Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Teldin]

I think it'd be more fun if goblins were more of a challenge. I'm sure there is a way to make it so certain species tend to be at war with each other. Let's face it: in history gen, it's a lot more interesting when there are lots of wars going on between different factions.

So, let's recap the things that affect politics:

* The density of opposing start groups. All species have reasons to go to war with each other it seems, except the same species; I've had 2 seperate dwarf civs live side by side forever with no troubles. Goblins babysnatch from other goblins though so I'm not sure what that's all about. (In one map I had one poor infant abducted 3 times in the span of 3 years).

* Ethics seem to have a large in-game effect, either on trading in fortress mode, what they do to you in adventurer mode, or how they react in history mode.

* Religion seems to play a major part in starting wars; opposing spheres give a pretty consistent reason for declaring it, ie. "the war started over the worship of rivers" or whatnot.

* TREE_CAP_DIPLOMACY: Obviously the elves declare war on you for this, but it does not affect history mode.

* The civ entity biomes let the civ spread to wider areas (humans spread so rapidly because they can use a wide variety, for example). Letting many civs spread to many areas may let them come into conflict more often.

Some things that might affect politics:

* BENIGN or EVIL tokens: do these affect politics at all? Maybe this makes it less likely for a civ to be at war with the same token, or accept/reject offers of peace.

* TOLERATES_SITE: do the site tokens affect politics at all? Maybe a civ is more likely to go to war if they have somewhere nearby they can conquer.

* The goblins have the tag [ABUSE_BODIES], I am fairly sure this allows them to put heads on pikes and hang corpses and so on after they win an attack. Maybe this also is affected by the ETHIC token MAKE_TROPHY_SAPIENT?



Now, so far I've had the most success in making a richly historical world by: very carefully adding enough max civs to the entity list and the world_gen tokens so that I don't get infinite rejects, so that the civs are nice and clustered together. This almost always ensures some good conflicts. If the civs expand to their max size and aren't overlapping any enemy forts they tend to stagnate for the rest of history.

Ethics are a pretty big deal I've think, too. I set most things on goblins to ACCEPTABLE (ie. slavery, eat_sapient_other), and it gives people a lot of reasons to go to war with them. Unfortunately this also means my goblins are usually vastly outnumbered; I have yet to try boosting their default site numbers, maybe that'd help.

I think the easiest way to make civs specifically at war is to change their religions to directly conflict with each other. Has anyone else found any better ways?

[Malaclypse 3]

I have also tried making interesting history by encouraging conflict, though I have not taken quite so organised an approach as you seem to have.

I think I read somewhere that the EVIL and BENIGN tokens decide who the civilisations side with in a fight, until things get more complicated.  I am not sure if they have an effect in the history at the moment.

As you have probably noticed as well; the elves seem to go to war with everyone because of their treatment of trees, amongst other things.  After that I think the major causes of war are eating sapients and making trophies.

So far I have found it difficult to get the goblins to attack there neighbours; most attacks seem to be from people who dislike other peoples lack of ethics.  The goblins do seem to dislike the elves 'river' worship though.

The best way I have found to make the goblins continually attack everyone around them is to replace their 'Intelligent' token with 'Can_civ' and 'Can_learn'.  Without the ability to communicate they get into fights whenever they encounter another species.  This can be replaced with 'Intelligent' again after the world has been generated if you want to talk to them.  I do not know if you would consider this a better way; I prefer to think of it as a refusal to communicate.

[KaelGotDwarves]

ETHICs and RELIGION [spheres] have the largest influence on wars in world gen so far.

Tweaking ETHICS and religious spheres to be opposites of each other guarantees brutal wars between civs.

Another interesting note that you have not listed is ACCEPTS_TRIBUTE in the entity_default raw and LIKES_FIGHTING creature raw, which both seem to affect wars.

Tribute meaning the civ will end a war if offered peace accords, if no tag, they will continue until one side is wiped out or weakened.

LIKES_FIGHTING creature tags appears to affect how many casualties a civ will allow in a battle, LIKES_FIGHTING I believe means less likely to retreat and they will fight to the death. I have a race of Angelic Spirits, who unlike humans and elves breaking off engagements after 5 or so losses, will systematically attack despite being outnumbered 100 to 1 and win with heavy casualties.

[Sean Mirrsen]

You really should try the modifications I've done in the latest Modbase version of the Martial Arts mod. I might even make those a separate mod. I'm very pleased with the results I got from it so far. Elves are still a bit cannibalistic, and still have grudges with the humans on a regular basis, but now the goblins actually wage wars against humans and dwarves. Feebly though, I don't think they ever won, but umiman's GigaGoblins might change that...

[Beacon]

Dunno if this is the right topic, but it's along these lines.

Is there a way to make certain civs always friendly with others, and always hostile with others?

[TheSpaceMan]

Dunno if this is the right topic, but it's along these lines.

Is there a way to make certain civs always friendly with others, and always hostile with others?

You could probably trim the personality values for a couple of races towards one side and the other races towards the other. Should create som tension. If one group can only exist between 0-50 and the other group only between 50-100.

[Beacon]

Could you expand on that please?

[Mephansteras]

I don't think Personality values will do it.

Ethics and Religion will, though.

Just make it so that both civs share the same ethics and Spheres.

At the very least, for Spheres, make sure they don't have any of the opposing spheres. The Sphere page on the wiki has all the information about friendly and unfriendly spheres.

Ethics-wise...best to make them identical or nearly identical. Wars can be declared over most, if not all, differences.

[Beacon]

Hmm, well I was looking for something more along the lines of, if you're race no.1, race no.2 won't trade with you, and will only siege you, bu tif you're race no.3, race no.2 will trade with you, and won't siege you, and vice-versa... Is this possible yet?

[Mephansteras]

If I read you right, you want race #1 to hate race #2 and trade with race #3. And Race # 2 to be friendly with Race #3. But you don't say about race #1 and race #3. I guess have them neutral?

In that case, Yes, but it'll require VERY careful handling, and would only work with a limited number of races.

Easiest way to do that would be to make sure there aren't any hot-button ETHICS that span Races. What you could do is pick 2 ETHICS and have them used.

Other option is Spheres. You could have race no 1 have a sphere which is opposite race no 2. Race no 2 would then have one that's opposite race no 3. 1 and 3, I guess, wouldn't have any that overlap at all.

If you give me a concrete example of what you want, I can give a more specific example.

[Earthquake Damage]

Does the equipment available to a civ affect its success in wars?  It might be fun to make a Precursors/Ancients civ that dies out quickly but has vastly superior technology (firearms and powered armor and other anachronisms), to give myself a reason to explore ruins other than skill grinding on zombies.  It'd be pretty retarded, however, if they can conquer the world with half a dozen warriors.

[Fleeb]

Problem with that is ruins are empty, no trace of the past occupants. At least, none of the ruins I've explored have had anything but wildlife in them.

[Beacon]

If I read you right, you want race #1 to hate race #2 and trade with race #3. And Race # 2 to be friendly with Race #3. But you don't say about race #1 and race #3. I guess have them neutral?

In that case, Yes, but it'll require VERY careful handling, and would only work with a limited number of races.

Easiest way to do that would be to make sure there aren't any hot-button ETHICS that span Races. What you could do is pick 2 ETHICS and have them used.

Other option is Spheres. You could have race no 1 have a sphere which is opposite race no 2. Race no 2 would then have one that's opposite race no 3. 1 and 3, I guess, wouldn't have any that overlap at all.

If you give me a concrete example of what you want, I can give a more specific example.

Ok, basically, this is what I want.


Race 1,2,3,4,5 are on the same side. They all trade with each other and do not siege. They're friendly to each other.

Races 6,7,8,9,10 are all friendly with each other, trade together etc, same as above.

However, Races 1,2,3,4,5 are all hostile to 6,7,8,9 and 10, meaning they'll siege each other. Is this possible?

Thanks for you help.

[Mephansteras]

Two sides is pretty easy. Just make it so that everyone on a side has the same ethics and Spheres that are all friendly with one another.

Make the other side have opposite ethics and spheres.

[Ramirez]

Does anyone know an easy way to tell whether a civ will siege/ambush/steal from you without having to build a fort and wait it out?

I am also having trouble getting any of my civs to fight each other, as anywhere I have embarked has left me with a friendly populace, even when the races have been fought each other before in legends (they may have been a different civs of the same race though).