AI population growth question

[Alx]

Hi dear SS enthusiasts,

I haven't played this mod since 6.1, a long long time ago, and now I've decided to jump aboard the 6.4 ship! I see that population growth has been significantly curtailed, which is a great thing, but I'm a little bit confused about something.

I'm playing France (early, vh/vh) and at year 1142 I have a pair of castles (Angers, Bordeux) with 5-6k pop each. I built all their +pop buildings right away. The English still control Caen, which I believe started out around the same, and it's already a fortress with 12k+ pop. My stationed spy is showing me that they have a negative growth, yet their population is increasing out of control. In fact, fortresses are popping up all around despite their "wooden castle" beginnings.

Is this right? Is it an artifact of vh campaign difficulty? Are all AI castles going to be fortresses by 1200, and how soon before they become citadels at this rate?

Thanks in advance

[Ferdiad]

AI get huge pop growth bonuses.

[StupidAlarmClockGuy]

AI get huge pop growth bonuses.

Even though the mod description says that they have to get built up slowly too?

Are the pop growth bonuses attached as AI bonuses to the buildings in descr_building or are they locked away somewhere else? Because that sounds like a huge problem.

[Ferdiad]

EDB.And possibly the script.

[StupidAlarmClockGuy]

Yeah, those would be the first two places to look, but that's truly strange. I know that the AI lags behind in some aspects, but giving them crazy buildups for no reason other than to compensate just seems like plugging a hole an inch in diameter with all the dirt in Canada. The only AI factor that really needs tweaking, IMO, is in-progress diplomacy, and that's hardcoded so there's no way anyone is getting to that.

[Jorge Juan]

yea but i think noone likes to atack wooden castles on 1185 while u got fortreses. =/

[Ferdiad]

Exactly, the AI can't mange it's growth without bonuses.While we can use high chiv governors and build the right buildings.

[StupidAlarmClockGuy]

Exactly, the AI can't mange it's growth without bonuses.While we can use high chiv governors and build the right buildings.

Looking at the bonuses you're right. They're pretty small, so any way of nerfing them would more or less cancel them out altogether.

[Kazuhiro]

How about instead of giving them population growth bonuses, we lower the pop requirement for the AI to upgrade? That way the AI basically gets the same thing, but it will be harder for the player to abuse it because if if he gets a settlement that hasn't been upgraded yet, he'll have to fill the original requirement.

[Kolaris8472]

Iirc, the bonuses for Town/Large Town/Wooden Castle/Castle are ridiculously huge, and then they become more reasonable once the AI hits Fortress/City.

I removed them all for my current campaign, it would need more tweaking but I like it a lot more. 120 years in and we've got about 20 AI Fortresses and 15 Cities (upgraded from Towns). They do need the bonuses at the Fortress/City level though, I'm not optimistic that they have any chance of hitting a Large City/Citadel.

[Ferdiad]

Iirc, the bonuses for Town/Large Town/Wooden Castle/Castle are ridiculously huge, and then they become more reasonable once the AI hits Fortress/City.

I removed them all for my current campaign, it would need more tweaking but I like it a lot more. 120 years in and we've got about 20 AI Fortresses and 15 Cities (upgraded from Towns). They do need the bonuses at the Fortress/City level though, I'm not optimistic that they have any chance of hitting a Large City/Citadel.

They really need that.You like to fight cripples AI faction?

[Kolaris8472]

They really need that.You like to fight cripples AI faction?

If the AI has an early monopoly on Castles/Fortresses/Cities, it just encourages the player to take from the AI rather than build his own. I don't know about you, but blitzing gets boring after a while. The pacing is also really off in terms of when in the campaign you hit different settlement tiers.

There are other ways to make the game challenging, I don't see why the AI having an enormous lead in developed settlements is integral to a challenging game, especially when you end up just taking those developed settlements from them anyway.

[Ferdiad]

Well I can't comment for you but I double the base growth rate in the files so the map is coverd in maxed out settlements fairly quickly.

[Kolaris8472]

Why not just make everything start maxed out then? There'd be no point in early units or undeveloped settlements with that change...

It reminds me of people who would play Empire Earth in only one epoch. You're seeing only part of the game that way imo.

[Ferdiad]

Why not just make everything start maxed out then? There'd be no point in early units or undeveloped settlements with that change...

It reminds me of people who would play Empire Earth in only one epoch. You're seeing only part of the game that way imo.

I'm too lazy to do it.I would if I wasn't so lazy and had the time.

[TWJunky]

Not the way i like playing the game. I think it makes the game become boring really fast if you have everything available right from the beginning. I am shure that most SS players actually like the build up process. I really am disapointed in CA for not being able to implement a balanced city development into their game. Bravo CA. Does anybody have any suggestion on how to balance this accordingly?

[SirRobin]

The truth seems to be: this game cannot be made genuinely challenging by modders unless the AI is made to cheat heavily.

I would prefer a non-cheating AI, even though it means that I would have to not use a very agressive playing style.


.
.