Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 37

Thread: The Complete Game

  1. #1

    Default The Complete Game

    Hey everyone. Long time player of the TW series, first time poster. (God I hate people who use that expression..DOH! first time, honest) :)

    This was the first community based forum that had a complete guide with most if not all of the games facets listed in an organized manner. I felt obligated to join up and become part of the community as TW is in essence (for me) the perfect game.

    What I wanted to touch on here was just how incomplete a new players strategy really is, especially if you are playing a catholic faction. I basically turned the game into a florins generating, tech building, massive military expansion and to hell with the pope, religion, even sacking cities. All I wanted was advanced echnologies with stacks of cutting edge armies on easy setting! This defeats the whole genius of this game. What I really want to get into is at least playing medium/medium and using the games ... subtler paths to victory. Of course, this is Total War afterall and there will still be lots of room for sheer aggression and barreling over weaker factions, I just think a lot of newer players and players of other strategy games fall into this trap of tech/military/economic building to support a massive army that has to protect much of everything because diplomacy isn't being used!

    Anyways, just thought I'd come on, admit my own shortsightedness and express my desire to become a well rounded player who plays .. "The Complete Game".

    NWO

  2. #2
    Guardian of the Fleet Senior Member Shahed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Leading the formation !
    Posts
    7,918

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    WELCOME NWO !

    Actually you are not shortsighted.

    IMO the game encourages that kind of gameplay unless you strictly limit yourself to your own style. Specially 1.10 and the harder difficulty levels encourage the AI to attack you constantly. A failure of diplomatic options means that factions have to be annihilated. This has been limited in 1.20.

    It's not entirely your choice, the game is leading you towards that style of play. If you have any specific questions, shoot. I'd be happy to help, as would many others, I'm sure.
    A Gamecenter with a dedicated Total War fanbase!
    Check out our Facebook!
    Email: shahed@outpost.be


  3. #3
    Friendly Resident Knight Member Fußball's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Der Arsch der Welt!
    Posts
    209

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    As Sinan pointed out, your own playstyle and maybe even "houserules" per se are what expand the game into something more. IMO makes the game much more fun and enjoyable to play. Trying to play 'good little catholic' and appeasing the pope is fun, and when you do he never bothers you for attacking other catholics. In fact, most of the time if you are attacked by others he warns them instead of you, 'good little catholic'.

    Any kind of little house rules you can think up and abide by to make the game more challenging and fun.

    Tschüß!
    Erich


    Things are getting better. Well, not as good as yesterday, but definitely better than tomorrow! ~Old Russian Joke

  4. #4
    Member Member Didz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Bedfordshire UK
    Posts
    2,368

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    My own personal preference now is to select the 'Short Campaign' option and restrict my initial strategy to acheivement of the goals set. In other words, if the short game requires me to eliminate the Scots and French then those are the only factions I will wage war against. All others I attempt to placate with diplomacy to keep them out of my hair.

    As a policy I also treat all missions as mandatory, the assumption being that I am under some sort of political pressure to carry out the action demanded. Perhaps, from the Baron's or some minor princeling somewhere.

    This approach to the initial campaign creates an additional set of challenges and inhibits the use of the 'slash and burn' strategy used by some players.

    Only once the 'Short Campiagn' has been won do I accept 'continue' and allow myself the freedom to choose my next strategic goals myself. Although, even then I consider all missions mandatory.
    Didz
    Fortis balore et armis

  5. #5

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    My play style could be best be summarised by the expression "flail of god".

  6. #6
    Member Member Yun Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Perth Western Australia
    Posts
    622

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    I admire your desire, and think a fair number of us share it

    I believe however the game itself cannot support anything other than a blitz strategy

    while winning through other means ie diplomacy, religion, agents etc - these functions are broken or have never worked (or are just made irrelevent by the behaviour of the AI).

    In my recent game VH 1.2 vanilla as the danes

    I thought Id play a non-aggressive alliance/religion game

    However constant war with my neighbours as well as constant blockading and constant invasion by england and scotland (every 3 turns - kind of kills the immersion - ALOT)

    I was going broke - fast

    so the AI with its kill the player at all cost strat - forced me to expand to stay in the black, and then well - the remainder of the game is a forgone conclusion - sing along *just keep blitzing - keep blitzing*

    you can try other strats but your subtlties will be lost on the game engine and at some point the 'attack at all costs AI' will snuff out any flame of immersion you mightve been sheltering

    basically all the elements are there but until there is a serious reworking of how the AI behaves - they are just window dressing
    Quote Originally Posted by pevergreen View Post
    its pevergeren.

  7. #7
    Member Member Didz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Bedfordshire UK
    Posts
    2,368

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Thats the main reason I choose to play the Short Campaigns rather than the take 45 region's option.

    I've found with the limited objectives of the Short Campaign, not only is the game more challenging in that ones objectives are focussed, but that it is possible to use diplomatic and political means to fend off those factions who might otherwise be intent on your destruction.

    For , example in my Venetian campaign I was able to fend of the hostile attentions of the French for the entire game by a combination of Papal intervention and massed assassination.

    The biggest problem at that time was always the reluctance of AI factions to make peace, which severely reduced ones trade income. However, since the 1.2 patch ceasefires seem to be a more frequent occurance. In my Moorish game both England and the Papal States have conducted repeated landings on Moorish territory, laid seige, then lifted the seige and sued for peace before collecting and removing their army from my beach. I've even escorted these armies to the beach to make sure they get on the boats safely.

    This has not been consistently true, in that, whilst the English and Papal States seemed willing to negotiate the Sicilians persistently refused to accept any ceasefire despite having no greater success.

    The behaviour of the English and Papal does seem a bit cyclic but at least it means that between cycles I'm getting some trade income out of these factions.
    Last edited by Didz; 05-21-2007 at 11:03.
    Didz
    Fortis balore et armis

  8. #8
    Typing from the Saddle Senior Member Doug-Thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    2,455

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Furious Mental
    My play style could be best be summarised by the expression "flail of god".
    Amen, brother.

    I have to agree with the others in general but quibble a bit on details.

    Yes, the game's diplomatic and religious options are overshadowed by the miltary ones. This is mainly because the AI gangs up on you when you are the top faction. It gets worse when you hit certain triggers, like taking Rome when you're playing an Islamic faction.

    Once you're clearly the king of the hill, no amount of diplomacy is going to remove the rest of the world's fear of you.

    However, diplomacy isn't useless, which is a point everybody knows, but somebody ought to say it.

    The AI never made peace before, no matter how much the faction it represented was on the ropes. Now it does.

    Trade agreements and map information are worth getting. Shoring up a faction that's fighting your enemy by giving the co-belligerant cash is also worthwhile. Religious matters make a big difference, especially on the "domestic tranquility" and ability to recruit troops for Jihad or Crusades. One of the very few Catholic factions I like to play — Spain — does very well with the Pope because it conquers Islamic lands and gives the Pope lots of new converts.
    "In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns."

  9. #9
    Masticator of Oreos Member Foz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    968

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    I think one of the biggest problems with the widespread desire for "more sensible" AI faction behavior is that it is really hard to make the AI behave sensibly using the parameters available. Just think about it: how, using strictly mathematics, does one determine when the AI should attack the player, and when it should try to keep peace? Will it be in the AI's interest to drop a full stack on a lowly-defended settlement of yours? Should it attack you if it sees an advantage?

    A part of that problem is that players' definitions of sensible AI vary quite widely. Some players expect the AI to largely leave them alone unless provoked, while others expect the AI to come at them at all times. Which road should the AI take?

    I'm not really sure about that, but one thing I have noticed for certain is that the AI does not attack randomly as people seem to suggest (w/ the possible exception of blockades). More than anything, the AI's attacks are governed by its perceived advantage against a given settlement. In short, if you wish to maintain peace, you must defend settlements better than you think is required. My latest campaign has been a bit slower than my usual pace, and instead of rapid expansion I've been trying to fortify my settlements better, especially along the fronts. At first it wasn't too effective, as I couldn't support enough troops to have sizable garrisons (due to the usual rebel settlement grab). At that point, Scotland, France, and Denmark all attacked me in different places. With some buildup, however, two of those wars ended, and Scotland, while at war with me, is being conquered instead of assaulting me. My peace with Europe has held for quite a few turns now, and I can only attribute it to my larger garrisons in all the bordering settlements. I suspect the mechanic is intended to have the AI punish the player for expanding too quickly and thus leaving areas unprotected, however the AI is obviously too confident in determining when it has an advantage, and usually can be beaten when it attacks. I suspect the most prudent thing for us to do is require it to have a more significant advantage when planning an attack, which may perhaps make it more challenging by building up forces until it can actually win a battle.

    I'm going to look through the AI campaign decisions file when I get the chance and see if I can draft up a plain English version of basically what the AI is doing, so we can consider revising it. Hopefully that'll help.


    See my Sig+ below! (Don't see it? Get info here)

  10. #10
    Member Member Blacknek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    59

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    at Foz:

    very well said.
    I think one of the main problem with campaign-AI (and people complainig about it) is, what can be expected from an computer-"AI".
    As you mentioned, computer-decisions are not altered by emotions/unrational thoughts. Their way of "thinking" ist strictly causal. Do one thing, the AI does another thing (action-reaction-principle). Now spice this principle with a little randomnes (calculating reaction by a predifined chance and then put in an random multiplicator) and the AI will do it, or sometimes not. By giving differentAI-factions different predefined calculators for certain actions. Voila, you generate a seemingly AI-"personality",
    This doesn't change the fact, that the AI will act in a simple manner all the time.

    This was true anyway with previous TW games. In MTW playing HRE France WILL attack, no mather what you do. It's just their (coded) "nature".
    In the older days nobody really complained about this.

    Another fact is, that AI-evolvemend can not catch up with the graphical/ sound-progress of the games. The expectations do.

  11. #11
    kwait nait Member Monsieur Alphonse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    928

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    I think that the AI is programmed to lose. Because the AI's (computer controlled factions) always attack at a certain point the player is forced to counter that attack. The AI attack usually end in failure which for them means end of game. Especially on H and VH campaigns the attack will drain their resources. A normal response of a player is counter attacking and take out the AI stacks. This leaves hardly defended cities/castles as a bait. Besides if you handle the pope well your AI opponent will be excommed.

    An other point is that factions with one or two regions left ask to be destroyed because they (almost) never ask for a ceasefire to rebuild their strength.

    An other AI strategy could be not to attack the player and let the player do the attacking. This will lead to worse diplomatic relations, a worse reputation and an angry pope. If the AI has some nice alliances the human player will have more trouble expanding than with a very aggressive AI.

    To summarize: Aggressive AI means that a player is forced to expand, forced to destroy the AI player to take out the threat.
    Defensive AI means more trouble expanding. Cities/Castle will be better defended etc.

    PS In an other thread someone won the short campaign in five turns playing England. On amazing thing he did was buying Anger and Toulouse in exchange for an alliance and some money. I tried that in a long campaign and it worked. Also I have bought in a Milan campaign Bologna from the HRE for some florins. Trying to bribe these cities won't work but with a good diplomat you can get them almost for free. Need some improvement
    Tosa Inu

  12. #12
    Member Member WhiskeyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    330

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    I have noticed that within about the initial 20 turns in any game, it feels as though theres some sort of bonus or something for Diplomacy or whatnot. I'm not sure what it is, but its like you can get awesome deals/alliances/bargains if you conduct your diplomacy asap. For instance, in some games i've gotten an alliance with the Papal States as Egypt and Turks pretty quickly, but as England and waiting till about turn 50 or so (with very reliable rep and no war and good feelings all around with everyone thats met me) they would outright refuse to ally with me, despite winning their little crusade.

    My guess is the AI is set to get progressively hostile towards you, to either goad you into action via them attacking, or to force you to move quickly and expand so you don't fail the campaign goals because your at turn 200 and have 3 territories the entire game. Of course, i could be entirely wrong about that


    "Don't mind me, i happen the have the Insane trait....." -Me

  13. #13
    Throne Room Caliph Senior Member phonicsmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cometh the hour, Cometh the Caliph
    Posts
    4,859

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    I have found it possible to keep long-standing alliances (Venice VH/H, playing 1.1 with trusted alliances enabled and carl's problemfixer) with three or more factions, so long as I keep my reputation reliable or better and my relations with those factions at outstanding or better (perfect to be safe).

    However, the MAJOR caveat to this is that if you share a land border with a faction, sooner or later they will attack.

    For example, I was allied to England for over 150 turns with no trouble, shared a land border with them and they have just attacked out of the blue, even though I just gifted them 14k the turn before. (Even in this case it took some 50 turns for them to attack me)

    I put this down to the same "mission" issue that causes the random blockades. I find when I have a stable number of provinces for a long period I inevitably get told by the Council of Nobles to expand into a neighbour's territory, regardless of the diplomatic situation. Not sure if the AI has the option to "decline" such missions....

    In order to counter this I've adapted a tactic I used to use in RTW where I would let the provinces between me and the faction go rebel, creating a DMZ.

    In M2TW it's even better in that you can gift them to the Pope, effectively creating a penicillin ring around your territory for any Catholic rivals.

    I don't have 1.2 but I think I read here somewhere that the trusted allies checks now include the target faction's reputation as well? in which case it's next-to-useless as all AI factions become despicable very quickly...
    frogbeastegg's TWS2 guide....it's here!

    Come to the Throne Room to play multiplayer hotseat campaigns and RPGs in M2TW.

  14. #14
    Member Member Yun Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Perth Western Australia
    Posts
    622

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Monsieur Alphonse
    I think that the AI is programmed to lose. Because the AI's (computer controlled factions) always attack at a certain point the player is forced to counter that attack. The AI attack usually end in failure which for them means end of game. Especially on H and VH campaigns the attack will drain their resources. A normal response of a player is counter attacking and take out the AI stacks. This leaves hardly defended cities/castles as a bait. Besides if you handle the pope well your AI opponent will be excommed.

    An other point is that factions with one or two regions left ask to be destroyed because they (almost) never ask for a ceasefire to rebuild their strength.

    An other AI strategy could be not to attack the player and let the player do the attacking. This will lead to worse diplomatic relations, a worse reputation and an angry pope. If the AI has some nice alliances the human player will have more trouble expanding than with a very aggressive AI.

    To summarize: Aggressive AI means that a player is forced to expand, forced to destroy the AI player to take out the threat.
    Defensive AI means more trouble expanding. Cities/Castle will be better defended etc.

    PS In an other thread someone won the short campaign in five turns playing England. On amazing thing he did was buying Anger and Toulouse in exchange for an alliance and some money. I tried that in a long campaign and it worked. Also I have bought in a Milan campaign Bologna from the HRE for some florins. Trying to bribe these cities won't work but with a good diplomat you can get them almost for free. Need some improvement
    Alphonse makes the point I was trying to earlier


    Quote Originally Posted by Foz
    I think one of the biggest problems with the widespread desire for "more sensible" AI faction behavior is that it is really hard to make the AI behave sensibly using the parameters available. Just think about it: how, using strictly mathematics, does one determine when the AI should attack the player, and when it should try to keep peace? Will it be in the AI's interest to drop a full stack on a lowly-defended settlement of yours? Should it attack you if it sees an advantage?

    A part of that problem is that players' definitions of sensible AI vary quite widely. Some players expect the AI to largely leave them alone unless provoked, while others expect the AI to come at them at all times. Which road should the AI take?
    The AI should not take the road it is currently on which is attack the player at all cost aggressiveness - This is strategically naive. As Alphonse said - it opportunistically attacks leaving itself exposed to either counter by the human - or other AIs opportunistic attacks. It should not attack anything if that means leaving itself exposed

    Ive lost count of how many cities/castles I have taken defended by 1 or 2 unit garrison (all of them). Meanwhile a massive AI stack wanders aimlessly from city to city as I reinforce each one, looking for which one it should attack, then re-evaluating each turn and going in circles - meanwhile its citys are all defenseless.

    Because of the changes made to strat map in RTW (from risk style) the AI now needs to garrison troops - something not necessary in MTW. And it needs to be programmed to understand that settlements are key to staying in the game.

    next it needs to scale its opportunistic attacks against
    1. its power
    2. the targets power (and counter ability)
    3. Its nearest neighbours power

    then the Human player needs to have a x2 modifier factored in - because if the AI attacks the human it can expect he will be at least twice as difficult to defeat in the tactical battle

    The AI needs to be programmed to know this lesson "together we stand, divided it falls"
    Here the AI needs to do some numbers regarding alliance with another AI will make it stronger defensively (also it needs addition of if someone declares war on ally then you have the option of declaring war to increase standing with ally)

    and the attacking in concert with the ally against the human aggressor because alone vs the human = loss

    it needs to have individual strategies for each nation with biases and favoured targets and enemires and allies
    Basically if the AI is england it needs to at least have a framework strategy for winning as england - not stopping the human - it needs to play its own game to win - that will be a greater hinderence to the human than the predicatable attack the human no matter what.

    as for the sharing border thing I agree completely with the other posters - as soon as you share a border you can predict war - no matter if they are your most trusted ally.

    if the AI allys with the human and wages war in concert with the human - that AI will start doing better - eventually well enough it might be able to confidently backstab the human - and if the computer is going to back stab - then it need to be programmed to have multiple stacks free for full scale invasion - NOT 1 stack (the way it does atm)

    I just want to see the days of huge battles return - allied armies on both sides meeting for battle of a scale not seen since MTW - I dont think Ive had a single battle with allies present on either side since MTW


    to sum up the AI in my opinion wanders aimlessly over the map looking for any opportunistic attack it can make - this is lame and obvious

    the AI needs to be programmed to move with a purpose - if it want to kill the human it should make some friends and move as one with everything to wipe out its enemies - that is what I call Very Hard

    unless its going to be a cakewalk - it should avoid war - until it is powerful enough to annihalate its opponent

    finally if ships cant be programmed to stop blockading (thereby creating wars) then get rid of them
    Quote Originally Posted by pevergreen View Post
    its pevergeren.

  15. #15

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    the lack of other means to victory than steamrollering the world is really something that is inherent in the very formula TW was first built on; it is a tactical battle game with a strategy part whose only function is to set the stage for tactical battles, iot is not a grand strategy game with tactical battles.

    that sais, on lower difficulty you can achieve a lot with subterfuge, but it is more costly and far less effective than pure military means. and irrational and overtly aggressive AI makes subterfuge irrelevant in some games.

  16. #16
    Member Member Yun Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Perth Western Australia
    Posts
    622

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Quote Originally Posted by anders
    the lack of other means to victory than steamrollering the world is really something that is inherent in the very formula TW was first built on; it is a tactical battle game with a strategy part whose only function is to set the stage for tactical battles, iot is not a grand strategy game with tactical battles.

    that sais, on lower difficulty you can achieve a lot with subterfuge, but it is more costly and far less effective than pure military means. and irrational and overtly aggressive AI makes subterfuge irrelevant in some games.

    I agree but if you look at the thread on 'the poll results' a few weeks ago, MP was unpopular - most people said they didnt play MP because of lack of context for the battles - this is key

    yes it is a tactical battle game with strategy to set the scene

    but the battles lose context if they are boring, repeditive or clearly some AI cyclical pattern - those battles your wanting to auto

    the battles people love are the battles WITH context - ie the great crusade for constantinople, a huge battle with your allies against your enemy and their allies for control of Italian peninsular - with 10's of thousands of men


    if the scene is not set adequately then the tactical battles lose context and become pointless and boring, and at that point you stop playing - atm that point is coming not long after starting the game
    Quote Originally Posted by pevergreen View Post
    its pevergeren.

  17. #17
    Confiscator of Swords Member dopp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    702

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Agree 105%, that's what makes Total War special.

  18. #18
    Member Member Didz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Bedfordshire UK
    Posts
    2,368

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    I would have to agree with Yunus, whilst the tactical battles were the major innovation of the TW series they cannot stand alone and continue to sell the games.

    I for one rarely play the historical battles, never play multi-player and only use custom games for testing and novelty value. (e.g. massed Tim Elephants v Massed Aztec Peasants - hilarious)

    The real danger is that as the TW series has matured it has gradually moved further and further towards the situation that Anders has highlighted.

    In the original Shogun TW there were valid alternatives to waging a military campaign and many of us completed entire campaigns without declaring war on a single faction. The so called 'War of the Shadows' with massed spies, assassins and geisha's was a valid alternative way to victory.

    Unfortunately, the more recent games in the series have lost that variety and the overall replay value of the game has sufferred as a result. Hopefully, in future versions we will see this balance restored and perhaps some more goal oriented victory conditions added.
    Last edited by Didz; 05-22-2007 at 11:41.
    Didz
    Fortis balore et armis

  19. #19
    Member Member crpcarrot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    368

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    also in MTW there was a chance that a province that was rebelling would join your faction (usually if it was taken from u recently or if its religion was more in line with yours) so their was more incentive to use spys and priests to convert and to get new provinces without a fight.

    personally i think the new strategic map has also done a lot to reduce the significance of battles. in STW MTW if u decided to venture into another factions province (even if you were trying to pass through to the adjoining provice) you had to face the whole garrision and any other army stationed in that province. it only went into a seige if the the defender decided the open battle was not a good choice. this made decisions of moving into another province a much bigger decision. now you can just stroll up to the castle and check out if there is a small garrision there decide if u want to seige or not and then walk away. thats why the AI seems to be so stupid it jut walks around looking for a target that it mathamatically could beat if not it just walks away doing nothing so u end up with loads of stacks doing nothing most of the time. and fighting lots of silly one sided battles that mean nothing other than getting to where u want to go.

    what i would like to see is for castles and cities to have a much larger region of control depending on their size. and any army that moves into this zone without military access will immediately take u to a screen asking if u want to attack. all armies in the zone of control will be included in this battle. so if u have 2 stacks standing outside your city u will have both of them plus the garrision in the battle. the attacking faction will have the invading army and any army in the squares adjacent outside the zone of control as reinforcements. if you decide not to do battle then it automatically becomes a seige. when an army decided to retreat to the castle it losed the sone of control round the castle allowing all enemy armies to move freely in the proince. for this to work the the zone of control will have to be pretty large but will still leave plenty of room for armies to go around cities in large provinces.

    its silly to think that a whole army can just move into your provice and lay seige to your city without you haing the chance to go out and meet them. and it becomes significant in my games as i have small kingdoms and the lost income can be significant. it will create more oppotunities for more significant (strategically) field battles.

    also bringing back civil wars (where disloyal generals went rebel and took whole provines and armies with them) and faction reemergences would be great. but rather than them just turning into armies that are going to sit on the map knowing what to do it should take you staright into a battle for that provice/castle/city.

    i think the movement seige system in the current map is really taking away from the significance of the battles. it was a step in the right direction but need to be improved.
    "Forgiveness is between them and god, my job is to arrange the meeting"

  20. #20
    Member Member Didz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Bedfordshire UK
    Posts
    2,368

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Well personally, I think a 'Get off my land' function would be a sensible solution to this problem, plus the obvious increase in the diplomatic and political penalties imposed for breaching another factions soveriegnty.

    The problem with instantly creating a battle scenario is that it would merely increase the level of aggression within the game.
    Didz
    Fortis balore et armis

  21. #21
    Member Member crpcarrot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    368

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    well in the relevant time period the only time an "army" would be allowed to walk your land unchallenged is if you had a prior agreement and i dont think any nobles were known for just seding whole armies on scouting missions. the aggression will ahve to be controlled through diplomacy rather than letting anyone just walk anywhere as long as they dont attack.

    the already weak ai is just wasting its resources by having a full stack walking around doing nothing while the human player is wisely building armies only when he needs to attack or when their is a percieved threat.

    anyway it was jsut an idea that i was thinking about its prob got be refined quite a bit. but i seriously dont like the idea of armies just standing by your city doing nothing for 10 turns and then turning around and walking away. and also Ai armies seiging a city in the center of you kingdom leaving castles and cities behind then affectivly cutting themselves off from thir resupply routes.

    unless a province is reached by sea it should not be possible to calth through one enemy province and take the next one. this will also limit the human layer being able to target the just the rich AI provinces effetively bankrupting it before it can make any affective counter attack. of course the sea route is still there for exploitation but that brings in the danger of several ai fleets picking u ships off and sending yout army to the bottom of the ocean.

    i'm rambling today sorry
    "Forgiveness is between them and god, my job is to arrange the meeting"

  22. #22

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Quote Originally Posted by crpcarrot
    well in the relevant time period the only time an "army" would be allowed to walk your land unchallenged is if you had a prior agreement and i dont think any nobles were known for just seding whole armies on scouting missions.
    Are you sure? My reading of medieval history is very, very different - armies were frequently able to walk through enemy territory unchallenged for long periods. Raising a full feudal host (or getting cash instead and using that to recruit mercenaries) took a lot of time. There was very little in the way of standing armies - typically a monarch might keep a small number of troops around him and have regular garrisons but other forces would be dispersed into their native regions.

    The end result was that armies could and frequently did spend a lot of time in enemy territory. Garrisons were big enough to withstand a limited siege but too small to fight an open battle - something the game reflects quite well, IMO.

    It was the duty of the monarch (or one of his lieutenants) to raise sufficient forces to fight and defeat an invading host. There were often reasons this was impossible. Civil war, rebellious nobility, being engaged elsewhere or simply being bankrupt often meant that invaders weren't dealt with adequately.

    This doesn't mean they conquered all available territory and reduced every fortress. Invaders had poor supply lines and had to rely on what they could get in the locality (again, well reflected in the game) - they were resupplied from their home territory very, very rarely.

    The upshot is that an army would frequently 'squat' in enemy territory, achieving little other than being a nuisance and buggering off before anyone came to fight them (about the time they got bored of dysentery and eating the local dogs).

    Back on topic, I tend to play the "Complete Game" on an irregular basis - I've paid my money so I may as well get as much from the game as I can......
    As the man said, For every complex problem there's a simple solution and it's wrong.

  23. #23
    Member Member Didz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Bedfordshire UK
    Posts
    2,368

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    @diotavelli

    Exactly, which is why I think a 'Get off my land' option is a better solution. Firstly, it requires a diplomat to deliver the message giving them another role in the game, and secondly it allows for the fact that the tresspassing army can ignore your demand with a 'Make me.' response if it doesn't think you have the muscle.

    There should also be an 'Appeal to the Pope' option so that in the event that neither side is willing to back down the situation can be resolved by threat of ex-communication.

    I certainly don't agree that wandering armies should simply go unchallenged as they are at present, but at the same time an auto-battle as in STW is not a good idea either.
    Didz
    Fortis balore et armis

  24. #24

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Didz, I agree that "gerrorfmoilaaand" is a good solution but I'm not sure even that a diplomat need be required.

    There's several hundred men wandering around, nicking food from the locals and eyeing-up the local totty (woman for most; sheep for the Welsh) - you can't really miss them. If the local garrison commander is senior enough to lead in battle, he's senior enough to ride into the enemy camp under a flag of truce and ask them to shift. No one from HQ need be required.

    I think the game should allow garrisons and enemy forces in close proximity to communicate. Before and during a siege, the invading force should be able to offer terms without some stuffed shirt from Court getting involved. Similarly, the local garrison should be able to surrender on terms or to bribe the invaders to go away.

    Of course, neither side would have any diplomatic training and the odds on getting a good deal would be limited: having a diplomat to lead negotiations would be useful, therefore.

    When you click on enemy armies they growl summat like "You are not my lord" - any reason this couldn't be extended to "You are not my lord but this situation could change given enough cash and a few choice estates for yours truly"?
    As the man said, For every complex problem there's a simple solution and it's wrong.

  25. #25

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    two things, firstly I certainly didnt want to ditch the strategy part of the game, and i fuly agree that the tactical part doesnt get half as interesting when in a cstom battle as in a campaign game. I just pointed out that the strategic bit first came into being as some kind of aftertought, and has since been lacking in comparison with other grand strategy games( Europa Universalis for one).

    secondly, what use is "getofmyland" or any other diplomatic option for that matter, if the AI stays as irrational as it is.( havent tried 1.2, might make a difference.)

    actuallt i think the game would be better if the AI was set up firstly for self preservation, then for reaching cetain faction-specific territorial goals, and treated the player much like any other AI controlled faction.

  26. #26
    Member Member Nebuchadnezzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    I think part of the problem is the ridiculous bonuses the AI gets that completely smothers any strategic value in the game. For example: I just discovered the AI gets awesome bonuses fighting rebels. During the AI's turn I see a HRE three quarter stack turn rebel and then challenged by a pathetically small 2-3 unit stack and completely destroying it. WTF. Thats the 3rd time I see something like this thinking that I must be imagining it.

    The other part is diplomacy. I'm sure its added only to give the player the illusion that diplomacy actually plays a part in the game. You really don't even need trade rights to trade.

    and finally, you guessed it. The dreaded AI. Why do we call it an AI. Nothing intelligent about it. Technically its not even an AI. Not even close.

    I feel games that have a straight up bonus to attack/morale is a far simpler and less likely to interfere with strategy, unfortunately many players find it simply indigestible to give the AI such transparent bonuses so they need to go clandestine and be plentiful.

    As for tactics I could never truly see any in this game as almost anything works great.
    Last edited by Nebuchadnezzar; 05-22-2007 at 16:06.

  27. #27
    Member Member Didz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Bedfordshire UK
    Posts
    2,368

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar
    You really don't even need trade rights to trade.
    You sure about that...I'm pretty sure that my port in Edinburgh wasn't getting any money from Denmark for its dye until my diplomat agreed their trade rights. That was either directly linked or coincidental, in that prior to my diplomats visit Scotland didn't even know Denmark existed, map-wise anyway.
    Didz
    Fortis balore et armis

  28. #28

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    from stainless steel 3.2

    there is your so called AI

    Code:
      <?xml version="1.0" ?> 
    - <root>
    - <!-- 
    		// The trusted ally global parameters specify the minimum faction standing thresholds for a target faction to be 
    		// considered a trusted ally.  We can use target faction standing parameters directly in invasion/defend decisions
    		// but the trusted ally data allows us to use additional entry parameters: trusted_ally_enemy and trusted_ally_protectorate
    		// that we cannot measure directly for a target faction.  An AI faction may also try and aid its trusted allies (hence the 
    		// reverse checks on standings to avoid helping allies it shouldn't)
    
    		<trusted_ally_fs_threshold float="0.5"/>                // min threshold for how much we like the target faction to consider them a trusted ally
    		<trusted_ally_target_fs_threshold float="0.5"/>         // min threshold for how much the target faction likes us to consider them a trusted ally
    		<trusted_ally_target_human_fs_threshold float="0.0"/>   // min threshold for how much the target (human) faction likes us to consider them a trusted ally
    		<trusted_ally_gs_threshold float="-1.0"/>               // min threshold for how trustworthy we are to consider the target faction a trusted ally
    		<trusted_ally_target_gs_threshold float="-0.1"/>        // min threshold for how trustworthy is the target faction to consider them a trusted ally
    		<trusted_ally_enemy_auto_war bool="false"/>        	// flag to indicate if a faction automatically goes to war with a trusted allies enemy
    
    		<use_cheat_overrides bool="true"/>                      // determines if cheat overrides (force peace with ai, force attack with humans) are applied
    		<invade_priority_fs_modifier float="-400.0"/>           // modifies the final invade priority for new faction targets by += (faction_standing * modifier) {makes factions more likely to start war with disliked targets}
    		<invade_priority_gs_modifier float="0.0f"/>             // modifies the final invade priority for new faction targets by += (global_standing * modifier) {makes factions more likely to start war with untrustworthy targets}
    		<invade_priority_assistance_offset int="200"/>          // modifies the final invade priority for new faction targets where military assistance has been asked by += (offset) {makes factions more likely to start war with military assistance targets}
    		<invade_priority_min int="50"/>                         // min clamp for final invade priorities calculated
    		<invade_priority_max int="1000"/>                       // max clamp for final invade priorities calculated
    
    
    		// Each faction has an 'ai_label' specified in the campaign descr_strat.txt.  This ai_label must correspond to a 'faction_ai_label' 
    		// entry specified in this database (e.g. 'default', 'catholic', 'papal_states').  The 'default' ai_label should always exist 
    		// and is used if a specified ai_label cannot be found.  Note that each ai_label is independent (i.e. 'catholic' ai_label does
    		// not inherit any data from 'default') hence care should be taken when adding new entries to ensure that any relevant global
    		// entries are added to all other ai_labels.  Additionally, the ai_labels can be tested through event conditions and set through
    		// a script command, potentially allowing ai behaviour to be changed dynamically in game depending on current game state.
    
    		<faction_ai_label name="default">	:: The label for a following set of campaign ai faction parameters
    		
    
    		// The ai_labels specify the structure of the long term goal director (LTGD) which drives the high level campaign AI.
    		// At the start of every factions turn (or when diplomacy changes), the LTGD is re-evaluated as follows:
    			// for every target faction (all other factions), evaluate the defend decisions
    			// for every target faction, evaluate the invasion decisions
    			// any invasion priorities are modified by the faction standing (relationship) towards the target
    			// depending on current game state, a new target with a high invasion priority may be selected to invade
    		// the LTGD can be debugged with the preferences '[log] level = ai.ltgd trace' and '[ai] ltgd_logging = true.
    
    			
    		// The 'defend_decisions' entry specifies a list of decision entries related to ai defence strategies.  To evaluate a defence
    		// strategy, a set of parameters is built and the list of decision entries is iterated until an entry satisfies the min and max
    		// conditions for the set of parameters.  As soon as an entry is satisfied (min <= current <= max), the iteration ends.  The decision
    		// is taken from the default 'faction_attitude' parameters with certain parameters overridden.  The 'min_entry' specifies the minimum
    		// thresholds specified for evaluation and the 'max_entry' specifies the maximum.  Note that care should be taken when entering new 
    		// entries since as soon as the thresholds for an entry are successfully met, the iteration ends.  An exception to this is the use of
    		// the 'continue' faction_attitude parameter, which allows the decision iteration to continue (This is useful for changing certain
    		// parameters of the faction_attitude but allowing the process to continue so other entries can apply additional modifications).
    
    		<defend_decisions>				:: List of ai defend decisions. when choosing a decision, code will iterate from first to last until a set of thresholds succeeds
    		
    			<decision_entry>				:: An individual decision entry
    			
    				<min_entry											:: The minimum threshold for decision comparison
    							frontline_balance="0.0"					:: ratio of factions frontline military strength vs the target
    							military_balance="0.0"					:: ratio of factions overall military strength vs the target
    							production_balance="0.0"				:: ratio of factions overall production strength vs the target
    							target_num_enemies="0"					:: the number of enemies the target has
    							num_enemies="0"							:: the number of enemies the faction has
    							has_alliance_against="false"			:: is the faction part of an alliance against target
    							military_balance_plus_enemies="0.0"		:: ratio of factions overall military strength vs the target (plus all of its enemies)
    							alliance_military_balance="0.0"			:: ratio of factions (plus its allies) overall military strength vs the target
    							strongest_neighbour="false"				:: is the target the factions strongest neighbour
    							most_desirable="false"					:: is the target the factions most desirable target
    							faction_standing="-1.0"					:: how much does the faction like the target
    							target_global_standing="-1.0"			:: how trustworthy is the target to the rest of the world
    							target_faction_standing="-1.0"			:: how much does the target faction like this faction
    							global_standing="-1.0"					:: how trustworthy is this faction to the rest of the world
    							target_religion="catholic"				:: the religion of the target (see descr_religions.txt)
    							enemy_excommunicated="false"			:: is the target excommunicated
    							excommunicated="false"			:: is this faction excommunicated
    							num_turns_allied="0"					:: the number of turns since the faction agreed to an alliance with the target
    							num_turns_ceasfire="0"					:: the number of turns since the faction has agreed to a ceasefire with the target (-1 for no agreement)
    							stance="Allied"							:: diplomatic stance with the target (Allied, Neutral, AtWar)
    							target_faction="england"				:: target faction label (see descr_sm_factions.txt)
    							target_human="false"					:: is the target a human player
    							target_is_shadow="false"				:: is the target this factions shadow faction
    							turn_number="0"							:: the game turn number (starting at 0)
    							is_protectorate="false"					:: is the target our protectorate
    							is_protectorate_of_catholic="false"		:: is the target a protectorate of a non-excommunicated catholic faction
    							free_strength_balance="0.0"				:: ratio of factions free military strength vs the target
    							borders_all_our_regions="false"			:: does the target border on all the factions region groups
    							target_weakest_neighbour="false"		:: is the faction the targets weakest neighbour
    							has_ceasehostilities="false"			:: does the faction have a cease hostilities mission against the target from the papal faction
    							is_neighbour="false"					:: does the target neighbour on any of the factions regions
    							trusted_ally="false"					:: is the target a trusted ally (they like us more than fs_thresh, and their global standing > gs_thresh, and they are allied)
    							trusted_ally_enemy="false"				:: is the target an enemy of a trusted ally
    							trusted_ally_protectorate="false"		:: is the target a protectorate of a trusted ally
    							num_settlements="0"						:: how many settlements does the faction own
    							rand="0.0"					:: a random value
    							difficulty="easy"/>			:: the chosen difficulty for the current local player (easy, medium, hard, very_hard)
    							
    				<max_entry											:: The maximum threshold for decision comparison
    							frontline_balance="999.0"
    							military_balance="999.0"
    							production_balance="999.0"
    							target_num_enemies="999"
    							num_enemies="999"
    							has_alliance_against="true"
    							military_balance_plus_enemies="999.0"
    							alliance_military_balance="999.0"
    							strongest_neighbour="true"
    							most_desirable="true"
    							faction_standing="1.0"
    							target_global_standing="1.0"
    							target_faction_standing="1.0"
    							global_standing="1.0"
    							target_religion="heretic"
    							enemy_excommunicated="true"
    							excommunicated="true"
    							num_turns_allied="999"
    							num_turns_ceasfire="999"
    							stance="AtWar"
    							target_faction="slave"
    							target_human="true"
    							target_is_shadow="true"
    							is_protectorate="true"
    							is_protectorate_of_catholic="true"
    							free_strength_balance="999.0"
    							borders_all_our_regions="true"
    							target_weakest_neighbour="true"
    							has_ceasehostilities="true"
    							is_neighbour="true"
    							trusted_ally="true"
    							trusted_ally_enemy="true"
    							trusted_ally_protectorate="true"
    							num_settlements="999"
    							rand="1.0"
    							difficulty="very_hard"/>
    							
    				<faction_attitude									:: A list of modifiers to apply if min and max entries above are successful
    									defense="defend_normal"			:: The long term defense type (defend_minimal, defend_normal, defend_raid, defend_frontline, defend_fortified, defend_deep)
    									defend_priority="0"				:: The defensive priority of achieving stance against this faction (NOT USED AT PRESENT) (additive with previous decisions this turn)
    									invade="invade_none"			:: The long term invade type (invade_buildup, invade_immediate, invade_raids, invade_opportunistic, invade_start, invade_none)
    									invade_priority="0"				:: priority of achieving invasion against this faction (additive with previous decisions this turn). Compared with priority for decisions against all other factions to choose highest.  Value modified internally by faction standing.
    									at_war="false"					:: are we at war with this enemy
    									want_peace="false"				:: do we want to be at peace with this faction
    									want_ally="false"				:: do we want to ally with this faction
    									want_be_protect="false"			:: do we want to be a protectorate of this faction
    									want_offer_protect="false"		:: do we want to offer protectorate status to this nation
    									force_invade="false"			:: must we invade now
    									alliance_against="0"			:: how much do we want to have an alliance against this nation (additive with previous decisions this turn)
    									pts_desire="0"					:: points total for measuring our desire for this faction's territory (additive with previous decisions this turn)
    									pts_alliance="0"				:: points total for measuring how much we want to be allies with these people (additive with previous decisions this turn)
    									can_force_invade="true"			:: can naval or forced invasion settings overwrite invade parameters
    									continue="false"/>				:: do we stop evaluating decision entries (false) or continue
    
    			</decision_entry>
    			
    		</defend_decisions>
    			
    	
    		// The 'invasion_decisions' entry specifies a list of invasion entries related to ai invasion strategies.  This process
    		// is virtually identical to the defence decision process but is evaluated as a separate stage.  
    
    		<invasion_decisions>				:: List of ai invasion decisions. when choosing a decision, code will iterate from first to last until a set of thresholds succeeds (uses identical data to defend decisions)
    
    			<decision_entry>				:: An individual decision entry
    				<min_entry/>											:: The minimum threshold for decision comparison
    				<max_entry/>											:: The maximum threshold for decision comparison
    				<faction_attitude/>									:: A list of modifiers to apply if min and max entries above are successful
    			</decision_entry>
    
    		</invasion_decisions>
    
        
      --> 
    - <!-- 	//////////////////////
    	// GLOBAL AI PARAMS //
    	//////////////////////
    	
      --> 
      <trusted_ally_fs_threshold float="0.5" /> 
      <trusted_ally_target_fs_threshold float="0.5" /> 
      <trusted_ally_target_human_fs_threshold float="0.0" /> 
      <trusted_ally_gs_threshold float="-0.1" /> 
      <trusted_ally_target_gs_threshold float="-0.1" /> 
      <trusted_ally_enemy_auto_war bool="false" /> 
      <use_cheat_overrides bool="true" /> 
      <invade_priority_fs_modifier float="-400.0" /> 
      <invade_priority_gs_modifier float="-200.0f" /> 
      <invade_priority_assistance_offset int="200" /> 
      <invade_priority_min int="50" /> 
      <invade_priority_max int="1500" /> 
    - <!-- 	///////////////////////////////////////
    	// DEFAULT AI PARAMS.  DO NOT REMOVE //
    	///////////////////////////////////////
    	
      --> 
    - <faction_ai_label name="default">
    - <defend_decisions>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR FORCING want_peace WITH A FACTION UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.  CONTINUES CHECKS FOR SUBSEQUENT DECISIONS
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude at_war="true" defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we have any settlements, and we are at the very start of the game, and target is not human (cannot trust humans) >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" turn_number="10" target_human="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, and we are at the start of the game >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" is_neighbour="false" turn_number="30" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, and we are at war, and they are not a trusted allies enemy, use defaults + want peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" stance="AtWar" /> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" trusted_ally_enemy="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude want_peace="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && he borders all our groups && his frontline strength is more than thrice as large as ours &&
    					his free strength is more than four times as large as ours, AND IS NOT OUR SHADOW FACTION >>> propose become protectorate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" borders_all_our_regions="true" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.3" free_strength_balance="0.3" production_balance="0.5" target_is_shadow="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" want_peace="true" want_be_protect="true" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && he borders all our groups && his frontline strength is more than twice as large as ours &&
    					his free strength is greater than twice ours, && IS NOT OUR SHADOW FACTION >>> deep defense, sue for peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" borders_all_our_regions="true" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="0.5" target_is_shadow="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" want_peace="true" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && he borders all our groups && his frontline strength is more than twice as large as ours &&
    					his free strength is greater than twice ours >>> deep defense, sue for peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" borders_all_our_regions="true" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is greater than his
    					then >>> deep defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && his frontline strength is less than ours && his free strength is greater than ours,
    					then >>> conduct raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry free_strength_balance="0.7" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_raid" alliance_against="4" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war, and none of the previous rules apply,
    					then >>> frontline defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_frontline" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is greater than his,
    					then >>> deep defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is less than his,
    					then >>> fortified defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_fortified" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are not his weakest neighbour && we are allied to him,
    					then >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry target_weakest_neighbour="false" stance="Allied" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are his weakest neighbour && he is not at war elsewhere && we are not at war elsewhere,
    					then >>> frontline defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_weakest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry target_num_enemies="0" num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_frontline" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are not his weakest neighbour && he is not at war elsewhere,
    					then >>> normal defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry target_num_enemies="0" num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_normal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					DEFAULT: defend minimal
    				
      --> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
      </defend_decisions>
    - <invasion_decisions>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR 'CAN_ATTACK_FACTION', NO INVASION IF SO
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
    - <!-- 			DIPLOMATIC AGREEMENT AND FACTION STANDING ANALYSIS COMES FIRST (allows early out if conditions met)
    			
      --> 
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If trusted ally, there is a 90% chance to use defaults (no invasion), cannot force invade.  allows even trusted allies to occasionally backstab
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry trusted_ally="true" /> 
      <max_entry rand="0.9" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied, are somewhat trustworthy and have only been allied for a medium duration, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry global_standing="0.25" /> 
      <max_entry num_turns_allied="10" stance="Allied" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied and have only been allied for a short duration, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry num_turns_allied="3" stance="Allied" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we have agreed to a ceasefire only a medium time ago and are somewhat trustworthy, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_turns_ceasfire="0" stance="Neutral" global_standing="0.25" /> 
      <max_entry num_turns_ceasfire="10" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we have agreed to a ceasefire only a short time ago, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_turns_ceasfire="0" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry num_turns_ceasfire="3" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied and we are very trustworthy, there is a 80% chance to use defaults (no invasion), cannot force invade, (we are a trustworthy ally)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry global_standing="0.5" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Allied" rand="0.8" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied, we like them a lot and we are not untrustworthy, there is a 80% chance to use defaults (no invasion), cannot force invade, (we are a friendly ally)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.5" global_standing="-0.1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Allied" rand="0.8" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied, we like them a bit and we are not very untrustworthy, there is a 65% chance to use defaults (no invasion), cannot force invade, (we are a friendly ally)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.25" global_standing="-0.25" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Allied" rand="0.65" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied, we don't mind them and we are not very untrustworthy, there is a 50% chance to use defaults (no invasion), (we are a partially friendly ally)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.0" global_standing="-0.25" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Allied" rand="0.5" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are neutral and we like them, there is a 75% chance to use defaults (no invasion), (we are a friendly neutral)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.5" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" rand="0.75" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are neutral and we like them a bit, there is a 50% chance to use defaults (no invasion), (we are a friendly neutral)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.25" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" rand="0.5" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are neutral and we don't hate them, there is a 25% chance to use defaults (no invasion), (we are a partially friendly neutral)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.0" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" rand="0.25" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If they are our protectorate, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry is_protectorate="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If they are a protectorate of a trusted ally, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry trusted_ally_protectorate="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					Not interested in factions that are not our neighbour, use defaults, may be overridden by forced/naval attacks
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry turn_number="30" target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="1200" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    					if we've more than twice his frontline strength, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" frontline_balance="2.0" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    					if we're superior on the frontline,	then >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" frontline_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war and it is very early in the game, do not invade (grabbing rebel regions instead)
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" turn_number="10" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <!-- 			AT WAR TARGET FACTIONS ANALYSED SECOND
    			
      --> 
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than five times his frontline strength && we're superior overall &&
    					we outproduce him, && IS NOT OUR SHADOW FACTION >>> propose he become vassal, invade immediate.  If not our shadow, also want to offer protectorate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="5.0" military_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry target_is_shadow="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="800" want_offer_protect="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than five times his frontline strength && we're superior overall &&
    					we outproduce him >>> propose he become vassal, invade immediate.  If our shadow, do not want to offer protectorate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="5.0" military_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="800" want_offer_protect="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than twice his frontline strength && he outproduces us && he is 
    					at war with more than one faction, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="2.0" target_num_enemies="2" /> 
      <max_entry production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="750" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than twice his frontline strength && we outproduce him && alliance
    					against this faction, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="2.0" production_balance="1.0" has_alliance_against="true" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="700" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we're superior on the frontline && we outproduce him,
    					then >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="650" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we're superior on the frontline && he outproduces us,
    					then >>> invade raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_raids" invade_priority="600" alliance_against="10" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war,
    					then >>> invade opportunistic
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="550" alliance_against="8" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <!-- 			NEUTRAL AND ALLIED TARGET FACTIONS ANALYSED LAST
    			
      --> 
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					thrice his && overall superior >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="3.0" military_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="500" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are at war with someone else && our frontline strength is more than 
    					thrice his && we're 2:1 superior overall against these factions >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_enemies="1" frontline_balance="3.0" military_balance_plus_enemies="2.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="1" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="450" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than 
    					twice his && alliance against this faction && alliance is overall superior >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="2.0" has_alliance_against="true" alliance_military_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="400" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					1.5 times his && we outproduce him >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="1.5" production_balance="1.5" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="350" alliance_against="2" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && frontline superiority && alliance against 
    					this faction && alliance is superior overall && he is strongest neighbour >>> invade opportunistic
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="1.5" has_alliance_against="true" alliance_military_balance="1.0" strongest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="300" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					twice his && he outproduces us && he is our strongest neighbour >>> invade raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="2.0" strongest_neighbour="true" target_num_enemies="2" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_raids" invade_priority="250" alliance_against="6" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && we outproduce him && he is our strongest
    					neighbour, then >>> plan future invasion
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry production_balance="1.0" strongest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_start" invade_priority="200" alliance_against="1" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && we outproduce him && he is most desireable, 
    					then >>> plan future invasion
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry production_balance="1.0" most_desirable="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_start" invade_priority="150" alliance_against="1" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					DEFAULT: invade_none
    				
      --> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR FORCING ATTACK ON HUMAN IF AT PEACE WITH EVERYONE FOR TOO LONG (hard = 4 turns, normal = 10 turns, easy = 20 turns)
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
      </invasion_decisions>
      </faction_ai_label>
    - <!-- 	//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    	// PAPAL FACTION AI PARAMS.  REQUIRES SPECIAL STUFF TO NOT ALLOW ATTACKING NON-EXCOMMUNICATED CATHOLIC FACTIONS //
    	//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    	
      --> 
    - <faction_ai_label name="papal_faction">
    - <defend_decisions>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR FORCING want_peace WITH A FACTION UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.  CONTINUES CHECKS FOR SUBSEQUENT DECISIONS
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we have any settlements, and we are at the very start of the game, and target is not human (cannot trust humans) >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" turn_number="10" target_human="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, and we are at the start of the game >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" is_neighbour="false" turn_number="30" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if target is non-excommunicated catholic faction, and they don't mind us much, and they are not obviously untrustworthy, minimal defense required
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_religion="catholic" target_faction_standing="-0.1" target_global_standing="-0.1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" target_religion="catholic" enemy_excommunicated="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude at_war="true" defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, and we are at war, and they are not a trusted allies enemy, use defaults + want peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" stance="AtWar" /> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" trusted_ally_enemy="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude want_peace="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && he borders all our groups && his frontline strength is more than twice as large as ours &&
    					his free strength is greater than twice ours, && IS NOT OUR SHADOW FACTION >>> deep defense, sue for peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" borders_all_our_regions="true" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="0.5" target_is_shadow="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" want_peace="true" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && he borders all our groups && his frontline strength is more than twice as large as ours &&
    					his free strength is greater than twice ours >>> deep defense, sue for peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" borders_all_our_regions="true" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" want_peace="false" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is greater than his
    					then >>> deep defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && his frontline strength is less than ours && his free strength is greater than ours,
    					then >>> conduct raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry free_strength_balance="0.7" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_raid" alliance_against="4" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war, and none of the previous rules apply,
    					then >>> frontline defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_frontline" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is greater than his,
    					then >>> deep defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is less than his,
    					then >>> fortified defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_fortified" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are not his weakest neighbour && we are allied to him,
    					then >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry target_weakest_neighbour="false" stance="Allied" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are his weakest neighbour && he is not at war elsewhere && we are not at war elsewhere,
    					then >>> frontline defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_weakest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry target_num_enemies="0" num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_frontline" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are not his weakest neighbour && he is not at war elsewhere,
    					then >>> normal defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry target_num_enemies="0" num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_normal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					DEFAULT: defend minimal
    				
      --> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
      </defend_decisions>
    - <invasion_decisions>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR 'CAN_ATTACK_FACTION', NO INVASION IF SO
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					Stop papal states attacking anyone for the first 20 turns
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry turn_number="20" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if target is a non-excommunicated catholic faction, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_religion="catholic" /> 
      <max_entry target_religion="catholic" enemy_excommunicated="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied and have only been allied for a short duration, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry num_turns_allied="3" stance="Allied" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we have agreed to a ceasefire only a short time ago, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_turns_ceasfire="0" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry num_turns_ceasfire="3" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If they are our protectorate, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry is_protectorate="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If they are a protectorate of a trusted ally, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry trusted_ally_protectorate="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If they are a protectorate of a catholic faction, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry is_protectorate_of_catholic="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					Not interested in factions that are not our neighbour, use defaults, may be overridden by forced/naval attacks
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry turn_number="30" target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="1200" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    					if we've more than twice his frontline strength, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" frontline_balance="2.0" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    					if we're superior on the frontline,	then >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" frontline_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war and it is very early in the game, do not invade (grabbing rebel regions instead)
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" turn_number="10" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if target is catholic faction we are not at war with, no invasion set up
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_religion="catholic" /> 
      <max_entry target_religion="catholic" stance="Neutral" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than five times his frontline strength && we're superior overall &&
    					we outproduce him, && IS NOT OUR SHADOW FACTION && IS NOT CHRISTIAN >>> propose he become vassal, invade immediate.  If not our shadow, also want to offer protectorate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="5.0" military_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" target_religion="islam" /> 
      <max_entry target_is_shadow="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="800" want_offer_protect="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than five times his frontline strength && we're superior overall &&
    					we outproduce him >>> propose he become vassal, invade immediate.  If our shadow, do not want to offer protectorate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="5.0" military_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="800" want_offer_protect="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than twice his frontline strength && he outproduces us && he is 
    					at war with more than one faction, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="2.0" target_num_enemies="2" /> 
      <max_entry production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="750" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than twice his frontline strength && we outproduce him && alliance
    					against this faction, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="2.0" production_balance="1.0" has_alliance_against="true" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="700" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we're superior on the frontline && we outproduce him,
    					then >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="650" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we're superior on the frontline && he outproduces us,
    					then >>> invade raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_raids" invade_priority="600" alliance_against="10" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war,
    					then >>> invade opportunistic
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="550" alliance_against="8" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					thrice his && overall superior >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="3.0" military_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="500" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are at war with someone else && our frontline strength is more than 
    					thrice his && we're 2:1 superior overall against these factions >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_enemies="1" frontline_balance="3.0" military_balance_plus_enemies="2.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="1" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="450" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than 
    					twice his && alliance against this faction && alliance is overall superior >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="2.0" has_alliance_against="true" alliance_military_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="400" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					1.5 times his && we outproduce him >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="1.5" production_balance="1.5" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="350" alliance_against="2" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && frontline superiority && alliance against 
    					this faction && alliance is superior overall && he is strongest neighbour >>> invade opportunistic
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="1.5" has_alliance_against="true" alliance_military_balance="1.0" strongest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="300" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					twice his && he outproduces us && he is our strongest neighbour >>> invade raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="2.0" strongest_neighbour="true" target_num_enemies="2" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_raids" invade_priority="250" alliance_against="6" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && we outproduce him && he is our strongest
    					neighbour, then >>> plan future invasion
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry production_balance="1.0" strongest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_start" invade_priority="200" alliance_against="1" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && we outproduce him && he is most desireable, 
    					then >>> plan future invasion
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry production_balance="1.0" most_desirable="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_start" invade_priority="150" alliance_against="1" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					DEFAULT: invade_none
    				
      --> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR FORCING ATTACK ON HUMAN IF AT PEACE WITH EVERYONE FOR TOO LONG (hard = 4 turns, normal = 10 turns, easy = 20 turns)
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
      </invasion_decisions>
      </faction_ai_label>
    - <!-- 	//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    	// CATHOLIC FACTION AI PARAMS.  REQUIRES SPECIAL STUFF TO REDUCE ATTACKING NON-EXCOMMUNICATED CATHOLIC FACTIONS //
    	//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    	
      --> 
    - <faction_ai_label name="catholic">
    - <defend_decisions>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR FORCING want_peace WITH A FACTION UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.  CONTINUES CHECKS FOR SUBSEQUENT DECISIONS
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we have any settlements, and we are at the very start of the game, and target is not human (cannot trust humans) >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" turn_number="10" target_human="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, and we are at the start of the game >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" is_neighbour="false" turn_number="30" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if target is non-excommunicated catholic faction, and they don't mind us much, and they are not obviously untrustworthy, minimal defense required
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_religion="catholic" target_faction_standing="-0.1" target_global_standing="-0.1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" target_religion="catholic" enemy_excommunicated="false" excommunicated="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					otherwise if target is non-excommunicated catholic faction, normal defense required
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_religion="catholic" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" target_religion="catholic" enemy_excommunicated="false" excommunicated="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_normal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude at_war="true" defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, and we are at war, and they are not a trusted allies enemy, use defaults + want peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" stance="AtWar" /> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" trusted_ally_enemy="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude want_peace="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if not our neighbour, and we have any settlements, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_settlements="1" /> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && he borders all our groups && his frontline strength is more than thrice as large as ours &&
    					his free strength is more than four times as large as ours, AND IS NOT OUR SHADOW FACTION >>> propose become protectorate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" borders_all_our_regions="true" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.3" free_strength_balance="0.3" production_balance="0.5" target_is_shadow="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" want_peace="true" want_be_protect="true" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && he borders all our groups && his frontline strength is more than twice as large as ours &&
    					his free strength is greater than twice ours, && IS NOT OUR SHADOW FACTION >>> deep defense, sue for peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" borders_all_our_regions="true" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="0.5" target_is_shadow="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" want_peace="true" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && he borders all our groups && his frontline strength is more than twice as large as ours &&
    					his free strength is greater than twice ours >>> deep defense, sue for peace
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" borders_all_our_regions="true" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" want_peace="false" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is greater than his
    					then >>> deep defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" alliance_against="7" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && his frontline strength is less than ours && his free strength is greater than ours,
    					then >>> conduct raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry free_strength_balance="0.7" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_raid" alliance_against="4" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war, and none of the previous rules apply,
    					then >>> frontline defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_frontline" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is greater than his,
    					then >>> deep defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && his frontline strength is more than twice ours && our free strength is less than his,
    					then >>> fortified defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry frontline_balance="0.5" free_strength_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_fortified" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are not his weakest neighbour && we are allied to him,
    					then >>> minimal defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry target_weakest_neighbour="false" stance="Allied" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are his weakest neighbour && he is not at war elsewhere && we are not at war elsewhere,
    					then >>> frontline defense
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_weakest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry target_num_enemies="0" num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_frontline" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are not his weakest neighbour && he is not at war elsewhere,
    					then >>> normal defense
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry target_num_enemies="1" num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_normal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					DEFAULT: defend minimal
    				
      --> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_minimal" /> 
      </decision_entry>
      </defend_decisions>
    - <invasion_decisions>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR 'CAN_ATTACK_FACTION', NO INVASION IF SO
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If trusted ally, there is a 90% chance to use defaults (no invasion), cannot force invade.  allows even trusted allies to occasionally backstab
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry trusted_ally="true" /> 
      <max_entry rand="0.9" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied, are somewhat trustworthy and have only been allied for a medium duration, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry global_standing="0.25" /> 
      <max_entry num_turns_allied="10" stance="Allied" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied and have only been allied for a short duration, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry num_turns_allied="3" stance="Allied" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we have agreed to a ceasefire only a medium time ago and are somewhat trustworthy, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_turns_ceasfire="0" stance="Neutral" global_standing="0.25" /> 
      <max_entry num_turns_ceasfire="10" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we have agreed to a ceasefire only a short time ago, no invasion set up, cannot force invade
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_turns_ceasfire="0" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry num_turns_ceasfire="3" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied and we are very trustworthy, there is a 80% chance to use defaults (no invasion), cannot force invade, (we are a trustworthy ally)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry global_standing="0.5" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Allied" rand="0.8" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied, we like them a lot and we are not untrustworthy, there is a 80% chance to use defaults (no invasion), cannot force invade, (we are a friendly ally)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.5" global_standing="-0.1" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Allied" rand="0.8" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied, we like them a bit and we are not very untrustworthy, there is a 65% chance to use defaults (no invasion), cannot force invade, (we are a friendly ally)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.25" global_standing="-0.25" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Allied" rand="0.65" /> 
      <faction_attitude can_force_invade="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are allied, we don't mind them and we are not very untrustworthy, there is a 50% chance to use defaults (no invasion), (we are a partially friendly ally)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.0" global_standing="-0.25" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Allied" rand="0.5" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are neutral and we like them, there is a 75% chance to use defaults (no invasion), (we are a friendly neutral)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.5" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" rand="0.75" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are neutral and we like them a bit, there is a 50% chance to use defaults (no invasion), (we are a friendly neutral)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.25" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" rand="0.5" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we are neutral and we don't hate them, there is a 25% chance to use defaults (no invasion), (we are a partially friendly neutral)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="0.0" stance="Neutral" /> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" rand="0.25" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If they are our protectorate, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry is_protectorate="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If they are a protectorate of a trusted ally, use defaults
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry trusted_ally_protectorate="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If they are the papal states and they like us, use defaults
    					(using their FS instead of ours, else it may not fire since papal states does not try to upset catholics)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="papal_states" target_faction_standing="-0.5" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="papal_states" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we have a cease hostilities mission against the target, and we like them above a threshold, and our global standing is reasonable, use defaults
    					(this will stop factions from attacking some targets if it will cause excommunication)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry faction_standing="-0.25" has_ceasehostilities="true" global_standing="-0.25" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					If we have a cease hostilities mission against the target, 50% chance to use defaults
    					(this will reduce chance of factions attacking some targets if it will cause excommunication)
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry has_ceasehostilities="true" /> 
      <max_entry rand="0.5" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					Not interested in factions that are not our neighbour, use defaults, may be overridden by forced/naval attacks
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry is_neighbour="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry turn_number="30" target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="1200" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    					if we've more than twice his frontline strength, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" frontline_balance="2.0" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    					if we're superior on the frontline,	then >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" frontline_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					special case the slaves faction - there are all sorts of things we don't want to do with the slaves
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <max_entry target_faction="slave" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="850" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war and it is very early in the game, do not invade (grabbing rebel regions instead)
    				
      --> 
      <max_entry stance="Neutral" turn_number="10" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than five times his frontline strength && we're superior overall &&
    					we outproduce him, && IS NOT OUR SHADOW FACTION >>> propose he become vassal, invade immediate.  If not our shadow, also want to offer protectorate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="5.0" military_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry target_is_shadow="false" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="800" want_offer_protect="true" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than five times his frontline strength && we're superior overall &&
    					we outproduce him >>> propose he become vassal, invade immediate.  If our shadow, do not want to offer protectorate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="5.0" military_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="800" want_offer_protect="false" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than twice his frontline strength && he outproduces us && he is 
    					at war with more than one faction, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="2.0" target_num_enemies="2" /> 
      <max_entry production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="750" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we've more than twice his frontline strength && we outproduce him && alliance
    					against this faction, then >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="2.0" production_balance="1.0" has_alliance_against="true" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="700" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we're superior on the frontline && we outproduce him,
    					then >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="650" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war && we're superior on the frontline && he outproduces us,
    					then >>> invade raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" frontline_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_raids" invade_priority="600" alliance_against="10" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're at war,
    					then >>> invade opportunistic
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry stance="AtWar" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="550" alliance_against="8" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					thrice his && overall superior >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="3.0" military_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="500" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we are at war with someone else && our frontline strength is more than 
    					thrice his && we're 2:1 superior overall against these factions >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry num_enemies="1" frontline_balance="3.0" military_balance_plus_enemies="2.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="1" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="450" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than 
    					twice his && alliance against this faction && alliance is overall superior >>> invade immediate
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="2.0" has_alliance_against="true" alliance_military_balance="1.0" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_immediate" invade_priority="400" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					1.5 times his && we outproduce him >>> invade buildup
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="1.5" production_balance="1.5" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_buildup" invade_priority="350" alliance_against="2" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && frontline superiority && alliance against 
    					this faction && alliance is superior overall && he is strongest neighbour >>> invade opportunistic
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="1.5" has_alliance_against="true" alliance_military_balance="1.0" strongest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_opportunistic" invade_priority="300" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && our frontline strength is more than
    					twice his && he outproduces us && he is our strongest neighbour >>> invade raids
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry frontline_balance="2.0" strongest_neighbour="true" target_num_enemies="2" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" production_balance="1.0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_raids" invade_priority="250" alliance_against="6" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && we outproduce him && he is our strongest
    					neighbour, then >>> plan future invasion
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry production_balance="1.0" strongest_neighbour="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_start" invade_priority="200" alliance_against="1" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					if we're not at war && we're not at war with anyone else && we outproduce him && he is most desireable, 
    					then >>> plan future invasion
    				
      --> 
      <min_entry production_balance="1.0" most_desirable="true" /> 
      <max_entry num_enemies="0" /> 
      <faction_attitude invade="invade_start" invade_priority="150" alliance_against="1" /> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					DEFAULT: invade_none
    				
      --> 
      </decision_entry>
    - <!-- 			<decision_entry>
    					SPECIAL CASE EXISTS HERE IN CODE FOR FORCING ATTACK ON HUMAN IF AT PEACE WITH EVERYONE FOR TOO LONG (hard = 4 turns, normal = 10 turns, easy = 20 turns)
    			</decision_entry>
    			
      --> 
      </invasion_decisions>
      </faction_ai_label>
    - <!-- 	/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    	// SLAVE FACTION AI PARAMS.  THEY DON'T REALLY DO ANYTHING //
    	/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    	
      --> 
    - <faction_ai_label name="slave_faction">
    - <invasion_decisions>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					Just use defaults
    				
      --> 
      </decision_entry>
      </invasion_decisions>
    - <defend_decisions>
    - <decision_entry>
    - <!-- 					Always try and defend the settlements
    				
      --> 
      <faction_attitude defense="defend_deep" /> 
      </decision_entry>
      </defend_decisions>
      </faction_ai_label>
      </root>
    and I honestly don't expect even a triple amount of that procedural behaviour script will bring us a more realistic AI.

  29. #29
    Masticator of Oreos Member Foz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    968

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Way to be helpful, Darth_napo. You posted an entire game file, and said absolutely nothing useful about it at all. Just... wow. The sheer laziness boggles the mind, not to mention how completely unhelpful it is. Perhaps you'd actually like to comment on the file for us instead of just blasting us with hundreds of lines of text you've copied?


    See my Sig+ below! (Don't see it? Get info here)

  30. #30
    Member Member Nebuchadnezzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250

    Default Re: The Complete Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Didz
    You sure about that...I'm pretty sure that my port in Edinburgh wasn't getting any money from Denmark for its dye until my diplomat agreed their trade rights. That was either directly linked or coincidental, in that prior to my diplomats visit Scotland didn't even know Denmark existed, map-wise anyway.
    Did you complete any building construction on that turn such as market or port upgrade as this can open new routes?

    From what I understand all that trade rights does is autcalc the most profitable price for a resource.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO