An AI that takes BB into account when settling peace deals would be nice.
Guys, it does. It has since the previous patch.
New 4.1 Beta - 15th of April
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
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.
Guys, it does. It has since the previous patch.
Is this really true? I'm seeing Burgundy and Austria with over 60 infamy after just 20 years of play. Clearly they cannot handle owning HRE provices, nor choose to not annex the smaller countries.
They might not be aware that owning HRE provinces gives BB. So they see the peace deal, think "hey, 2 rich provinces, I can easily handle 8BB, I'll take it!" and don't know that they'll get an additional 2x0.25BB/year for those provinces.
It is taken into account, you can see it when hovering over the shield in the HRE view.
But it's only negated by how many badboy points you have (e.g 10 badboy -10 points chance of being emperor.) It should be double, if not triple that.
I meant Infamy from peace deals, which has been a long standing problem for the AI. The next beta patch will address AI woes over the new HRE non-core penalty.
In this patch that has been significantly increased, to 10 x your BB.
Hypnotoad's point was that the AI doesn't seem to realise that each non-core HRE province that you take costs you 12.5BB over 50 years, at the rate of .25BB/year. I suspect that that's going to cause all sorts of problems - I started a game last night, and by 30 years in, both Burgandy and Austria were dishonourable scum with a net BB gain per month
Would I be right in assuming that the changes there are the cause of the HTTT AI being so keen to release nations, rather than annex provinces?
It's nice that the AI are sane with regards to infamy now, but the weighting they put on it could definitely use a fair bit of tweaking (as, I imagine, is happening). As is they seem to be far too afraid of infamy, and consequentially aren't taking provinces which would boost their power in the long term.
That's not exactly what I'm seeing tbh. Frankly, it's not even how I see things.
I am quite happy to see the AI demand other things than provinces; being even close to the Infamy limit is very dangerous now. Your limit might drop and all of a sudden you're over it, and all hell breaks loose.
Biggest problem I can see at the moment is the AI nations expanding at a rapid rate then collapsing over and over.
By the way Doom, when will we see CK2?
By the way Doom, when will we see CK2?
True, that's getting scarier and scarier with each patchThat's not exactly what I'm seeing tbh. Frankly, it's not even how I see things.
I obviously haven't seen nearly as many examples of AI behaviour as you (fancy that
), but I often get the impression that the AI's main goal from a peace deal is to cause damage to their opponent, even at the expense of getting very little direct gain out of the war themselves. So when a major power collapses under its own weight (see: France, Bohemia, Austria), a lot of nations will often be released by the victors and rise from the ashes, rather than those nations taking many of the provinces that they control.In terms of staying under the BB limit, that makes a lot of sense. But it doesn't really gain the AI anything except insofar as they don't have to worry about the larger country anymore. It'd be nice to see them take a few provinces more often; that way they go from, say, 2PM > 4PM rather than staying a 2PM with a couple of small allies who will likely dishonour the alliance at the nearest opportunity.
On the other hand, I've seen what I'd consider some excellent AI decisions since HTTT (for example, in a losing war against burgandy as holland, burgandy offered a white peace that I couldn't really refuse immediately after 0-morale-wiping my entire army so that they could focus on their war against england, my alliance lead - that's very smart resource allocation), which is great
Sorry about that then.
I didn't mean to say that it hadn't improved but it still tends to implode (though admittedly less so than it did) once it reaches a certain size. Perhaps it's no longer due to BB handling however (apart from the HRE provinces) bur rather other issues with empire management?As others I agree the AI is getting considerably better. Part of the implosion problem seems to me to be that it's gotten a lot better at expanding and seizing an opportunity than it used to be but it still has some stuff to learn about how to hold on to it's gains.
That's not the whole truth. Freeing a nation makes it your ally with a high relation, such giving the opportunity to diplo-vassalize it. It's the diplomatic form of divide and conquer and the way I always try to make the biggest enemies smaller and less dominant. At least it was like this in IN, I play HTTT only for a few days now (I somehow missed it before).
After reading the comments, and looking at the files in the rar file, I've decided to not install this patch, but stick to the March 29 one (except for some of the history, event, and so on files).
I like to play EU3, not MMP. Please don't go overboard.
I like to play EU3, not MMP. Please don't go overboard.
No worries on that account, our philosophy is a bit different. However, going over the Infamy limit has always been supposed to be disastrous. You are not really meant to... I think you should try the patch.
In theory I totally agree with you - it should give the AI reliable allies. Unfortunately, the released nations often seem to abandon the allies who freed them at the first opportunity they get. I've even seen them fight against their saviours within a few decades
It would be interesting to see an option, maybe for 2-3x the warscore, to request that a nation 'release' a country as your vassal state. That would certainly make for more loyal allies.
Still I think the .25 BB per non core hre-province is a bit silly.
It kinda makes the 10% infamy cost per province on imperial ban casus belli useless.
Imagine taking five HRE provinces from, say, Poland.
Taking them is a-ok with everyone (2BB), but keeping them is considered bad (1.25BB/year)?
Doesn't make too much sense to me.
It kinda makes the 10% infamy cost per province on imperial ban casus belli useless.
Imagine taking five HRE provinces from, say, Poland.
Taking them is a-ok with everyone (2BB), but keeping them is considered bad (1.25BB/year)?
Doesn't make too much sense to me.
I think the idea is taking the provinces and then giving them back to the HRE country they originally belonged to.
Well yes, but wouldn't forcing the release of some nations basically do the same thing?
I mean, you could also just take the provinces and release the countries as vassals in your realm for low infamy.
I doubt this isn't what a holy roman emperor should do either.
You can't force the release of a nation if it still exists. What I meant is if Poland takes all but one of Brandenburg's provinces, you can take them from Poland and give them back to Brandenburg. That is the sort of thing I'd expect a Holy Roman Emperor to do.