The horror of S-Iberia or magical adventures of polar conquistadors

[Wizzington]

I've seen that already.

Really, what's so hard about just recoding the AI? There's literally nothing in Siberia that's worth Portugal and Spain's while.

"If Siberia, do not colonize if you are Spain or Portugal" is not how you code an AI. If they should not go there it should be because of clear gameplay rules that will not be badly applied to other situations.

That said, I'm actually looking at a way to tweak the AI here. Just not for 1.12.

 

[Wizzington]

Some sort of historical expansion directioning? England prioritizes in consolidating the British Isles, then United States, then India. France consolidate French lands then Caribbean, then India, then east Asia and so forth.

Entirely the wrong approach. EU4's AI needs to work even if inserted into a totally different scenario.

 

[Wizzington]

Then, maybe you could associate colonization with trade zones...

Already how it works. AI won't colonize where they can't pull trade, but you actually *can* pull trade from Siberia to Spain, just via a lot of stops on the way - but if I defined it by number of stops they'd also ignore the pacific islands and such.

What I think I'll do is make the AI ignore arctic provinces (it's the harshest climate as of 1.12) if they don't have bordering provinces or territory in the same trade node. That should have the bonus effect of Spain also not grabbing random provinces in Hudson Bay.

 

[Wizzington]

Obviously I don't know how the AI currently picks colonization targets (I suspect that the "colonize X" mission sometimes guides it, maybe even overriding the selection process if it's available) but wouldn't some rules that predispose the AI to colonize non-distant overseas, then colonial regions/trade companies, then distantoverseas basically cover this? Just add the pacific islands to a trade zone and Siberia will be the last thing colonized by anyone not adjacent to it, but the colonizers will colonize as they should.

EDIT: lots of posts since I started typing then went to make coffee, more about AI selection of colonization targets was said, but I think it doesn't invalidate my point?

The (Western European) AI already colonizes Siberia dead last. People want them not to colonize it at all because it's a waste of money for them and looks rather bizarre.

 

[Wizzington]

I think more dynamism in who colonizes is a good idea, as long as you don't end up with Oirat Siberia every game.

 

[Wizzington]

If you do that, will it make the AI not colonize Greenland's 2 provinces unless they have Canada?

A big issue is the AI colonizing areas sporadically, causing a lot of exclaves. Especially with Protestant countries that don't adhere to the rules of Treaty of Tordesillas. The AI should prioritize securing fully and having a colonial nation ready to act than having several colonies in different neighboring colonial regions.

Yes and that's perfectly fine, Greenland shouldn't be a priority for anyone.

 

[Wizzington]

Some of you still do not get it - downprioritizing Siberia is meaningless because they already go there only once they are out of other options, and refusing to colonize anywhere they do not already have trade dominance would likely break AI colonization in half. It's not like the AI doing this is actually a problem in how they play, it just looks weird.

 

[Wizzington]

I have no doubt about that, but imo the province's climate should be weighted when the AI decides where to colonize, and there should even a modifier on how effective a nation should colonizing a region taking in account the climate. I think Spain and Portugal should have a heavier penalty on settler increase when colonizing in arctic provinces, than Russia, p.e..

It IS and had always been weighted in quite heavily.