Galactic Events, poss AI tweak?

Diplomatic vs. Conquest Victory

from GalCiv2 Forums
I'm finding a couple problems with the concept of Galactic Events working specifically to "upset the balance of power."

The main issue here seems to be that the computer races can't win, so they don't seem to work to win.

I've won through Tech, Influence, Diplomacy, and Conquest, yet it is always the build up to Conquest that causes the most destructive events to occur (like uber pirates and Dread Lords to come kick your butt). It seems that these events are skewed to prevent the conquest victory, or at least to make it more of an improbable option. In addition, most of the Dark Avatar games I've played have had a few wars early on to thin the heard, so to speak, but then have many of the AI races playing nice with each other, mostly being friendly towards all. Which, in contrast to the Galactic Events circumstances making the Conquest Victory so much harder, it seems that Diplomatic Victory has become too simplistic.

In conversations with a friend, we were discussing that possibly that maybe the AI needs to work at Conquest Victory a little harder (which makes a direct opposition to the player), or that maybe it works towards Diplomatic Victory conditions too often (which doesn't hinder the player at all, and actually helps him). Obviously, the AI races can't 'win' the game based on Victory Conditions, but I was wonder what exactly is their purpose in the game... how variable is their 'victory' intent? (That was one of the concerns, at least.)

All in all, I'm wondering if as a result of these issues, it isn't necessary to tweak the AI a little bit more to work harder towards all victory conditions simultaneously, each to a certain degree, and each depending on the circumstances of the Galaxy and their position in it at that time (that is, if it doesn't already). It doesn't seem to do that currently, at least with the Dark Avatar expansion, or maybe it is just always determining that the Diplomatic Victory is the best/easiest route to success for each race.

In any event, it seems that Diplomatic Victory has become far too easy and Conquest Victory has become significantly (and even possibly inversely proportionately) more difficult with the advent of the Galactic Events AI intent on "upsetting the balance of power."

Of coarse the easy option is for the player to just turn off the Galactic Events, but that diminishes the fun of the game, and it is hard to imagine that it is the intent of the developers to unbalance the victory conditions like this as seems to have occurred.
6,684 views 8 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Another point here is that while Mega Events should be hugely game altering, I don't think they should be game-killing.

In games with Uber Pirates, Dread Lords, and/or Jagged Knives, it seems that if it doesn't kill the game outright, it complete obliterates the Conquest option for the player.

Maybe just my personal experience, but the game seems to definately favour the Diplomatic route now by a signifcant margin.

What say you all?
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Another point regarding Mega Events in this thread regarding the plague that might help balance the Diplomatic v. Conquest vic conditions for these events (and my subsequent post):

https://forums.galciv2.com/?aid=138684#1092819

I haven't seen the plague yet, but I like the ideas of the original poster (modified to 50% colonies, instead of races). I like the damage over time issue, increased cost, plague invasion option (biological warfare), and particularly the invasion deterrent, but mostly the trade factors.

Trade heavily effects diplomacy vic conditions, as should this event. The plague should cause others to drop significantly in their viewing of the races who have it- maybe something like a certain amount per race dependant on the number of colonies affected (regardless of how many of the viewing races colonies are affected). And if the algorithms determine that a race failed plague check as a result of a trade route, the infection should be attributed to the trading partner, so the newly infected colony and their govt knows who to blame (more of a drop in relation status, but also a huge one in morale status for that colony since the govt decided to keep trading with the plague-infected).

This could potentially balance out the severely slanted effect on Conquest Vics that the Mega Events seem to have, at least partially.

Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The Uber Pirates was a game-killer for me.
The Dread Lords are a push over when they show up since they have no ships or infastructure. Invade fast and they go down.
The jagged knives are frustrating, my way of dealing with them is to make peace with anybody I'm currently at war with and focus exclusively on them.
As far as plague is concerned, therre seems to be a minimum size that you can go down to. I played a game with no tech trading, got plague, researched cure, won by tech victory... but in the 1200 turns or so in between the plague commencing and the end, everybody did business as usual, those who obviously researched the cure sent out troop transports but nobody else did.
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The main issue here seems to be that the computer races can't win, so they don't seem to work to win.


I've read in another thread, I can't remember which one, that the AI don't play to win. They instead, try to act like they are the leaders of their nations, and try to decide what is best for their civilization. So this whole galactic conquest policy of theirs is nothing more than a means to provide their citizens more elbow room, or more skin to eat if Drengin.

If the AI actually tried to win the game, it would not be possible to win influence victories as is. You can't win an influence victory if you were at war, something that the AI can easily declare at the very last turn. They might do this, even if it were only were to delay your eventually victory.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
If the AI actually tried to win the game, it would not be possible to win influence victories as is. You can't win an influence victory if you were at war, something that the AI can easily declare at the very last turn. They might do this, even if it were only were to delay your eventually victory.


Good point, but my thinking wasn't so much that they can/should work to prevent your victories (or rather work against your victories), but instead work more towards accomplishing their own by acheiving their own goals (as opposed to simply disrupting yours).

I knew that line that you quoted from me didn't really convey my meaning as well a I wanted it to. I also feel like I'm still not communicating the most accurate sentiment here either though. Meh.  
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
"Uber Pirates, Dread Lords, and/or Jagged Knives"

These are game ruiners for me. Although I baleave with the right script Jagged Knives could be quite fun, e.g. they take the worst planet of each race but defended with the best ship of the race they took the planet from.
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I agree, I like Mega Events, but they have to be a little more moderated to prevent them from being game-ending.

My major issue is that it seems the Mega Events are slanted more towards Conquest Victory build up than any other victory condition, and in contrast that Diplomatic victory seems a much more viable option due to so much more racial cooperation in DA. I'd like to see that evened out a bit more with the 3 aforementinoed Mega Events toned down a little bit and the Plague issue ramped up a little more having a more dramatic/drastic effect on relations resulting in more of an impact on the Diplomatic victory.
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm playing conquest-only games -- albeit with 9 custom races -- and I definitely haven't seen a lot of AI cooperation. This may well be because of the tendencies of my 9 custom races (5 REALLY evil, 2 kinda evil, 2 good) -- but my galaxy is in a near constant state of warefare almost from the get-go.

In fact - I'd almost say it's too much warfare, and especially too early. For example - before anyone has even researched planetary invasion -- every single race is at war with someone. I'm getting TONS of mercenary wars (too many, I'd say... every 4th turn seems to yield a new race saying "X needs to be exterminated... at least that's what we've been paid to think").

Beyond the custom races - this is exactly how I always played vanilla GC2 (gigantic map, conquest-only) -- and I would usually try to stay out of war, or, at least just play to stalemate until all techs were researched (and all trade goods and galactic wonders built... virtually always on my own planets).

I've noticed now that it's IMPOSSIBLE for me to stay out of wars... everyone always seems to be paying someone to attack me (when they're not attacking each other). The saving grace -- the inclusion of the colonization types seems to have DRASTICALLY slowed the arms race.

In vanilla -- by the time I had run through the planetary improvements, some other race would almost always have the top mass driver, missile, and/or beam techs -- and they'd make for VERY expensive trades. Now - I can do what I always did: focus on planetary infrastucture, wonder, and trade good research -- but when it's time to turn to weaponry, I find I'm nowhere NEAR too far behind.... plus - just like the AI loves to acquire soil enhancement/habitat imprv/terraforming -- I've now have nearly a dozen new techs that the AI seems to highly value for trading.

Quite likely - it's because of my custom races - but I have the opposite gripe... the AI seems to eager to go to war.... low weaponry, no troop ship techs... it's meaningless hostility that gains them nothing - they can't take out even the most minimally armed starbase, they can't invade my worlds, we're just "at war".