Zakhrov's strange behaviour

[aaglo]

Hi folks!
I'm currently in the middle of a game (Thinker level, Large random map Tech Stag on) and I'm playing with a customized faction. The enemies are University, Spartans, Morganites, Gaians, Fundamentalists and Datatech.

University makes me go . We started of on same medium continent, and in the beginning we made treaty. Time passed. We both had about 15 cities, when Zak started threathening me (his mood was seething). So I started bribing him on a regular basis - but his mood didn't change. Then some 40 turns later I got fed up with his annoying behaviour and he declared vendetta against me.

I was prepared, so after 3 turns I had captured two of his cities (the other had pre-sentient algorithms SP). Then Zakhrov succumbed , with a pact of loyalty . And he still had some 20 bases.

I'm just wondering, what the heck was that about. I have never come across with this kind of situation. Zakhrov's personality is Erratic, but this is ridiculous...

[Avenoct]

I've seen this kind of thing happen quite a few times. I believe the AI looks at your might, your army, and your tech and decides whether holding our or surrendering is the best option. If you are far superior you can expect lesser factions to submit quickly. But you are also correct in that there is an element of randomness to it. If there is a formula to best get factions to submit quickly, I've never seen it.

-Smack

[RedFred]

Getting a faction to submit with that many cities is great! It really will make your game easier.

I have had factions submit when I have had zero troops in their territory and have not fired a single shot. Part of it is chance, but if you go about it the right way you can enhance your chances.

[xobsidianx]

When you play against him, he will not share research with you in exchange for your research, yet according to his profile, research is his thing. The developers should have been consistent.

[spartak]

Originally posted by RedFred
Getting a faction to submit with that many cities is great! It really will make your game easier.

I have had factions submit when I have had zero troops in their territory and have not fired a single shot. Part of it is chance, but if you go about it the right way you can enhance your chances.

Have you any advice on this RedFred? If you do I might just let my next K beast go free!

[RedFred]

Somebody should ask Markos politely for a gasmaske smilie. Somehow I don't think he would go for it, though.

Ways to increase the rapidity of a surrender:

1. Be lucky
2. Stay with honourable reputation
3. Have other submissives ( don't ask me why, but once I start getting them it seems to be easier to get more surrenders)
4. Diplomacy. Sometimes I'll be whaling away on the AI and they will ask me for a tech. If you give it to them sometimes for no apparent reason they will surrender.
5. SE settings seem to matter a bit. Try not to run their aversion and try to run their agenda. But it is a minor help at best.
6. You seem to get a diplomatic bonus the more rapidly you contact the other factions and a hit if you are stuck on some island by yourself and go 50 to 100 years without seeing a soul. So you have another reason to explore early.
7. Be persistant. If you are in a conflict call the vendetta'd faction up every few turns. Keep refusing cease fire. The best time to dial them up on the comlink is when you are just about to capture a key city.
8. Others have suggested that a huge military machine on your side will make surrenders easier, but I haven't seen much evidence of that.
9. Capture several cities in the same turn. They either throw in the towel or start defending incompetently (alright, more incompetently than usual).

But being lucky and playing a lot of games are the best ways to see a complete capitulation without any units lost on either side. Counterintuitively, Santiago is the most likely to exhibit this bizarre behaviour in my experience.

[johndmuller]

I was playing an SP game as Miriam, testing a concept iln which Miriam is not allowed to build any units except probes (softened to allow 1 former), she is, however allowed to utilize any captured or gifted units.

In this game, Yang and Santiago share a contintent with Miriam (just the two who you'd be hoping for, right?); Yang and Santiago were apparently already fighting each other when I arrived on the scene and somehow we ended up in a Pact with Santiago.

Santi gradually takes over the Hive bases, while I get to steal Yangs tech and some of his units, whenever he sends some out of the bases. Eventually, there is just one Hive base left, with dozens of Spartan units and 2 of my probes hanging around - it's a tough base to approach (fungus, rocks or forests on all sides), so my non-elite probes can't jump in without getting zapped.

Finally, I take a chance, planning to move the probes in on two different adjacent sides, hoping for cover by Santi, but I move the first one in and Surprise, Yang surrenders to Miriam, with a tiny (and distant) army instead of Santi, with Planet's top military, much of it right outside the door. I don't even think that my reputation was real good.

[spartak]

RedFred. Thanks. Most useful. Consider my next KBeast to be tranqed and then released back into the wild.

The :gasmaske: is (c) Navarro. I got his permission before using it on this site - he made me a very nice avatar that I'm still waiting to use.

[Avenoct]

Some extrapolations (and there are many) of number 7 and 9 above are to:

a. take the AI capital city...they don't like that, and it weakens them as a submissive, so not a great choice.

b. as Minnesota Fat's said about how he won every pool game: "I just take all the easy shots, then there are no hard shots." In other words, take a bunch of lightly defended cities rather than one or two key cities. Often times the surrender will come when you then turn your units toward the capital or another key city. This is just about the opposite of playing a human.

-Smack

[Cybergod]

I have noticed that with non-pacifist factions, when you keep a vendetta for a LONG time, even without a single fight, they start acting like sh*theads that have had a genocide commited against them ... and won't surrender in any way

[Patriqvium]

I had a rather strange game a few weeks ago...

I was playing on the Huge Map of Planet, with random factions (it chose the Gaians for me). When I met Domai for the first time, he went bananas and pronounced Vendetta on me immediatly. After that, every attempt of contact was answered with the classic "nothing personal, but Planet simply isn't large enough for the both of us". His strange behaviour went on until I finally had the pleasure of wiping him out, 125 turns after that first contact...

[Velociryx]

::grin:: yep....a looooong time ago, when SMAC first came out, the term for Zak's odd-ball behavior was "Crazy Ivan."

That suits him pretty well, actually, and has to do with the way his faction is set up. Not a "builder" and not a war-monger in the way you can look at Morgan's and Miriam's faction files and deduce their tendencies.

The same basic behavior can be seen in erratic Lal, and a look at the faction files will reveal very similar construction, although in practice, AI Zak has better tech, and his superior tech position often puts him in the position of making sudden, radical political moves (something about the AI's reliance on his generally higher (well...higher than the other AI's anyway) tech level when determining relative power--even tho it is HORRIBLE at actually making USE of said tech lead).....

At least, that'd be my guess....

-=Vel=-

[Avenoct]

I think these effects could be quatifiable, but it would take one heck of a lot of research ("damn, I have to play another game?"). Cybergod, I've noticed that as well, that it's the long vendettas that turn out to be the most brutal to finally resolve...now that is quite human.

I'm wondering if anyone's ever calculated the cost/benefits of various war-making strategies? For instance, in the ideal, and often in the real, I try to wage wars: one at a time, with overwhelming advantage, as quickly as possible, and with objectives measured to the means. In other words, long Vendettas are to be avoided at some probably measurable cost.

A hypothetical example: Think about a 10-year war with Yang. The objective is to make him submit, but half-way through you realize he has twice as many bases as you thought (ALWAYS infiltrate!) and you are faced with a problem. Yang calls up and says "Zak, give me 500 EC's and that base there, and oh, a couple technologies, and we'll call it even". You could accept this and lose 500 EC's, a base, and a tech-margin over Yang. Or you could pursue the Vendetta knowing that it's going to cost you approximately 2 units a turn for 20 turns untill you develop airpower. Furthermore, you're at increased risk for suffering unknown offensives from our favorite Chairman.

20 turns * 2 units = 40 units or 800 minerals (perhaps). unsafe, more tech advantage.

20 turns * 0 + 500 EC's and a base = 500 EC's, one less base, more safety, less tech advantage.

Then of course you have to factor in the relative turn advantage of those 800 minerals. What would you build if you weren't sending units to the slaughter?

It seems to me that 'selling out' is quite often the more profitable route. Although the final calculations are going to be contextual and subjective, it might be worth estimating the costs before you refuse to be bought or sold.

-Smack

On the flip-side, many Vendettas are with factions so remote that the costs are minimal and the lost commerce insignificant.

[Xian]

Originally posted by xobsidianx
When you play against him, he will not share research with you in exchange for your research, yet according to his profile, research is his thing. The developers should have been consistent.

stole the words right out my mouth

[aaglo]

Originally posted by xobsidianx
When you play against him, he will not share research with you in exchange for your research, yet according to his profile, research is his thing. The developers should have been consistent.

Yes, it's true. But when he succumbs with pact, then he gives away tech for free (at least when you play KNOWLEDGE-value).

Another strange behaviour (maybe with all pact brothers&sisters):
When bases of two different factions are close to each other (sharing same tiles) and these two factions have made pact, the AI-faction (in my case = University) starts terraforming the tiles my base is working on! I mean those tiles that are in both base's radius... Now I have to plant forest time and time again...

I thought that one cannot terraform anothers land without a diplomatic impact...