Raising Influence

[CrazyGuy]

What defines the influence of your leader?

I know that breaking alliances costs influence, but does keeping alliances or being otherwise trustworthy raise influence.

Successful crusades increase influence, but I'm playing VI.

Finally, is it a 'personal' thing, defined by command rating, acumen etc? If it is, surely influence will be on an ever-decreasing spiral? One average king begetting a below-average king with low influence, begetting a worse king with worse influence... Bang! Civil War.

Any advice?

[BAD]

I ended up with a low influence king by just defending my borders and never really advancing, only occaisionally when rebel uprising came about I'd snatch up a province, or if I got attacked I'd take an easily defensible province like an island or one that just shorthened/kept my border the same etc.

I managed to up my influence by just capturing about eight provinces in about 10 years. I think it doubled from three to six. Of course this wasn't in Viking Invasion, but it most likely holds true for that also.

[Innocentius]

Relieveing besieged allies, winning battles and conquering territories earns your leader influence. And then Crusades and GA's (like largest army or most content population) etc. as well.

[Ironsword]

- Also a quick question on this; does influence affect whether a rival ally/neutral power will suddenly march 4000 troops into your land or is just down to the power crazed MTW AI..?

[FactionHeir]

Playing vanilla MTW 1.1 as the English, I have not expanded much at all, besides taking the British isles and Scandinavia during about 60 or so years. Yet all my kings have near max influence for some reason.

I'm not sure if influence is worth it though, as every faction that I already had a marriage alliance with (even those 60 years ago) will not accept another from me.

[CrazyGuy]

Does 'trustworthiness' work both ways?

I understand that stabbing your ally in the back would reduce influence, becuase 'that family cannot be trusted' so people wouldn't listen, but surely if I repected my alliances I would be 'someone you can do business with' and hence more influential?

On a side point, how can I escape alliances without attacking them? I no longer have a use for one of my friends but can't afford the 'influence penalty'.

[Martok]

- Also a quick question on this; does influence affect whether a rival ally/neutral power will suddenly march 4000 troops into your land or is just down to the power crazed MTW AI..?
It's pretty much down to the AI -- it will backstab you if it senses an opportunity. Diplomacy has always been a weak part of the Total War games, and MTW is unfortunately no exception to this.

The problem is that the AI seems to lack the ability for long-term planning; it's unable to see beyond the immediate consequences of its actions. That's why you'll sometimes see a 1-province faction (we'll call it Faction A) backstab a 30-province superpower (who we'll call Faction B).

I can only speculate, but it seems like the AI works thusly (using the example I just mentioned): All Faction A can see is that right now, its army is significanly more powerful than the small garrison Faction B has in Province X at the moment (which is right next to Faction A). So A therefore decides to invade Province X and take it away from B. What A doesn't seem to take into account, however, is that B's overall military resources are far greater than its own, and has now just set itself up for massive retaliation & retribution when B comes to take back Province X....and possibly A's own province as well.

I'm not certain that this is how the AI looks at situations -- it's probably a little more nuanced than that, as there are likely other factors to consider as well -- but I suspect I'm not too far off overall. As I stated earlier, the AI in the Total War games seems only able to examine any *immediate* consequences, and is unable to fully assess the larger strategic situation.

[Martok]

Does 'trustworthiness' work both ways?

I understand that stabbing your ally in the back would reduce influence, becuase 'that family cannot be trusted' so people wouldn't listen, but surely if I repected my alliances I would be 'someone you can do business with' and hence more influential?
In theory, yes the other factions should recognize you as being a reliable partner and ally....and it probably even does to an extent.

However, as I just pointed out in my previous post, the AI seems to always be looking for opportunities to backstab its buddies (whether it be you or another faction), and it's not very good at realizing the long-term consequences of doing so.

So alliances may hold for a while -- I've seen them last over a century -- but they almost always get broken in the end.



On a side point, how can I escape alliances without attacking them? I no longer have a use for one of my friends but can't afford the 'influence penalty'.
Ally with someone that faction is at war with. You'll then receive a message saying you must choose your allies. You can then break off your alliance with the first faction at no cost to your influence. ~:)

[CrazyGuy]

Thanks Martok,

But at the risk of sounding facetious, my situation is a little more complex than that, is there 'another' way.

For example, in my current VI game I am the Welsh, allied with Northumbria. They were attacked by Mercia and being a good ally I joined in. Soon after the Saxons joined in and we all ganged up on Mercia.

Now, sooner or later, the three of us will go to war and i'm going to try to maintain a balance of power by attacking whoever is winning the Saxon/Northumbria war.

If this is Northumbria, how can I attack them without losing influence and getting even worse heirs. I could ally with the Saxons as you suggest, but that doesn't solve the problem.


Is there a way out of this condumdrum? Perhaps the game should allow alliances to lapse every 25 years?

[Agent Miles]

Civil wars are caused by disloyal generals leading your armies. Marry your daughters to your best generals and give them titles to raise their loyalty above reproach. Spam some garrison units and keep only the most loyal ones. Then you don’t have to worry about civil wars and you can attack whomever you want.

[Martok]

I could ally with the Saxons as you suggest, but that doesn't solve the problem.
Actually, it does. Because the moment those two factions go to war against each other -- and you're right in that they probably will -- you'll then get to choose which of the two factions you stay allied with, without suffering an influence penalty for breaking an alliance. So start sending those emissaries over to the Saxon king and make nice! :yes:

[stxman]

I have been working the Sicilians in high. I have been trying to advance all of my trade and get an economy going prior to starting my military build-up. Not only am I sending out emissaries everywhere searching for rebel provinces to bribe (I like to take two provinces next to each other, bribe them, and consolidate under the most useful territory. Each turn, the rebels return to the empty province, I go back, bribe and repeat, then when the army is big enough after consolidation, I can have enough to send some over to garrison the other), I am trying to maintain maintain a navy as well. However, the italians and almohads continually find a way to start a conflict, at sea. Then, my stream of funds falls apart due to blockaids and I'm stuck having to go to war because they will not accept ceasfires.

[gunslinger]

Stxman: about the only way to deal with that is to have a large navy at your disposal to immediately wipe out your attackers' ships. The beautiful thing about naval battles is that once they are over, you will automatically go back to neutral status with your enemy as long as your boats can't see them, and their boats can't see you (actually the same with land battles, but easier to accomplish with boats). So, after the Italians attack your navy, starting a war and messing up your trade routes, simply overwhelm their boats, killing all of them. Then retreat away from any ocean sector which borders an Italian province. Next turn, move back into your trade routes. The most frustrating thing will be when the enemy ships run from you rather than stand and fight. Then, you will have to waste a lot of turns chasing them around before you can reopen trade. It's just part of trying to be a peaceful maritime trader in MTW.

Welcome to the org, and by the way, don't be afraid to start a new topic if you have any other questions (this topic was about influence, not naval tactics).

[Tony Furze]

Egyptians /1182/Hard/GA

Sultan Baybars II has 5 crowns and a Grand Mosque in Egypt. His Kingdom stretches across Africa all the way to Morocco. He has Syria. Apart from that the rest are Homelands.

Over the next four years he gathers a crown a year till his influence is the maximum. Nothing happens except consolidation of trade routes, building up border forces.

He keeps his max influence for about six years. The Spanish send two Crusades to Morocco both are soundly defeated by the Sultans capable General.

Its 1192 and Sultan Baybar II s influence has dropped to 0-no crowns at all!

What caused the rise?

Why did it drop to 0?

[Martok]

Egyptians /1182/Hard/GA

Sultan Baybars II has 5 crowns and a Grand Mosque in Egypt. His Kingdom stretches across Africa all the way to Morocco. He has Syria. Apart from that the rest are Homelands.

Over the next four years he gathers a crown a year till his influence is the maximum. Nothing happens except consolidation of trade routes, building up border forces.

He keeps his max influence for about six years. The Spanish send two Crusades to Morocco both are soundly defeated by the Sultans capable General.

Its 1192 and Sultan Baybar II s influence has dropped to 0-no crowns at all!

What caused the rise?

Why did it drop to 0?
Damn. It looks like you got hit by the Influence "wraparound" bug. :thumbsdown:

When a faction leader with an influence of 9 gains another point of influence, the game reads it as 0 influence instead of 10. I don't remember exactly why it does this, although I believe it has to do with some unused code CA never removed the game. Sorry Tony; I wish I'd thought to mention that. :shame:

[Tony Furze]

Thanks, Martok.

So does that mean his influence is now zero? (I suppose I could roleplay that he s been reborn at a new level of Sultanship/hood)

More importantly, how can you use such a rapid influence rise to good use? I tried brokering a few partnerships, including making up to the Turks, but none of them worked.)

[Ironside]

Thanks, Martok.

So does that mean his influence is now zero? (I suppose I could roleplay that he s been reborn at a new level of Sultanship/hood)

More importantly, how can you use such a rapid influence rise to good use? I tried brokering a few partnerships, including making up to the Turks, but none of them worked.)

The influnence bug is atleast ok if it behaves like it has done when I've seen it, it will then automatically regenerate back into 9 influence during a few years.

I don't know the mechanisms behind it, but it's not as easy as 10 influence, otherwise it would be way more common. But it's probably related to that Jihad spamming can give you about any influence possible.

[r johnson]

Relieveing besieged allies, earns your leader influence. .

I always wonder what the incentive was to do that.