Why no one should waste their time helping with this mod.

[Summoner]

Those who are interested in getting the useful unsubmitted output of IDLF should look in the Portugal and Indian Ocean thread on posts:

157 - Most of the events for Indian ocean conquests
169 - events for Lanka and Ternate
198 - East African setup
291 - Ormouz events

There's plenty of debate about these, but I think they are mostly good. There's also the Socotra events that were never really agreed on but should be implemented in some way. There's a few different versions floating around on pages 10 and 11 of that thread.

Thanks for the pointers.

169's been submitted and added in a tweaked format. Same structure, just the addition of breakvassal commands before vassalizing the targets it seems.

I've saved the thread from posts 150+, and will try and wade through it for changes/improvements to the event sequences. It'll probably be a day or three before I put anything up. Partly to get through the mess and run at least one handsoff to make sure there aren't any bugs. And partly to see if idlf is really gone for good instead of just breifly leaving in a snit like he did before.

EDIT: I was really hoping he'd posted a version of his AI somewhere. If not, I suppose we can just use daywalkers as a base, and update the combat lists if needed.

 

[Garbon]

at the very least making the vassalage of Granada end by ~1460 (if not removing it entirely)...i don't think its a good idea to make anyone Castile's punching bag, but especially Granada being annexed early on in the oft seen Portugal-Castile alliance.

Yea this is a better date, I never actually tried it... o

 

[unmerged(12033)]

Wow, some people take this way too seriously - it's just a game, after all. Seriously, get another hobby if you're going to react like this - you're just bogging down the forum for loyal contributors, players, and fans (like myself).

 

[unmerged(31425)]

Why the AGCEEP is not a good mod and can't become a good mod

In the last thread I started, I was mad when I made it and I vented alot of that anger quite bluntly. I apologize if I said anything I shouldn't have. I'm not convinced that I did but I have an imperfect capacity to reason just like everyone else here. So I apologize if I said something I shouldn't have. I'm gonna try to be more calm here so people can understand the problem I have with this mod.

This will most likely be my last post. To put it in a classical IDLF kind of way, I got to get this one last little piece of turd of my butt out so I can wipe it and move on. There are alot of things that are going on in this mod that I don't like and am quite certain are not good for modding. There is however one fatal flaw in this mod that literally makes it not worth contributing to. I'll address it in a minute but first I'm gonna talk about what I like about this mod to give it a fair context.

It feels good to make proposals in this mod and get others approval on your work. It gives one a feeling of accomplishment to see their contributions in the mod when it is played by many people. It's fun talking with people here. Every person I can think of who posts in this forum is pretty intelligent. No dummies here as near as I can tell. When your a smart guy you particulary enjoy the conversation of others who are also intelligent. No doubt everyone here can relate to what I'm saying here.

But the main problem is this. With this particular engine that this game has the AIs are inherently weaker than us humans. Even with the cheating that they are programmed to do by the engine design itself they cannot even come close to us in competitiveness.

Whenever a historical event is added to this game it gives us humans a distinct advantage. If it is beneficial we can capitalize on it so much better than the AIs. If it is detrimental we can adapt to the stress it puts on us so much better than the AIs. Thus as long as many additional events are being added to the mod it will inherently widen the gulf between the performances of humans vs AIs. If everything is adjusted in this mod in an optimal way it simply isn't enough to keep that gap only as wide as the vanilla.

Here's how it works out. When you as a human player play this mod this gap isn't much bigger than the vanilla for the first 75-100 or years or so. But once alot of events start to kick in the gap starts increasing. By the time you hit 1/3rd of the way through the game, you've pretty much already won. Your economy even by this point is so much stronger than the AIs' that they will rarely even bother to DOW you, because they weigh the economic strength of the respective alliances in their decision on DOWs. This is why often when you are out of an alliance AIs start to DOW you. It's because their alliance has a stronger net economy compared to just your's and this wasn't the case before. In fact it's even worse than their not being able to DOW you often at 1/3rd of the way through the game becasue they still DOW each other and jack each other up with profitless wars one right after another.

The problem is in the AGCEEP the gap of economic strength that makes AIs reluctant to DOW you even if you have no alliance or only a small one hits sooner in the AGCEEP than the vanilla. Once you hit that point the game is all down hill. As long as your BB is under a certain point the AIs are programmed to leave you alone. So you just bump off a pagan here and there and focus on colonizing and making province improvements. Then once you get to a certain economic strength you feel like you can just take on the whole world and go on a killing spree for the rest of the game and the AIs just can't stop you at all.

This happens way too soon in the AGCEEP and it's because of the events being added. Other factors come into play too but this one alone is decisive enough by itself. And this makes for a boring game. Sure the AGCEEP is more historically acurate, at least for the first 100 years or so. Ya it's a "historical mod" and so the premise is to make it more historical but it is a historical GAME not a gamish history. Gameplay is what really matters in the long run.

If the AGCEEP is less challenging than the vanilla most people will try it if they see it and are interested in trying an EU2 game that's a bit different. Ya they will be amazed by the additional historical events and the more historically accurate setup but in the end they will realize that it's a boring game, because it's just too easy. This may not be a pressing matter for many of you AGCEEPers but it is for most gamers. Without overcoming that AI performance discrepancy this mod will not be successful at appealing to a large chunk of the EU2 players no matter how hard you imagine that it will.

Nothing you can do can bridge this gap fully except AI cheats. And there will have to be alot of them to pull it off too. Particularly when even more historical events get added. The problem with this will just get worse not better. Sure there are other factors involved in the poor AI performance. You may even be able to correct every one of those. But once that is done the gap will just keep getting bigger and bigger and you'll be helpless to stop it from happening as more and more events are added to the game.

I've tried my hardest to try and convince you all of this reality. Some of you have grasped it, some have grasped it in part, and some think it's pretty much irrelevant because they don't see that there is indeed a real problem here. The problem isn't that none of you have gotten it yet, its that too many of you haven't grasped the full truth of this reality and are heavily opposed to either AI cheating or to any AI cheating beyond a trivial extent. And enough of you who are highcouncil members fit this category and are quite willing to use your voting power to block any significant progress in the adding of AI cheats to the AGCEEP.

You may not like them. Hardly anybody really does. But the mod can't be successful without them. It will have less replay value than the vanilla and thus be an inferior version of EU2. The amount that is neccessary to make the AGCEEP be as challenging as the vanilla is much more than the overwhelming majority of you are currently willing to accept. Indeed it's much more than I have even hinted at so far.

This whole point I'm making here I have challenged many of you over and over to try and refute if you disagree. The overwhelming majority of what I'm pointing out here you haven't even tried to refute no matter how antagonistic and obnoxious about it I was. This is because it's not my opinion, it's objective truth. It's a fact It is an irrefutable reality. And thus you can't refute it. Indeed even if I played Devil's advocate, I couldn't refute it either. Have either the EEP or the AGC been as challenging as the vanilla? Has the AGCEEP been that challenging yet? The answer is no. And they won't be either unless the AGCEEP crew takes a sharp turn to embrace a much more liberal use of AI cheats.

It was precisely because of my realization of this reality that I threatened to leave in the first place. But then some of you came around or so I thought and said ya I see we're gonna need some to make it happen. The problem is you didn't follow through with that acknowledgement to any significant degree. You said one thing but than did another. And given the results of recent debates in this forum, I think it's extremely doubtful that this post is going to change the minds of enough of you to make it a very real possibility that the gap can indeed be shortened to the point of the vanilla's at least.

Until you can refute this argument or actually make a mod as challenging as the vanilla my claims here stand totally vindicated and untouchable by any doubters. This is why I even go so far as to say this mod is a dud and can't be successful with it's current course. I even reccommend that everyone who agrees with me ditch this mod. So that the few who don't but unfortunately have the controlling power of this mod will be forced to reconsider their stance on the use of AI cheats.

Believe me I have no doubts that no one is as cut to the heart and as grieved about my departure as me. I have immensely enjoyed the company of you all. I am not bitter towards a single one of you and hold you all in high esteem. But there's just no sense in making any serious effort to improve a mod when those who control it are unwilling to do what is neccessary to make it into a good mod.

This mod is like when your old dog is no good anymore and even though you love him you still got to take him out in the yard and shoot him, because he's just suffering and it's doing no good. Perhaps another mod that can be made into a good historical mod will come in the future. If so I'll probably join it because I like modding. Or perhaps if we're lucky enoughof you HC members will get it and I'll come back. I doubt this will happen but I hope it will. But I got better things to do with my freetime than work on a mod that I know sucks and will continue to do so in the future too. I'll miss intensely the fellowship with you all but I'm just sick of the unwillingness on the part of the majority who have a say to do what it takes to make it happen. I'm tired of arguing with you. But you have yet to prove me wrong here and I doubt you ever will.

 

[Twoflower]

I could point you at the quite immense number of people who enjoy this mod quite much, among them lots of people who have been playing EU2 for a very long time and should thus be quite proficient in playing it, try to tell you that for most people a singleplayer game will never ever be really "challenging" unless the player is bashed in an entirely unfair way or start gathering people who would hate AI cheats and less historical flair enough to quit playing this mod no matter how strong it makes the AI. Why, if an AI strengthened by cheats is so all-important to everybody as you think, isn't everybody playing Daywalker's mod that beyond any doubt makes the AI accomplish incredible things? Why, if there is already an excellent mod that focusses on the AI's performance available for people like you who consider this the most important thing, should the AGCEEP do the same thing and not focus on what has defined it in the past and what so many people like about it?
But I know this is futile anyway. It is a pity to see you go, yet this was quite inevitable.
It may be true that the AGCEEP is no good mod for what you expect from the game, however it is an undeniable fact that the AGCEEP is already a damn awesome mod for lots of people, and what annoys me ever since your ranting posts have started is that you refuse to acknowledge this evident truth and seem to insist that all those people are wrong and should not get the mod that they desire.

 

[Mad King James]

Well since you know better, why don't you go off and do it "better" yourself, and stop bitching?

 

[Twoflower]

Btw, should somebody ask a mod to delete the two useless threads posted by IDLF? These do not contribute anything constructive to the AGCEEP - IDLF has already stated his criticism before and is only repeating himself - and a newby who reads just the thread titles might be scared off without even reading the discussion or trying it out himself. Since this is just repetitive and rather boring stuff, it also pretty much amounts to spam.

 

[WiSK]

I happened to agree with most of what you have posted over the last few months. I agreed with enough that I actually went off and learned the basics of writing events, and followed with interest the discussions on AI improvement and so on. I thought your incisive analyses could make a difference.

Obviously your debate style left something to be desired. Not that I have any problem with it myself, but clearly some people were annoyed. And I think if you really want to "win" an argument, you've got to learn that it's not about being right on all details, it's about convincing other people. By continually repeating that everyone else is "unable to refute" any details, you are generally alienating yourself rather than gaining any sympathy. That is a shame.

I have also come to the conclusion that the AGCEEP is never going to be a power-mod. Of course it never claimed to be this. I believe this mod reaches out very much to the sort of people who think 'what if?' and, you know, that's okay. There's good reason that players like Lawkeeper and Daniel A choose mostly vanilla; they need a stronger challenge. Just the same, there's also good reason that Norrefeldt and Twoflower are in here; because they want to see the 'what ifs' but Aberation is too much for them. It doesn't make this a 'bad' mod, just means it's not a mod you'd like to play.

So there's no community power-mod. Daywalker's events have filled that niche, and there aren't enough 'determinists' to start a new project. Well then it's tough luck for us 'determinists'. We can't go blaming the AGCEEP for not providing what we want, we just picked the wrong party to crash.

 

[unmerged(12033)]

Btw, should somebody ask a mod to delete the two useless threads posted by IDLF? These do not contribute anything constructive to the AGCEEP - IDLF has already stated his criticism before and is only repeating himself - and a newby who reads just the thread titles might be scared off without even reading the discussion or trying it out himself. Since this is just repetitive and rather boring stuff, it also pretty much amounts to spam.

First smart thing I've heard all day. Mods, a little help here?

 

[GeneralSnoopy]

Btw, should somebody ask a mod to delete the two useless threads posted by IDLF? These do not contribute anything constructive to the AGCEEP - IDLF has already stated his criticism before and is only repeating himself - and a newby who reads just the thread titles might be scared off without even reading the discussion or trying it out himself. Since this is just repetitive and rather boring stuff, it also pretty much amounts to spam.

Actually, I think it should stay. Removing it would smack of censureship. These threads reflect philosphical differences between the AGCEEP's history and what IDLF whats. I think that philosophical disagreements are acceptable. Perhaps, if feasible, these two threads should be combined with the "AGCEEP: Historical Focus" thread, since these new threads are the sequel.

If IDLF was an EU2 monarch his diplomacy stat would be 0.

 

[unmerged(17856)]

Nothing you can do can bridge this gap fully except AI cheats.

For this statement to be debatable, in my view, it needs to be narrowed down to state that these 'gaps' do not exist with all AGCEEP countries. Where are the game specific or instant-specific examples other than those debatable examples raised stemming from Portugual?

This whole point I'm making here I have challenged many of you over and over to try and refute if you disagree.

However, most of your arguments are rhetorical, and even propagandist, to which most, such as myself, don't seem to be interested in refuting. The rest of your arguments deal in your own personal versions of absolute truths, when this project relies primarily on subjective truth. For example, what exactly is a 'challenge'? You should find with some careful consideration that the definition is rather personal, and the logical way of assessing 'challenge' is to interpret contributers' posts in order to asertain existing trends. I'm talking about the process of building consensus, a slow, but necessary component of a healthy, open-ended volunteer project.

 

[unmerged(10128)]

Btw, should somebody ask a mod to delete the two useless threads posted by IDLF? These do not contribute anything constructive to the AGCEEP - IDLF has already stated his criticism before and is only repeating himself - and a newby who reads just the thread titles might be scared off without even reading the discussion or trying it out himself. Since this is just repetitive and rather boring stuff, it also pretty much amounts to spam.

i agree. we have been tolerating with enough of this kind of spam.

if the person still fails to learn the simple principle that if his proposals are not acceptable to the community, he has to change his proposals to fit with the community, the community will not change to fit with his proposals, then i see no reason to tolerate with these kinds of attack and distraction through spamming tactics.

PM have been sent to Havard informing him of this.

 

[unmerged(18043)]

i agree. we have been tolerating with enough of this kind of spam.

Um What Spam? Where in his rant, IE explination and IMHO a well thought out topic is spam? If you don't like it have you thought about NOT replying in the topic?

You can mod a game but not understand the basic rules of letting a rant thread die?

if the person still fails to learn the simple principle that if his proposals are not acceptable to the community, he has to change his proposals to fit with the community, the community will not change to fit with his proposals, then i see no reason to tolerate with these kinds of attack and distraction through spamming tactics.

He's not making a proposal. He's making a statement about why he feels the mod lacks the power to be a Great mod. I find your thoughts that anyone who disagrees with anything in a mod should "accept it" simply because over 50% of the Community likes it, rather laughable. But hey to each his own.

PM have been sent to Havard informing him of this.

I'm so proud of you. I'll name my goldfish after you.

I myself am not sure why events would cause a largening of a gameplay gap between the players and the AI. But as you guys are to busy complaining about something as simple as a disagreement. I guess that question may never get answered.

If ACGEEP was something that cost money to buy I would ask for a refund based soley on your closeminded responses to his post.

If you don't like what people post don't reply.

I've always been a big fan of "If you don't like it, why don't you go make something better" Rebuttles. It packs the same power the "Oh yeah........." does in a school yard verbal spar. Come up with something better for the sake of originality at least.

So that my view and questions. I mean no one any harm and hope that my view as a third party can perhaps open your eyes to the larger world around you. Disagree with IDLF is fine but to cry "please mod delete this post that makes our mod look bad" is immature, closeminded and overbearing.

Good night,

P.S. From the games I've played of ACGEEP they've been fun. And More to the point is it harder or easier than Vanillia Eu2?

 

[Archaalen]

The anger reflected in these posts I think is mostly these people acting out the frustration they'ved felt in dealing with IDLF. People felt that he was unwilling to be flexible to what significant numbers of other posters had to say, and that many of his suggestions were aimed at what are seen as fundamental aspects of how this mod is developed and run. People felt like they were being attacked, by extension from him attacking the mod they had worked so hard on. Narrowmidnedness is bad in any form, but intransigence to other's suggestions really made people here upset. I'm not saying that their response to him was correct, I'm merely saying that it was natural considering the circumstances. That said, censorship is bad and if IDLF won't be here any longer anyway, why bother?

 

[Cagliostro]

What he's suggesting is "more events" means "more opportunities for the player to maximize his own play". Whereas the AI is too stupid to make event decisions or play with events in mind. It doesn't know it's going to need money, et cetera.

I think on some level he's right, but "good" is highly subjective. What he really means is "events will always challenge the AI more than the player". I guess you could modify that by randomizing between different historical event severities, the way the reformation mod does, but that would be difficult. Also difficult but a potential fix would be to force the AI to make "reasonable" decisions by leading them down different event paths if they had selected earlier event paths. Of course, then no "reasonable" AI player would submit to annexation by event...

I don't know; I just don't view it as a game-breaking problem.

Incidentally, I wouldn't suggest deleting the thread. But renaming it to something less unpleasant (like "concerns with AGCEEP structure) might make sense.

 

[unmerged(10128)]

Um What Spam? Where in his rant, IE explination and IMHO a well thought out topic is spam?

read twoflower's reasons which is what i quoted.

If you don't like it have you thought about NOT replying in the topic?

so you are saying that anyone who disagrees with anything should not say anything in this forum? then why are you responding to me? have you thought about not responding to me if you dont like what i said?

You can mod a game but not understand the basic rules of letting a rant thread die?

yea, and you think you understand that.

He's not making a proposal. He's making a statement about why he feels the mod lacks the power to be a Great mod.

i did not say that he is currently making a proposal.

I find your thoughts that anyone who disagrees with anything in a mod should "accept it" simply because over 50% of the Community likes it, rather laughable. But hey to each his own.

where on earth did you "find" my thoughts that those who disagree should "accept it"? why do you think we have been discussing about this topic for so long if this is the case?

I'm so proud of you. I'll name my goldfish after you.

suit yourself.

I myself am not sure why events would cause a largening of a gameplay gap between the players and the AI. But as you guys are to busy complaining about something as simple as a disagreement. I guess that question may never get answered.

I've always been a big fan of "If you don't like it, why don't you go make something better" Rebuttles. It packs the same power the "Oh yeah........." does in a school yard verbal spar. Come up with something better for the sake of originality at least.[/

if you havent been following other discussions perhaps you dont know, or perhaps you are not interested in following discussions that is answering the question, only interested in complaining about other people's disagreements, or perhaps you are simply distracted by this thread from other threads that are actually trying to answer the question.

If ACGEEP was something that cost money to buy I would ask for a refund based soley on your closeminded responses to his post.

well it's not costing you any money thats why you download it isn't it.

So that my view and questions. I mean no one any harm and hope that my view as a third party can perhaps open your eyes to the larger world around you. Disagree with IDLF is fine but to cry "please mod delete this post that makes our mod look bad" is immature, closeminded and overbearing.

you claim to possess a third party view and yet you disagree with me asking for the view of a moderator, which is a third party, on this issue.

 

[Arturro]

PEOPLE! IT'S A GAME! This topis is full of bad emotions. But still EU2 and AGCEEP is just a game. Something we play just for fun. It isn't religion, ideology, country, love, or anything really important. So why so many people are reacting such emotionally? Calm down

Athought I mostly disaagre with idontlikeforms, it's true what he said about too easy game, and "stupid" AI. It's true, but AI always was stupid. Only MP is really chalenging, and before somebody will create truly artificial inteligence nothing will change.
I've found AGCEEP to easy, so I've added some ai-cheats in my games. But not everybody like AI-cheats.
There is a solution. idontlikeforms - if you like, create some AI-cheats events and add it as a optional mod for AGCEEP So players could choose between "pure" AGCEEP and "AI-cheats" AGCEEP.

 

[|AXiN|]

It amazes me how much idlf brings out knee-jerk reactions from almost all of the long-time contributors. Guys, relax - aside from anything else, he just said he's leaving.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

It's not that each event needs to be significant on its own. It is that the cumulative effect of all these events often promotes an unstable situation. This in turn means we hardly ever experience some situations which we'd like to see later in the game (e.g. Portugal's colonies taken by the Dutch, Brandenburg and Prussia staying alive long enough to merge, etc).

That may well be the case, but is, at the very least unproven. I would speculate that it's a small number of events (less than 100) that actually make a difference, and that the effect of the other 95% or whatever it might be is so small as to be meaningless. That's just a guess on my part, but so is your theory.

 

[unmerged(18043)]

if you havent been following other discussions perhaps you dont know, or perhaps you are not interested in following discussions that is answering the question, only interested in complaining about other people's disagreements, or perhaps you are simply distracted by this thread from other threads that are actually trying to answer the question.

No I haven't. And all I've seen is a bunch of people crying to delete complaints about the mod. That is my whole issue. But please feel free to turn your anger at IDLF to complete strangers who point out your acting like a spoiled child in public.

well it's not costing you any money thats why you download it isn't it.

Wow great rebuttle did you think long and hard about that before you typed it? I'm floored and found unworthy in the face of your mighty logic.

you claim to possess a third party view and yet you disagree with me asking for the view of a moderator, which is a third party, on this issue.

I win this easy. Am I You? Am I IDLF? Then naturaly I'm a 3rd party. See simple answers to simpleminded questions.

I disagree with you crying like "please delete this post that makes us look bad". So he doesn't like the mod. Big deal, get on with your life. If he's gone then soon this thread will slip away into the darkness of paradox's forums.

But no you have to make a Federal case out of it. And besides what view did you ask a Mod? You wanted them to remove the post.

so you are saying that anyone who disagrees with anything should not say anything in this forum? then why are you responding to me? have you thought about not responding to me if you dont like what i said?

Do you enjoy shoving words in peoples mouths? What I was saying was instead of posting

Btw, should somebody ask a mod to delete the two useless threads posted by IDLF? These do not contribute anything constructive to the AGCEEP - IDLF has already stated his criticism before and is only repeating himself - and a newby who reads just the thread titles might be scared off without even reading the discussion or trying it out himself. Since this is just repetitive and rather boring stuff, it also pretty much amounts to spam.

You should PM the mod. I mean why talk about it either PM the mod or zip it.

In fact this thread already has the following spam posts,

The above post by Twoflower,

Mad King James excellent argumant that I'd expect from a 2 yaer old, minus the cussing ofc

e_maiwald seconding of Twoflowers spam, Which sad to say if thats' the
1st smart thing he's heard all day he should get out more.

And ofc your 1st one. Kinda sad 4 spams (unless you also want to include mine replies) in a topic where your complaining anout someone else spamming.

So yeah I think you've deviated from the concept of being nice to people. So I'm done and you can have whatever whinny complaining party you want. I noticed this thread because of your inital post and wondered why agceep was not able to be a good mod. I don't agree with his views and I think AGCEEP is a good mod.