persia over £80000 and still it taxed the poor at 100%, making a profit). Even China taxes at 100% for its poor POPs, and it makes a fair bit of money. However, all these nations do move their poor taxes up and down, though why I dont know - there is no obvious connection.

For uncivs the value of: "primitive = 0.25", could be altered in the "...\db\economy\misc.txt" file
As pointed out, I see no connection between earning money/having lots of money and not taxing POPs at 100%. They still tax at 100% even when earning. This would of course help the bankruptcy, but I was hoping to fell two birds with one stone.

I think we should have historical parties and policies at the beginning.
While I agree that it would be ideal to have historical parties and policies, nations going bankrupt, thier population collapsing is pretty ahistorical (well, at least the poor POPs. The rich and middle POPs will keep on growing as they are not being taxed to death. This in itself is a cause for concern and is ahistorical) . I think a comprimise between these two would be OK, providing lassiez-faire doesnt radically alter things. The party would be activated at the start and made the ruling party. Then, when it is changed for whatever reason (say elections) then the party is lost for ever. Hopefully these nations will be liberal industrial powerhouses and will elect in another lassie-faire party.

Anyway, I'm just testing the water. Trying to come up with a way to improve the AI, stop bankruptcys and prevent population decimation.

In many ways, this is no differnt to telling the AI not to tax above 50% (if we could do that) through the game code. Not a lot else changes, except caps can build and nations cant get reforms, but that wont be an issue for most of the AI nations. I dont think it would cause any real ahistorical changes either (no more than the AI currently causes due to its poor ability to manage its nation).
 
Last edited:

unmerged(131989)

Field Marshal
20 Badges
Jan 13, 2009
5.324
0
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • March of the Eagles
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • East India Company
  • Deus Vult
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
I mentioned uncivs as these are the only ones I've ever seen go bankrupt. Even in the strange screenshot thread all these years I haven't seen a civilised country go bankrupt. Usually the AI never even suffers from over taxing their POPs (although I have observed China decrease in population somewhat due to this, but this is the only one I've seen). Even then... is reducing China's population such a big deal for them? Plenty more where that came from :p

Feel free to alter stuff around though mate. We all might just learn something...
 
Dec 29, 2004
636
0
Hmm, well I watched AI egypt. Its population went up every month, but when I loaded it up it was taxing @100%. I let it run a month and the population dropped. So the AI seems to be doing a resonable job at keeping its population from dropping. Loading egypt on the 30th, it had 0% poor taxes. Loading it on the 5th of the next month it had 100% taxes again. So my guess would be that, if the population check only occurs on the 30th of the month, the AI lowers its taxes, increases its population and then increases its taxes again. So perhaps the population error has been fixed already. Will have to watch a few more countries for longer periods of time.

Indeed, this is probably how the 1.4 patch fixed it

AI will no longer be hurt by bad population growth because its pops are taxed too heavily.
Perhaps the lassie-faire govenment would not be such a great idea after all. I may test it on a nation which often goes bankrupt to see if it helps it out. It would still help as far as tarriffs go, though then having a modifyer of income would perhaps be the better alternative, as you suggested.
 
Last edited:

unmerged(131989)

Field Marshal
20 Badges
Jan 13, 2009
5.324
0
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • March of the Eagles
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • East India Company
  • Deus Vult
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
That's a very clever thing that the AI did really. Your POPs won't migrate (which happens on 5th and 19th is it?? :confused: can't remember the two days it happens on in the month) as they are short-ranged, so tax them to death until just before your population growth is taken into account. A very clever thing in fairness to it!
 
Dec 29, 2004
636
0
Indeed, very clever. Very good way out of the problem.

I think it also means your pops will always get a -0.16 mil/con decrease due to 0% taxes on the month as well as -0.05 for everyday needs. Indeed, everyone I load up has 0 mil and often 0 con. This means that until plu gets really high (above +0.21) the POP will never gain in militancy. Sweet deal for the AI, which is probably why there isnt more radical changes in AI government types.

It does mean that european nations will get a lot of people leaving for the Americas (whether this is a good thing.....)

Perhaps what is needed is an ideology to prevent the AI getting away with 0% taxing, making it state cap or whichever one makes min taxing 20%.

Well, I may have been completely wrong/confused with what has changed, but I have still learnt something new.
 

unmerged(96217)

First Lieutenant
1 Badges
Apr 5, 2008
209
0
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
I often see some of the German minors go bankrupt, and Argentina once, but even then its rare for civilized nations.
 
Dec 29, 2004
636
0
Well, I would guess that is due to some event specific to that game, such as a war that has gone on to long.

I am also interested in what this would do to the world economy. At the moment, these POPs cannot buy any goods (due to 100% tax). If I changed ALL rulling parties to lassai-faire, will there be changes in prices/good availability (which would answer another question I have). I am going to test it.

But all that said, I always play 50% taxes, 100% tarriffs (or varients of that), esp in the early game to get things going. It seems the most proffitable, and I think I am a goodish player. This means the computer has a disadvantage (however much it cheats) as it will never be making as much money as me.