Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Arksa's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Finland, Oulu
    Posts
    842

    Default Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Hi all,
    First of all, Lusted, great mod. Without this mod I wouldn't be playing this game.
    The Ultimate A.I in LTC is IMO too passive: Alliances are too easy to get (especially in the early game), A.I doesn't break alliances and never seem to betray you. I know, we whined about the betraying A.I in vanilla but maybe something in between should be more appropriate? Thoughts?

    Sorry if I posted this in the wrong forum.

  2. #2
    Lusted's Avatar Look to the stars
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Brighton, Sussex, England.
    Posts
    18,184

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Are you playing on VH? If not then yes the ai will be passive. Also try adding in the latest UAi 1.2 beta(using the descr_campaign_ai_db.xml, descr_diplomacy.xml, descr_faction_standing.txt from the mod)
    Creator of:
    Lands to Conquer Gold for Medieval II: Kingdoms
    Terrae Expugnandae Gold Open Beta for RTW 1.5
    Proud ex-Moderator and ex-Administrator of TWC from Jan 06 to June 07
    Awarded the Rank of Opifex for outstanding contributions to the TW mod community.
    Awarded the Rank of Divus for oustanding work during my times as Administrator.

  3. #3
    Arksa's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Finland, Oulu
    Posts
    842

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lusted View Post
    Are you playing on VH? If not then yes the ai will be passive. Also try adding in the latest UAi 1.2 beta(using the descr_campaign_ai_db.xml, descr_diplomacy.xml, descr_faction_standing.txt from the mod)
    Yeah I'm playing on VH.it's what the UAI is for, right?
    So do I just copy/paste those files from the 1.2 beta and replace the old ones? I'm not the expert in these things. Can I continue my HRE campaign just like nothing happened?

    I Appreciate your help

  4. #4
    Lusted's Avatar Look to the stars
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Brighton, Sussex, England.
    Posts
    18,184

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Yeah I'm playing on VH.it's what the UAI is for, right?
    So do I just copy/paste those files from the 1.2 beta and replace the old ones? I'm not the expert in these things. Can I continue my HRE campaign just like nothing happened?
    Yup, yup and yup. Make sure you replace the files in landstoconquer\data.
    Creator of:
    Lands to Conquer Gold for Medieval II: Kingdoms
    Terrae Expugnandae Gold Open Beta for RTW 1.5
    Proud ex-Moderator and ex-Administrator of TWC from Jan 06 to June 07
    Awarded the Rank of Opifex for outstanding contributions to the TW mod community.
    Awarded the Rank of Divus for oustanding work during my times as Administrator.

  5. #5
    Douchebag's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    A place called White Castle
    Posts
    2,748

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    I dont mind, allies not betraying you. I just dont like the fact that, no one is fighting each other - like france and england. Anyway...what is this 1.2 beta? whats new?

  6. #6
    Sonny WiFiHr's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    In Hell
    Posts
    1,544

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    It is not true.France + HRE attack Milan for 20 and more turns.Milan almost destroy Venice.Byzant attack HRE etc.In my game HRE start Medieval World War.Don't make too many alliances.My best expirience is to ally with only one nation (not Pope).

  7. #7
    Giorgos's Avatar Deus Ex Machina
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Larissa/Skiathos Hellas(Greece)
    Posts
    5,557

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    attacks happen normally on mine as well. byz fight with venice or turkey, milan hits venice, portugal+spain go into alliance versus the moors. Looking good...


  8. #8
    Arksa's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Finland, Oulu
    Posts
    842

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Aah, no alliance with the pope...I'm allied to pope. Maybe they avoid attacking because I'm a friend of pope? I'm allied with Milan and poland and England + pope...too many?

  9. #9
    Giorgos's Avatar Deus Ex Machina
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Larissa/Skiathos Hellas(Greece)
    Posts
    5,557

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    who knows, maybe. Skip the papal alliance and see how it goes.


  10. #10
    Sonny WiFiHr's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    In Hell
    Posts
    1,544

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    You have too big power block.Make alliances only when you need them.I'm now allied with Poland and Hungary (playing as Eng) nobody touch them and they are only factions in peace all other factions are in war (i'm in war only with France and Egypt now).Next campain - no alliances ,because is funny when everybody is in war with everybody and I'm only one peacefull nation .
    Last edited by Sonny WiFiHr; February 04, 2007 at 09:19 AM.

  11. #11
    Elfdude's Avatar Tribunus
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    7,335

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    In my game england france scotland milan portugal spain venice hungary poland and the dutch are allied together... They want nothing to do with war and if I try to attack one they all attack me and as soon as I make peace with one they all try to ally with me.

    I sort of preferred the angry AI who looked out for no one but itself, it'd be neat if the AI tried to avoid fighting with the stronger factions but the way it is it's pretty dumb.

    And yeah I'm playing on very hard.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    In my campaign i created a "powerblock" of 5-6 catholic factions but even in this way some factions are still in war to each other (like HRE and Venice). On the other way muslims factions are allied togheter, but this is good because an aggressive HRE Pope is calling a crusade after another (in how many years they "reloads"?): the middle east is burning hell of clashing armies.

    I got another question about diplomacy:

    When you are crushing another faction taking them a city after another you reach a point in which they don't sign a ceasefire even if proposing it you are making a "very kind" offer. They do not accept vassalage and the only way to finish the war is to erase the other faction from the map.

    I find this very unrealistic and unfunny to play.

    In my campaign as soon as I reached my objectives againts the Moors (marrakesh and granada) I stopped every attack and assassin attempt against them. They got only 3 provinces left and even if i completed a "faction leader assassin" mission for them i still got no raise in relationship. They continue to waste troops against my walls (i think they won only 2 battles in a 30 years war) and even if I free their prisoners and offer gold they still want more beating.

    There is a way to propose a ceasefire or, after a certain level, diplomatic relationships are no more possible?

  13. #13

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude View Post
    In my game england france scotland milan portugal spain venice hungary poland and the dutch are allied together... They want nothing to do with war and if I try to attack one they all attack me and as soon as I make peace with one they all try to ally with me.

    I sort of preferred the angry AI who looked out for no one but itself, it'd be neat if the AI tried to avoid fighting with the stronger factions but the way it is it's pretty dumb.

    And yeah I'm playing on very hard.
    Well, my game is totally different. I am playing Russia and I am allied with Byzantine, Eygpt, HRE, and Milan. I attacked Poland and now England, Hungary, Danish, Scotland, and Spain are at war with me. The beauty is they all are at war with my other Allies and so I am mainly concentrating on Poland and the Danes. Hungary is bothered by the Byzantines and HRE/Milan are fighting England, Scotland, and Spain. Also the English just finished wiping out the French who were also allied with me. So, my game is full of turmoil.
    Year is 1220 and the Mongols are fighting the Turks and just declared war on Eygpt.
    Having a blast at this Kaotic time.
    'Twas a woman who drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her for it. WC Fields

  14. #14

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude View Post
    In my game england france scotland milan portugal spain venice hungary poland and the dutch are allied together... They want nothing to do with war and if I try to attack one they all attack me and as soon as I make peace with one they all try to ally with me.

    I sort of preferred the angry AI who looked out for no one but itself, it'd be neat if the AI tried to avoid fighting with the stronger factions but the way it is it's pretty dumb.

    And yeah I'm playing on very hard.
    how did you get the dutch in your game?

  15. #15

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vergilius View Post
    how did you get the dutch in your game?
    dutch = danes

  16. #16
    Douchebag's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    A place called White Castle
    Posts
    2,748

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Im playing on H/H and its pissing me off. Mongols arent doing ANYTHING. All they did, is take over Kiev...they have like 4 fully stacked armies, and their just sitting there. Years 1258.

  17. #17
    Wolfgrin's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    cincinnati
    Posts
    475

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    @Opulleo

    Try this with the Turks. I had a similar situation with the Turks and Egypt where no amount of gold or good deeds could bring peace, even though both were badly bloodied and barely in the game. What finally worked was asking them to become my vassal for around 100,000 florins. It worked with both of them. I even got all the gold back the next turn in tribute. Nice, eh?

  18. #18

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Well I like the passive strat AI to be honest. I am playing HRE and it gives me the warm and fuzzies to help out my beloved danish allies (and visa versa). I hate it when they constantly backstab you completly out of the blue. You can play the game at your own pace as it is now.



  19. #19

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    Mine was pretty passive till about the year 1200 (I fought only rebels until then) when I finally attacked Poland. They were becoming quite strong and they always seemed to be on the verge of attacking. So I patiently built my infastructure and became stronger. I knew sooner or later they would attack and so I took the first move and that's when everything broke loose arcoss the other factions. Of course I'm Orthodox and I don't have to deal with the Poop, uh the Pope.
    'Twas a woman who drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her for it. WC Fields

  20. #20

    Default Re: Diplomacy a bit too passive in 2.1?

    when I update Ultimate A.I. 1.1 to 1.3 do I need to begin a new campaign?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •