PON2-Subforum-help and hints requested for volunteer developing team

[Christophe.Barot]

this thread will welcome technical questions and confirmations, short ones, requesting direct answers andnot linked to a particular event, it'sd a pure tehchnical thread

for beginning : do state of war trigger a defensive alliance

I mean, a declaration of war to a nation triggers or should trigger a declaration of war from defensive allies

is just being at war (without any side declaring it, by event) triggers CB all the same (so who declared war doesn not matter) or does it NOT trigger it (opening way for subtleties almost guaranteeing duels (like a defensive treaty not covering this nation),obviously by event, like franco prussian, austro prussian, russao japanese, some russo ottoman wars (in 1877, Turkish atrocities dismayed even the British, who began to try to stop the Russians only when they came close to constantinople)

thanks (other will follow)

[Christophe.Barot]

ok, settling white peace or setting peace is no problem

but proposing peace to player (or even AI) without forcing it

[color="#FF0000"]you have to propose conditions, what is the syntax please, can we have a few samples of proposals with winning and losing peace, with conditions[/color]

[color="#40E0D0"]and while we're at it, wishlist, could we propose white peaces ?[/color] (and also script them)

[Christophe.Barot]

Not sure I ever saw one, and sure i never did one, but

what are effects on blockade - on [color="#FF0000"]trade [/color]I mean

theorically it should prevent the blockaded nation to use sea connection (at least from the coast blockading sea, Baltic or North sea for Germany, Atlantic or North sea for Britain, for example), both for foreign fleets accessing to home national capital trade box or foreign nations accessing to blockaded nation fleets (which can't make back to home national trade box theoretically, that's what blockade simulates)

I doubt game works this way ([color="#FF0000"]add to wishlist then[/color]), never tested - did someone do ?

still, so used would be a very powerful naval weapon adding to interest - just think of Italy losing access to British or US coal, having to relay on only german or Austrian surpluses, German trade interrupted or limited to baltic and fleets in baltic ( for sake of simplicity, we'll ignore the getting out of baltic through north sea problem, home fleet can blockade baltic too), or necessity for britain to maintain vital sea lanes open, lest lose her exports and access to colonial Empire , US, scandinavian ore, European or South American resources.

it is both historically accurate, and add interest to naval side of game (in same order, efficiency of submarine warfare on trade boxes should be checked) ! Naval supremacy is no longer lilmited to landing risks. this explains essential role of British navy during XIX century and duplicates it.

this gives, gamewise, to British player the power he indeed had. (don't mess with her Majesty Government unless you're prepared to face extremely unpleasant consequences ! no sir, we won't try to take Berlin, Paris, or Petersburg by an assault of Coldstream Guards or Black watch ! still you won't like it - consider it an official warning from Whitehall) and gives a realistic and efficient incentive, at least to players (AI will need more ..), to build fleets

hiostorically it was used, efficiently
- during Civil War
- during the Great War

and was most feared :
- by Japan (more as supply than for trade, in 1904-1905 RJW)

- by Italy (permanently had "never mess with britain" in mind)

- by Bismarck (here too, less for trades than for colony lines of supply and trabnsport - no way to keep supply for colonies, brits, and even french will make them fall - if we build a fleet, we'll get bruitain as enemy, then they will fall too, driop the colonies idea)

a definitive "to do" thing - unless ... is already done

[Christophe.Barot]

It would be simpler and allows cumulative effects, than controlling (which I'll do anyway) present applicable value (1850, 1860, 1880 or 1890) and setting very complex conditions

ciumulative effect would allow , still complex, agree, but simpler conditions

else could we get it (wishlist)



and, and and ...I'll keep begging

can we know the basic values, basic parameters, and algorythms (mathematic formulas) - player doesn't need to know precisely (better he plays agreeing to common sense than trying to reach a precise value) - but developers/designers do, even if they are woorking for free for AGEOD (we all work for a game and history we both love difference is we have other sources of income .... and less developing time too ...)

[Christophe.Barot]

AI or system does it, and use national morale too

I have certainly missed something, but I didn't see commands allowing to compare warscore

- either between nations the way we can compare unit count

- or compare it in absolute terms

for example we will propose/set a peace treaty for Balkan wars if (adding, or selecting higher of several warscore would be handy) Balkan states (or best of Bulgaria/Serbia/Greece) is superior to Ottoman one by a margin of at least 37 (for example), and another one if ottoman is better than 5 to average of 4 Balkanic states and Austria is at war against Rumania (it is just an example, remember)

how can we use it ?

[Christophe.Barot]

"Warscore is only relevant if Advanced Diplomacy is ON, as of May 9th 2013, only Pride of Nations have it. You can't switch to this mode and have it works, as a modder." (in Agewiki, warscore)

[color="#40E0D0"]how can we have access to advanced diplomacy[/color] ([color="#FF0000"]private answer is OK[/color]) we, or at least me, do NOT work for competitors, do not intend to ever work for competitors (I have utmost respect for Johann, but my "cup of tea" is not sandbox - and Philippe T is a friend since more than 20 years, I consider Pocus and Fernando as such too, and I never betray friends - in real life that is, a game of Diplomacy, i'd be less absolute )

we NEED the data and the process/formulas/algorithms to finish the work on this monster game !, as , with bugs and tuning and deadlines, you never had time to put Diplomatic system at same level as economy, colonialism, and military, it's already a wonder you did all you did with countless sleepless nights ! but we want put "massive perfusions of Bismarckian ADN" in AI - which requires more data on "the patient" (hence my confidentiality plea !)

only so can we detect missing parameters (for example national claims not taken into accounts, or alliances, or what do I know), or irrelevant ones (ranking for too different states, so they are not in direct competition - I seem to have detected a "badboy effect" when Russia, then in present game Germany. is it one ? does not seem accurate to me - for example is Montenegro worried by Russian power ? really ? who is a threat for a Montenegro ? (hint, AUS TUR), and who is a threat for the threat ? (hint RUS) so is a powerful RUS an inconvenience for Montenegro , no ? would Montenegro be reluctant to ally to a dominant REussia ? not only he would not be, but he would be more eager to ally to a powerful Russia than to a weak one ? why ? Montenegro ambitions is to survive and perhaps expand ..at ottoman expenses, and a weak Russia is no help ! conversely, allying to a powerless Russia is dangerous, as Ottoman could react nastily ! had you time to set AI so to consider this ? I hope it was given to you - I can't check anything - even if I understand that, without better, a badboy is better than nothing .. perhaps

ditto mobilization (real one, as a card in crisis module has no effect) provokes a worsening of relations ! I see the logic, but mobilization [color="#FF0000"]"against whom"[/color], it is supposed equating to militarism and agressiveness. let's say I'm[color="#40E0D0"] Austrian, I'm allied to germany [/color]! [color="#008080"]Russia masses troops at my border[/color], and let's imagine that I'm at war against Serbia, just a weird idea... and german mobilizes ! am I angry ? which mobilization effect simulates - or [color="#008080"]relieved, grateful,[/color] and with a better national morale ? are those conditions taken into account ? I'd understand you had no time for refining if it was the case, but could a dedicated fan staff analize those mechanisms and submit suggestions to your approval/validation now ?

ditto the snowball effect : obvious for diplomatic relations ! very difficult to correct for a sandbox game but, very precisely, PON is NOT sandbox, was designed to allow taking into consideration personalized parameters a sandbox game wouyld not allow. nobility prejudices can be factored in game country by country, dependance on trade, or imported coal too !

a discussion about effect and cause can enlighten us, like Mac Naughton 's who opened my eyes on the [color="#40E0D0"]massive effect of Russian fleet destruction[/color] at japanese hands on the possibility and desirability or desirability of a [color="#40E0D0"]Russian entente for British[/color]

... or kensai discussion allowing me to figure out precisely[color="#40E0D0"] what an Austrian victory would have meant[/color] (not just a statu quo till Prussia succeeds, but still manageable situation)

did you think why,[color="#40E0D0"] in spite of their structural enmity to Austria, Italy never considered an alignment with Russia [/color](another rival of Austria, with ups and down relationships) ? Italy always looked towards France or Germany. answer is ..... Britain ! Britain was Russia big enemy, and Italy just [color="#40E0D0"]couldn't afford to offend Britain[/color], would have meant blockade, and Italian economy just stopping by shortage of imported coal (among other consequences, colonial situation would have been a mess too). ONLY when Russian-British relatioins improved did Italy came closer to Russia (Racongini).

Ditto, if I[color="#40E0D0"]taly came to form triple alliance [/color]in reaction to France Tunisian takeover, it is not only by conscience of her isolation (as japan after triple intervention), which explains the German alliance. But the full move, including alliance with ... [color="#40E0D0"]Austria[/color], her arch enemy, and no was of [color="#40E0D0"]no help against France[/color] (sure Austria could have helped would French troops invade venetia ...but war would more likely have been fought in Africa or on the seas) was caused by impossibility to win against Austria, as was allied with Germany, and perhaps with Russia too (3 emerors alliance), meaning that Germany and Russia at least wouldn't help. so a[color="#40E0D0"]llying with Austria, a german ally[/color], also - both [color="#40E0D0"]differed a pointless irredentism[/color] and[color="#40E0D0"] ensured an effective protection[/color], not forcing Germany to choose with two allies.

Same reasoning with [color="#40E0D0"]Britain [/color](german threat, [color="#40E0D0"]not forcing France to choose between britain and Russia[/color])

conversely German opinion, and kaiser were reluctant to renew alliance with Russia because of her rivalry with Austria (effects of pangermanism and panslavism too). ditto Bjorko failed because, conversely to the Czar, Russian [color="#40E0D0"]cabinet was fully aware[/color] than an alliance with germany was uncompatible with their alliance with France, and would have put all cards into germany hands, not theirs. as a [color="#40E0D0"]german ally was no use for France[/color].

is this billiard game taken into account ?

we need the formulas to see input factors , check and improve (submit improving)

we need also the formulas to check and prevent the snowball effects we see happen every game. [color="#40E0D0"]the better relations you have, the more you are likely to improve[/color] them. but [color="#FF0000"] relations depended primarily of external factors[/color], alliances were a result, not mainly a cause - sure they helped, but[color="#40E0D0"] were made to serve a (geopolitical objective/security) purpose[/color].

for example, effect of alliances on relations - it seems they drive relations to 100, the maximum possible how and why ?

does alliance improve relations each turn with no ceiling ? at what speed ?
or do they improve of, let's say towards a bonus of, let's say +50 compared to normal reference point ?

in one case, formula is flawed, in the other case, parameter is just set too high ! but blind, how to know

it seems to me it should work thgat way
relations have a natural reference point, towards which they naturally evolve
reference point is set in game, depending on implicit natural relations, cultiural factors (serbs like russians, italy and austrians dislike each other)

some situations improve or worsen relationships, structurally - act like a static bonus for reference

an alliance should do that during the time she is in effect, but take care to cap effect
conversely owning national provinces of anothger country is a permanent static malus factor for their relations

was just two examples of many factors
actions should improve or worsen realtions temporarily (one shot) -- concluding an alliance, declaring war, breaking an allaince, conquering a province

but without the formulas, we act blind...
we can script to force things to happen, but to influence things accurately with more subtlety, we need the formula and basic uninfluenced figures

[Jim-NC]

Not sure I ever saw one, and sure i never did one, but

what are effects on blockade - on [color="#FF0000"]trade [/color]I mean

theorically it should prevent the blockaded nation to use sea connection (at least from the coast blockading sea, Baltic or North sea for Germany, Atlantic or North sea for Britain, for example), both for foreign fleets accessing to home national capital trade box or foreign nations accessing to blockaded nation fleets (which can't make back to home national trade box theoretically, that's what blockade simulates)

I doubt game works this way ([color="#FF0000"]add to wishlist then[/color]), never tested - did someone do ?

still, so used would be a very powerful naval weapon adding to interest - just think of Italy losing access to British or US coal, having to relay on only german or Austrian surpluses, German trade interrupted or limited to baltic and fleets in baltic ( for sake of simplicity, we'll ignore the getting out of baltic through north sea problem, home fleet can blockade baltic too), or necessity for britain to maintain vital sea lanes open, lest lose her exports and access to colonial Empire , US, scandinavian ore, European or South American resources.

it is both historically accurate, and add interest to naval side of game (in same order, efficiency of submarine warfare on trade boxes should be checked) ! Naval supremacy is no longer lilmited to landing risks. this explains essential role of British navy during XIX century and duplicates it.

this gives, gamewise, to British player the power he indeed had. (don't mess with her Majesty Government unless you're prepared to face extremely unpleasant consequences ! no sir, we won't try to take Berlin, Paris, or Petersburg by an assault of Coldstream Guards or Black watch ! still you won't like it - consider it an official warning from Whitehall) and gives a realistic and efficient incentive, at least to players (AI will need more ..), to build fleets

hiostorically it was used, efficiently
- during Civil War
- during the Great War

and was most feared :
- by Japan (more as supply than for trade, in 1904-1905 RJW)

- by Italy (permanently had "never mess with britain" in mind)

- by Bismarck (here too, less for trades than for colony lines of supply and trabnsport - no way to keep supply for colonies, brits, and even french will make them fall - if we build a fleet, we'll get bruitain as enemy, then they will fall too, driop the colonies idea)

a definitive "to do" thing - unless ... is already done

I saw it once, and it did nothing (US Civil War in MP game). The south could still sell, even with capital "blockaded". Interestingly enough, when Richmond fell, south could no longer trade with anyone. Which is a shame, as trade should could have still happened from Charleston, or other unblockaded ports (I believe this is a game engine limitation/decision - all trade with foreign countries flows through capital region. No capital, no trade). It appears to be an all or nothing, you can either trade or not.

[Christophe.Barot]

AI.ChgLocalInterest or AI.SetLocalInterest

is an interesting way to force AI into adopting a human developer/designer strategic analysis ("look, my Boy, defending Ottoman Empire against Russia is really interesting for you now, you should block him into Varna, invade Sevastopol and crush Black Sea fleet onece and for all"or "be nice and don't send all those american troops in Africa, even if Gladstome is serving you free burgers there", or, "Market garden into Khiva is really a lot of (rope) bridges too far", or "hey ho, Mikado, Formosa awaits you, be gung ho", or "Majesty, you should REALLY mass a home fleet in North sea, yes, yes, I assure you"

BUT

we don't have any clue of basic value of [color="#FF0000"]basic values [/color]we're going to try to modify

[color="#FF0000"]any way, any tool we can know them, or check them ?[/color]

[Christophe.Barot]

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/EvalNatThreats

first, what is the definition, concept of threat (I mean in game, for AI, in real life and as a player I know that, thank you)

that is, being in war isn't enoughj you need to have forces ? naval ? land only ? where ? near capital ? national territory ?

what is the notion of enemy at peace ?


Parameters :

ChanceOKAtWarThreat The chance to have the test passed if the nation is at war and threatened (morale is 50 or lower, or enemy land units are worth 1.25 or more own's value).
1.25 worth own value ?[color="#FF0000"] where ? at all worldwide ? is a test of global balance ?
[/color]
ChanceOKAtPeaceThreat The chance to have the test passed if the nation is at peace but threatened (nations with hostile relationships (-25 or below) have land units combat value worth 1.25 or more own's value).
with such criteria (is a[color="#FF0000"] "and" or "or"[/color], btw) especially second one, Montenegro will always consider russia a threat ? 1.25 ratio strength is ridiculous and inaccurate criteria - also is an hostile Japanese 1.25 strength meaningful for Montenegro ? I mlean, if kjapanese forces are in Far East and Montenegro in Balakns, could be on planet Mars itself ...
[color="#FF0000"]what is effect of alliances, an ally with a 1.25 is a threat ?[/color]