Tweet
You know how the AI factions will declare Vendetta, or dislike it when you choose a SE choice they are averse to? Like having a democratic government when talking to Yang?
There should be a viable reason why the AI would do a such a thing, instead of hurting their own cause (well maybe yours by losing commerce): making war on a faction who has an SE choice your faction hates should yield some sort of benefit, while having a treaty with such a faction would have a penalty, and a pact, double that penalty.
Whereas, if say, if a faction declares war against a faction with an SE choice they advocate, there should be a penalty, whereas a treaty yields a benefit, and a Pact, double that benefit.
So then, Lal would naturally be pacted with Roze, and they would want to stick together, not only in AI behaviour, but because it actually helps their cause. It would then be perhaps of top priority to frame them against each other to try to damage the relationship for the enemy, for example.
I'm thinking of the benefit and penalty being extra drones. Penalty, extra drone at every base, and first benefit being minus one drone at every two bases, and the second benefit, minus one drone at every base. And Miriam would have perhaps minus 2 drones at every base if she is pacted with two other factions who are at war, since the AI likes to become fundamentalist in times of war.
Or minus 3 drones at every base by declaring vendetta on Zhakarov in addition.
Having two first benefits should be equivalent to one second benefit. That is, Lal having a treaty with Gaians and Roze who both have democracy (currently) would make him have minus one drone at every base. And Miriam attacking/being friendly with say, Yang's police state would have half the normal penalties or benefits, since choosing democracy over an advocated SE in the same category, (in this case fundamentalist) isn't quite as serious as say, choosing knowledge as a value in itself.
This makes it a bit more rational when Miriam declares vendetta for choosing democracy over fundamentalism, for example, or Gaia for choosing free market over Green (which is actually one and a half times the benefits because not only is someone choosing a SE choice you hate, its being preferred over one you advocate!) Of course, the thing is, I've never seen the AI declare war on me, ie. the Drones, for choosing Green, that should be fixed.
Anyway, keeping ideas until the day Meier decides to release the source code. Hopefully.
There should be a viable reason why the AI would do a such a thing, instead of hurting their own cause (well maybe yours by losing commerce): making war on a faction who has an SE choice your faction hates should yield some sort of benefit, while having a treaty with such a faction would have a penalty, and a pact, double that penalty.
Whereas, if say, if a faction declares war against a faction with an SE choice they advocate, there should be a penalty, whereas a treaty yields a benefit, and a Pact, double that benefit.
So then, Lal would naturally be pacted with Roze, and they would want to stick together, not only in AI behaviour, but because it actually helps their cause. It would then be perhaps of top priority to frame them against each other to try to damage the relationship for the enemy, for example.
I'm thinking of the benefit and penalty being extra drones. Penalty, extra drone at every base, and first benefit being minus one drone at every two bases, and the second benefit, minus one drone at every base. And Miriam would have perhaps minus 2 drones at every base if she is pacted with two other factions who are at war, since the AI likes to become fundamentalist in times of war.
Or minus 3 drones at every base by declaring vendetta on Zhakarov in addition. Having two first benefits should be equivalent to one second benefit. That is, Lal having a treaty with Gaians and Roze who both have democracy (currently) would make him have minus one drone at every base. And Miriam attacking/being friendly with say, Yang's police state would have half the normal penalties or benefits, since choosing democracy over an advocated SE in the same category, (in this case fundamentalist) isn't quite as serious as say, choosing knowledge as a value in itself.
This makes it a bit more rational when Miriam declares vendetta for choosing democracy over fundamentalism, for example, or Gaia for choosing free market over Green (which is actually one and a half times the benefits because not only is someone choosing a SE choice you hate, its being preferred over one you advocate!) Of course, the thing is, I've never seen the AI declare war on me, ie. the Drones, for choosing Green, that should be fixed.
Anyway, keeping ideas until the day Meier decides to release the source code. Hopefully.
Comment