• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
May I be the first to congratulate you on a balanced and detailed review by someone *in the know*. A lot of the features that you go into are very exciting for a Paradox veteran, like vassalage (does the AI seek vassals or does it tend to annex as in CK1?), the politics of warfare (the hostages element is very intriguing), and how the AI is directed through plots.
 
May I be the first to congratulate you on a balanced and detailed review by someone *in the know*. A lot of the features that you go into are very exciting for a Paradox veteran, like vassalage (does the AI seek vassals or does it tend to annex as in CK1?), the politics of warfare (the hostages element is very intriguing), and how the AI is directed through plots.

Thanks. Let me see if I can adequately answer your question about AI and vassals.

While playing, it looked to me like the AI preferred conquest when it had enough troops to secure total victory easily. When total victory was in doubt, but the weaker side was slowly losing, the AI seemed to ask for vassalage. However, the AI may instead be factoring in how much it likes opposing characters when making these decisions. I mention this because after about 20-30 years, there seemed to be a lot of hate and discontent between characters, mainly due to lower diplomacy scores in children born after the start of the game. I suspect that, as of the time they put out the preview copy, Paradox was still fiddling around with children, stats, fertility, and genetics, resulting in some oddities. My observations of AI behavior may just be a result of character interactions rather than military considerations.

On another subject, one thing that I decided to cut (in the interests of length) was a discussion of how the three main currencies of the game operate. Honor, cash, and manpower are all tied together in interesting ways. The game is not yet balanced, but cash is not necessarily king in Sengoku, unlike many other Paradox strategy titles (Trade income in EU, sound economic practices in Vic2, IC in HIO3). There is a finite amount of development provinces can sustain, and both ronin and ninja are impossible to spam, so at some point, it is worth the time and effort to invest in honor or manpower generating strategies rather than just building the economy. (This is where choosing to support one religion or another gets important; in two games I built a bunch of Shinto temples only to burn them all down and build Buddhist ones later because I needed manpower, not honor.) When the game is out and balanced, I will be interested to see how it all fits together.
 
Thanks for answering my questions, SM. The AI in EU3 DW seems to understand the value of prestige, so I hope the Sengoku AI takes honor seriously, at least to a degree, at least on par with land and gold. Are there peace options that in essence mostly humiliate your opponent like in EU3 (e.g., concede defeat), and do you get some kind of BB points for wanton conquest? I'm kind of curious if honor will be a way to restrain both human and computer players.
 
There is no infamy/bad boy mechanic as such. Other than angering the people you attack, conquest does not make you appear to be a threat. Obviously, the leadership of a clan you attack will not like you that much if they survive the current war.

On the other hand, thanks to the plot mechanic, you can usually count on someone always plotting against you (or your clan) at any time, making declarations of war tricky. The time to unleash a plot against another clan, or against the leader of your own clan is, in my mind, the moment they move against someone else. That means that larger clans are naturally in a position to be more careful when DOWing others. If you have a weak ruler that is not well liked, attacking another clan might just encourage some of your more restive vassals to plot.

Bear in mind that honor not only is spent attacking other clans and plotting, but it is a factor in lord/vassal relationships. Generally, the higher your honor, the more your vassals like you. That means that weak rulers will be more inclined to hoard their honor to stave off unhappiness among vassals. Spending honor to plot or declare war might use up honor you need to maintain the goodwill of your vassals. It's not an infamy or bad boy mechanic as such, but it does provide a more complicated war/no war decision tree for players. You are not budgeting infamy or bad boy so much as you are budgeting honor within the boundaries of your ruler's ability to interact with vassals.

The AI seems to take honor and cash seriously; however, because there are more limits on internal development of your clan's kori (provinces), there is a point where it makes more sense to DOW someone else than it does to sit on your hands and promote internal economic development. The AI realizes this and, at any time, there are probably 25 or more small wars being fought throughout Japan, many of which are 4-way fights. The AI sends ninja to destroy province improvements more than it tries to assassinate people right now (or maybe the AI prefers destroying my province improvements based on an algorithm that sees how developed my provinces are). I also did not see any AI clans near me that spent their honor frivolously. (There may have been some that did so, but I suspect the AI may have forced those vassals and clan leaders to commit seppuku to solve that little "problem.")

There is no "concede defeat" function that causes a loss of honor; however, conceding defeat does cause the loser to give up a hostage, securing an enforced peace (the winner does not give up a hostage in this case :) ). This makes forcing other clans to concede defeat more worthwhile because they are unlikely to retaliate in the near future with the life of a hostage (and the penalty to honor) at stake.