As far as I can tell a wizard broke a wizard's pact with me because they settled 4 tiles away from a major city of mine. Which then caused them to consider my garrison an amassed army on their border.
Maybe it's a good behavior here for them to get angry with me go from relaxed to neutral to broken wizard's pact... but the angry message they send should probably be about borders not amassed armies on their border, there's literally no way to move my armies backwards.
(June 8th, 2016, 20:20)namad Wrote: As far as I can tell a wizard broke a wizard's pact with me because they settled 4 tiles away from a major city of mine. Which then caused them to consider my garrison an amassed army on their border.
Maybe it's a good behavior here for them to get angry with me go from relaxed to neutral to broken wizard's pact... but the angry message they send should probably be about borders not amassed armies on their border, there's literally no way to move my armies backwards.
The radius for that check is 2 tiles around their city and your had to be at least 4 tile apart with yours. You had a unit somewhere else, maybe on a node near one of their new outposts?
Or perhaps one of their cities was outside of the visible radius of your scouts, units often don't see 2 tiles ahead.
Isn't there a diplo penalty for having armies on the same continent as them? I don't think this was about being within 2 squares of a city. It's just for havng armies on an opponent's border.
(June 10th, 2016, 11:12)Tiltowait Wrote: Isn't there a diplo penalty for having armies on the same continent as them? I don't think this was about being within 2 squares of a city. It's just for havng armies on an opponent's border.
In the vanilla game, what I call "military modifier" was calculated by comparing the total upkeep of units on the wizard's home continent (their own vs the other wizard's).
This, however, was in no way related to texts using the "on border" words. Considering the broken nature of original diplomacy, we can only speculate what the intention was.
I never bothered to decrypt which direction this modifier worked. It might have given the player an advantage if their forces were larger (at least that would be more logical, to not piss off someone who has superior armies in front of your door), or it might have given a penalty. Either way it was the relative strength of the two forces that mattered, not the mere presence of units.
In CoM and 1.50, this military modifier is abolished because it's not practical for gameplay. Forces might be over sea, or the "home" continent might be a 5 tile island completely irrelevant in the big picture. Instead the AI just looks at who has more forces total in the entire game and respects stronger players more, weaker players less.
The message group that had texts like "amassing units on our border" was used by something unrelated, if I remember well, banishing another wizard, and having more than X amount of units globally. The latter of which I disabled entirely because it's stupid.
There still is a check for controlling too many cities, but not units, as it goes the opposite direction of my intention - diplomacy that favors the stronger player. Instead, the generic war declaration roll uses the relative military strength : wizard prefer to declare war more if someone starts to be a threat, in other words their military is getting too close to their own. However once it's far above (or far below), they'll not picks fights through this type of roll. (others might still cause a war though)
The 2 tile city radius however can give a warning and small penalty even if no wizard pact is between you and the AI.
Oh also. In my new game one wizard repeatedly said he wouldn't deal with me because I broke treaties. Unfortunately though.... In fact they had broken out wizards past many times.... Not me.
My units maybe have been within 3tiles of his city... But they were definitely within my own city's 2tile radius.
Border friction messages seem to be a bit random on what actually is said.
EDIT:
The main issue might just be that I don't understand diplomacy at all. How does increasing your army strength trigger an attack? Are you saying ai wizards won't attack you if your army strength is extremely low? or does the personality matter? will aggressive and ruthless ai's attack players much weaker than them? but peaceful wizard's won't trigger their attacks until your army strength gets too high instead?
It makes sense I don't understand it, if you say in the original MoM the code just didn't work, I never got to learn it.
(June 12th, 2016, 02:06)namad Wrote: Oh also. In my new game one wizard repeatedly said he wouldn't deal with me because I broke treaties. Unfortunately though.... In fact they had broken out wizards past many times.... Not me.
My units maybe have been within 3tiles of his city... But they were definitely within my own city's 2tile radius.
Border friction messages seem to be a bit random on what actually is said.
EDIT:
The main issue might just be that I don't understand diplomacy at all. How does increasing your army strength trigger an attack? Are you saying ai wizards won't attack you if your army strength is extremely low? or does the personality matter? will aggressive and ruthless ai's attack players much weaker than them? but peaceful wizard's won't trigger their attacks until your army strength gets too high instead?
It makes sense I don't understand it, if you say in the original MoM the code just didn't work, I never got to learn it.
If a treaty is broken due to a unit being too close to their city, both players are treated as the person breaking it : you because you violated the pact, and them because they cancelled it in response.
In all other cases the player breaking the pact is the only one being treated as the one breaking it.
Yes, the original diplomacy didn't work at all. It had bugs like declaring war on random people, or messages never appearing, to the extent no one has ever seen a wizard offer a trade or treaty in the past 20 years until I found it's there, just broken.
For more information, read here, everything about how it now works, and how it failed before is explained.
The AI has about 6 or so ways to declare war, each using specific conditions and formulas. Most of them are listed here
In simplified terms the AI declares war if
-Their city was conquered.
-They warned you and you triggered new warning(s) repeatedly in a short amount of time.
-Your military is far weaker and they have a Militarist or Expansionist objective but not Peaceful personality.
-Your military is nearing the power of theirs and relation is not high enough to compensate for that.
-They are allied with your enemy.
-The relation level is below -30 and the player is in fewer wars than the difficulty level.
-The wizard has Chaotic personality and does it for no reason
-They conquered your city (yes they can attack if there is no formal war but the hostility level is above zero. This is what Wizard Pact is most useful at preventing)
Yeah I've been attacked without a formal war before, If you win the battle the war doesn't get declared, but if you lose it does?
The thing I think I am most confused about is what "nearing" means? do you mean if your army is weaker than theirs but yours is catching up? or do you mean both directions? and if their army is catching up to yours? is it both?
When I violate a wizard's pact usually it happens when I just right click where I want a unit to go, the pathfinding will send you straight through an enemy wizard's pact radius even when it's EXACTLY as many turns of movement to go around. The pathfinding has a weird love of zigzagging for no reason. Guess I need to get less lazy about long movement orders. Speaking of which it only counts as violating the wizard's pact if you END your turn inside their radius right? you can move through as long as you're out the other side before the turn rolls over? right? (maybe this is why I keep accidentally breaking so many pacts? Also I swear sometimes I get a warning and sometimes it just instantly breaks).
Is there anyway to warn an ai wizard to stop violating your territory without just declaring war on them?
EDIT:
In my current game one wizard is dead. Wizard A has an alliance with the remaining two. I also have those alliances with those two. Those two have never met. I'm in a cold war with Wizard A. I'd like to murder Wizard B or Wizard C to absorb their territory. Is there anyway to do that without upsetting Wizard A? Both Wizard B and Wizard C see me as harmony perfect relations. In theory I could just ask them to end their alliance with Wizard A before I break my own alliance with them. Would that help at all? Is there an order of operations to this that doesn't just result in them 3on1 dog-piling me the instant I act? (Wizard A is peaceful but sometimes attacks me presumably because I'm charismatic and have aura of majesty up, as I was intentionally testing this situation, as long as I never lose a city and never fight back against him he cannot help but like me even if he queues up orders to attack and meld nodes adjacent to my cities and also attacks my troops that were blocking his path to do so, troops which were only single unit screens designed to keep peaceful wizards out.) So far this combination has made it impossible for anyone to declare war on me. I'm playing on hard I wanted an easier game after some failures on extreme. So kudos on improving the AI, even as a kid I found vanilla MoM impossible too easy.
EDIT2: http://masterofmagic.wikia.com/wiki/Play..._Diplomacy
does this mean in caster of magic as well as 1.50 that using alchemy I can offer ai wizard's 100 gold for +10or more visible relations repeatedly to make everyone love me? even if the target wizard has 8000 gold because they're cheating?
Quote:Yeah I've been attacked without a formal war before, If you win the battle the war doesn't get declared, but if you lose it does?
Only if you lose a city. Likewise if you attack but no city switches owners, there is no automatic war, but the AI might get angry enough to declare one anyway.
Quote:The thing I think I am most confused about is what "nearing" means? do you mean if your army is weaker than theirs but yours is catching up? or do you mean both directions? and if their army is catching up to yours? is it both?
Both. It calculates the difference between the two armies, and if this value is lower than another calculated from personality and relation, there is war.
Quote:Speaking of which it only counts as violating the wizard's pact if you END your turn inside their radius right?
Yes
Quote:Also I swear sometimes I get a warning and sometimes it just instantly breaks
First offense triggers a warning. The second consecutive turn shows no message. Third consecutive turn the pact breaks instantly.
The warning, like any other form of warning, might break the pact if relations drop too low (or if your received too many warnings for other misdeeds like casting curses)
Quote:Is there anyway to warn an ai wizard to stop violating your territory without just declaring war on them?
You can threaten them. In response they might consider it forming a peace treaty - the units won't leave your territory but they'll be unable to attack you for a while. Of course if they have the upper hand they might ignore the threat or consider it a declaration of war from your side.
The AI isn't able to comprehend "territory" as a concept aside from the end of turn check on their own cities and that cannot be added to the game.
Quote: In theory I could just ask them to end their alliance with Wizard A before I break my own alliance with them. Would that help at all?
Yes it will mean you receive no penalty when defeating the wizard from Wizard A. If you make them start a war, you even receive a bonus.
If you make the alliance of wizard B break with A then you're safe to attack B. However, pay attention because they might make the treaty again. A wizard's pact is not spreading the war but it does mean you receive a penalty when you banish the wizard.
Quote:does this mean in caster of magic as well as 1.50 that using alchemy I can offer ai wizard's 100 gold for +10or more visible relations repeatedly to make everyone love me? even if the target wizard has 8000 gold because they're cheating?
No, the tribute options are in percentage of the gold the enemy owns. If they have 8000 then you can do 2000, 4000, 6000 or 8000 at a time. It works best when they're low on money. If they have lots, better to offer spells.
I think I figured out the issue with wizards get mad at me.
If units are 2tiles away from my city and diagonally two tiles away from their city they're inside my radius, but outside their radius.
This seems to anger merlin who keeps accusing me of having units on his borders in violation of our wizard's pact, but it's entirely within my border, and even if it's a single ghoul he still gets angry.
However I have to have that unit there, because when I move it back inside my city he summons a magic spirit and sends it directly for that tile, which is inside my radius, because he see's an unguarded node (that I've already melded and is inside my territory).
I'm not sure this is fair, but I'm not sure if there's anyway to fix it. Ideally it shouldn't be possible to violate a wizard's pact with units that never leave your own city's tiles. It doesn't matter much though because I'm about to wrap this game up anyways, and I guess next time I'll try to settle my cities 1 tile away from nodes instead of 2.
It's good the ai is smart enough to try to steal my node out from inside my territory, it's a bit buggy though that when I stop him from violating my territory, while we are peaceful and under a wizard's pact he gets angry, breaks the pact and blames me for it.
You're probably already aware of this behavior and either consider it correct or cannot fix it, but here's the save file autosave from a turn in which merlin broke a treaty, if it helps at all, which it probably doesn't
(June 14th, 2016, 01:37)namad Wrote: I think I figured out the issue with wizards get mad at me.
If units are 2tiles away from my city and diagonally two tiles away from their city they're inside my radius, but outside their radius.
No, in that case they are in the radius of both cities. Although their city will not be using the tile's terrain, it is still within a distance of 2 from the city. So they consider it their own territory not yours. Same for any other "shared" tile visible from the city screen of both cities. It's not very logical since diagonals are not actually used by the city, but that's what "distance" actually means, no more than 2 tiles neither horizontally nor vertically.
It would be unreasonably difficult to change this so we'll have to live with it.
