Thanks, Q, for your warm welcome.
I might try tinkering with the anger settings. And I believe you are right that the anger against MEEs increases each turn. But, to be exact, the fact that it takes different AI players more or less turns to become murderous or to declare war on you neither speaks for nor against permanent anger increases. It's rather the fact that, eventually, they all become murderous. Even those AI players who really really loved you, i.e. who loved you more than 50 points worth! Now, if even your most fanatic admirers - after a few more turns than your Cold War opponents - try to slice your throat, then your MEE status must have really broken their hearts.
The point I want to get to: Is the MEE function realistic if it works permanently against you? I don't think that's how politics works. Let me just throw out a few things here:
1) The term Mega Evil Empire (MEE) is slightly off-target. It should rather be called Evil Mega Empire (EME). The point is not that it's mega evil, but that it's evil and mega, meaning huge. An empire which is evil, or even mega evil, but small should'nt be much cause for concern. But if it's evil and huge, then our alarm bells should ring.
2) From that follows that besides empires that are huge and evil there, of course, can also be empires that are huge but benign. Call them Benign Mega Empires (BMEs), if you wish. Why should any AI player's anger rise against an empire which is huge but benign. Let's say the BME has put more resources in far-reaching exploration, quicker colonization, faster research, better population development etc. Again, the point is: Why do AI players turn against me only because I score more than 500k and more than 170 % of the second-ranked player?
3) Here's a real-world example: Some may disagree with me, but I would argue that the U.S. as the sole remaining superpower could be seen as relatively Benign Mega Empire. In game speech, I would call the Soviet Union an Evil Mega Empire. (Okay, in the real world I have some reservations regarding Reagan's simplistic phrase of the "Evil Empire." But that's not the issue here.) Now, don't many, especially European, countries by and large accept U.S. leadership in a pretty unipolar world? Shouldn't the game allow for a Pax Americana, a Pax Romana, or a Pax Something? Are countries taking on the U.S. just because it scores so much higher than the second-ranked country - whichever it is? Why should the AI players be so suicidal in the face of a BME?
4) Another example: You may argue that the MEE function does nothing more than translate the British balance-of-power politics into a game setting. In the 19th century, the Brits always saw for it that neither France, Russia, Prussia, or Habsburg Austria would be getting too powerful. And yet, I would argue that, nowadays, the Brits wouldn't take on the U.S. even if they could. They just share too many interests and are the closest allies since World War I, celebrating their "special relationship."
To wrap it all up, here's my suggestion:
1) Distinguish between Evil Mega Empires (EMEs) and Benign Mega Empires (BMEs).
2) Yes, keep the balance-of-power politics element in the game and have AI players become angry at, feel threatened by, and grow jealous of sheer power and size - in absolute and relative terms (absolute aggregate score, percentage difference in aggregate score to second-ranked).
3) But factor the evilness of the Mega Empire into this. How often does it declare war on others? How far does it stretch out into the vastness of space? How many systems, rather than planets, has it colonized? These are objective measures.
4) Trigger anger, jelousy, and fear because of a Benign Mega Empire's sheer size and power much later than anger against an Evil Mega Empire.
5) Don't accumulate anger against Mega Empires. Introduce multiple thresholds resulting in ever higher anger increases, but only once, when the threshold is passed. Mega Empires should have a chance to reconcile other players with gifts and - above all - time. If the Mega Empire is already that big that it constantly steps on somebody's toes and can't evade constant battling, thereby making others even angrier, well, then it's probably really too big.
6) Trigger thresholds should vary based on empire characteristics. Have empires react differently to benign and evil expansion: How do the Mega Empire's racial traits, culture, and demeanor relate to ours? (After all, since 1816 no two democracies ever fought a war against each other.) A democratic empire might ask, did the apparently Evil Empire fight other democracies or just slaveholder societies? A pacifist democracy probably wouldn't care. It's against war, and that's it. It would become very angry, but it would take a long time to translate this anger into a declaration of war.
Okay, that's it for now. Sorry to have bothered you with my deep thoughts. I thought I throw this out. These are just suggestions. Maybe somebody wants to pick them up.
I think they would strongly improve the politics of the gameplay. I'm aware, however, that there may be one major problem with my suggestions: I guess SE4s AI still needs to be worked on. For now, most of us actually want the AI players to declare war on us as soon as possible. But ... it's not realistic.
Servus aus Wien!
[ 15 December 2001: Message edited by: Steppenwolf ]
Mega Evil Empire - Triggered once or every turn?
Please advice. Thanks!
Linear Mode
