Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations – Dev diary 6: Improved Diplomacy

  • 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.
Reminds me of something a heard in a technology documentary: Robots will never take over the world, because we write thier coding, we tell them exactly what they do and they can't think on thier own without human input.

On topic, looking forward to WoN, definitely turning out much better than CoP!

Except that fairly simple codding can take over the world, in terms of making a desert and call it peace.
 
Last edited:
I very clearly wasn't referring to the AI in general but the alliance maintenance code which i was very careful to specify.

yes, i still dont agree with your sentiment 'that its horribly patched up' many refinements seem to have been made and wiz has been on the forum numerous times to explain his working and thoughts on the AI. Not once did it come across that he is a purveyor of a patched up mess.
 
Generally, since all AI cheats to a certain extent in games.
Though some people throw this idea on their heads, and seem to be fine with the AI cheating... if the devs didn't do it. If modders seem to do it, they love it to death, but if the devs do it... *meaningful glance at another grand strategy title made by another company, and at certain people who love a certain garrison script for certain title even though its blanant, obvious cheats*
In fairness to the Third Age modders, the AI withdrawing from really major cities with chapters of the source material devoted to their defense pretty much destroyed any sense of accomplishment or immersion. That was cheating that actually helped make the mod feel real.
Flat out making the AI better with flat bonuses than you can also work in games like XCOM where the point is to make the player feel desperate and overwhelmed by crisis after disaster after tragedy.

But in a Grand Strategy game? Making the AI factions superior throws off the mental calculations you make in war and peace, and the whole game is about how and when to take those risks.
 
yes, i still dont agree with your sentiment 'that its horribly patched up' many refinements seem to have been made and wiz has been on the forum numerous times to explain his working and thoughts on the AI. Not once did it come across that he is a purveyor of a patched up mess.

We'll we're all entitled to our own opinions. However as a programmer and going by the evidence of what happens during actual games I can only surmise that such horrifically bad events occur after multiple patches because the system is to nasty for him to fully fix it. If it was cleanly written and easy to understand these ridiculous inanities wouldn't happen so often. It's one thing to get low chance things to happen in a game that's based on possibilities. Over time stuff will happen. It's another thing where AI will repeatedly do things like dumping a best friend only to want them back a few days later, or declaring war on Russia when they are already at war with the entire west, break their alliance with you when you're their only ally and there's a 7 member coalition against them....I could go on and on.
 
I think Paradox should consider adding a new ledger listing all nations that currently qualifies as great powers. I've often found myself reaching the limit of GP allies and thus unable to recruit more GP allies. I've looked at my allies and I can only find two GP allies. IIRC, three is the max number of GP allies you can have at any time before penalty kicks in but I may be wrong.
 
This sounds so fantastic - I don't do so often, but this is a day one purchase for me. The rivals system and power projection mechanics smack of awesome!
 
We'll we're all entitled to our own opinions. However as a programmer and going by the evidence of what happens during actual games I can only surmise that such horrifically bad events occur after multiple patches because the system is to nasty for him to fully fix it. If it was cleanly written and easy to understand these ridiculous inanities wouldn't happen so often. It's one thing to get low chance things to happen in a game that's based on possibilities. Over time stuff will happen. It's another thing where AI will repeatedly do things like dumping a best friend only to want them back a few days later, or declaring war on Russia when they are already at war with the entire west, break their alliance with you when you're their only ally and there's a 7 member coalition against them....I could go on and on.

Yeah, some things should be prevented from being done. For example, Nations should not be allowed to rival anyone with +100 relations. Or 50+ year allies. It is just not realistic in any way.

For example: My last Japan game, I had a long-lasting Alliance with Oirat, around 200/200 opinion. We fight Manchu. I give them provinces in the peace deal. They grow too big and rival me, causing the relations to fall far below -100 within years.

Just...No.
 
We'll we're all entitled to our own opinions. However as a programmer and going by the evidence of what happens during actual games I can only surmise that such horrifically bad events occur after multiple patches because the system is to nasty for him to fully fix it.

Necroplus on this. It is in nature of commercial software though - quickly fixing an issue right here and right now happens more often than sitting on it and burning your payed time. Because you also still have deadlines and other things to do.
 
So am I the only one who suspects these changes to the rival system (which take choice away from the player) and this new power projection feature will actually impact diplomacy negatively?