Not really, no, when Corruption is low, there is a penalty that is unique to that faction. There isn't very many to choose from, so it is a penalty that is available that pertains to them. The only thing that matters is, the Corruption should not be low, if you can help it.

When Corruption is high, conversely, that faction gets a bonus that is unique to them. Again, there isn't that many to choose from, so I am simply using the ones that are available. But the only thing again that matter is that you want Corruption as high as possible, and when it is at the highest levels, you will get a bonus.

I am a bit confused about some of these buffs/debuffs.
khorne loses exp for all units at low corruption ,but gains...replenishmend only for his daemons on high corruption?
nurgle has lower health for 3 units at low corruption but gains replenishment for his daemons again?
these changes seem a bit all over the place.

Ah, that was in response to my previous comment.

Yes, still testing it out, nearly done with a campaign and then I will push it in an update. Hard to tell if it is helping the AI or not without playing a lot of turns...

Waiting eagerly!

Actually, for what its worth, I figured out what was breaking the test, and no I am experimenting with another idea that might help the AI emphasize building of Corruption buildings. But the point is, I am still looking into it.

Nevermind, I tested it and it does break things. In any case, I am 145 turns into a current campaign and I do see plenty of Tzeentch and Slaanesh corruption taken hold in provinces in my area (I am not near Khorne), like over 70+ corruption or more. In my game Slaanesh took over the entire "Elven Toilet Seat" (what I call the high elves' island) and totally consumed it with Slaanesh corruption.

So I think the AI's ability to spread corruption is more to do with whether they have a good start in that campaign, and whether they get established or not.

Actually... I may have found something the AI uses to put "weight" on deciding which buildings to construct, individually. I will experiment with this and see if it helps then if it does, I will update the mod after I know it doesn't break anything.

I can take a look, but I doubt it it is possible to tell the AI to emphasize specific building construction, probably just classes of building (ie. military, economic, etc), but maybe there is something there for control buildings.

On the other hand, I have seen Corruption from the AI, but what it really requires is that the faction is successful in expanding. What I mean is, every time you play the game some factions (usually the same ones) will spread dominantly, and some will not. If, for example, a vampire lords, chaos, Skaven, or Khorne spreads its territory then Corruption will take hold. But if they do not, then it won't take hold, because they end up controlling one region in a province, for example. The same is true for the player, and in that regard I think it is good. But that said, I will still try to improve the AI however I can.

Is there a way you can prioritize the AI to build buildings or get skill points to raise corruption? Right now your mod has completely eliminated corruption from the world since the AI is unable to maintain it.

Thanks, glad you like them.

Hmm, I am afraid I have never messed with diplomacy. I could look into it, but then perhaps it might be better to look for a small supplemental mod on the workshop that might specialize in that area.
...(that is, if there is such a mod on the workshop, I don't really know - maybe someone here in the comments might be able to help and point one they like out).

@Volcano I use all of your mods and I really enjoy them. I was wondering if you could do something similar with reliability? I feel like, just like corruption and control, the system is underutilized and unbalanced. I see many possibilities which could remove reliability points based on actions that you and the AI take. Examples like trespassing (finally trespassing for the AI would mean something), declaring wars (small reliability rating if declaring war while your armies are in friendly territory vs trespassing for a blitz attack), being at war for too long, etc.

I feel like this mechanic would further aid the goal of your mods which helps slowing down the campaign

alright, cheers i'll go test then :)

It might, because it sounds like they just added another effect to Khorne corruption, and this mod only replaces the original effects. Best thing to do is try it out and see how it plays together.

does your mod work similiar to SFO, as an example, khorne corruption at 75 or higher in SFO makes factions that don't like that corruption rampage in battle and such

I updated it, no more capital letters in the tables. It was tedious, and CA says they will fix it, but I don't quite trust that a future update will not break it again so the change/fix here doesn't hurt.

This mods needs to be updated I think. As of 6.1: "MAKE SURE YOUR PACK CONTENTS - as in, the table names or lua file names and everything like that - DO NOT CONTAIN CAPS. That'll straight up crash the game from now on." - from the Modding Den

Thanks.

No it affects the AI too, but they have their inherent benefits of course.

This only affects the player correct?

Can you add these changes in the Tomb King desert corruption and Kislev ice corruption mods?

SFO COMPATIBLE??

@annatar thanks for the recommend
@volcano thanks for even considering it!

OK, yeah, I will leave this mod like it is. That mod (VCIAS) is pretty extensive (nice work), and unlike other modders I try to avoid straight lifting other people's work and rolling it into their own mod.

So, I will leave it up to personal preference, and if that is the way you want it then use that mod with this one. They seem like they would work together fine.

...thinking about it more:

Or perhaps I should just leave it up to people to use that mod together with this one, if they want it to play that way. I mean, I can see that perhaps having your vassals get overtaken by corruption could be a form of subjugation (keeping them weak), or could encourage you to make same-corruption factions your vassals (meaning, it might be a matter of personal preference).

I'll think about it as I play the current campaign and get more vassals.

@Annatar, thanks for the info - sounds like I need to look into how that was done.

@Riftwalker there is a mod for that, "vassal corruption immunity and spread" by Selonianth.

It doesn't seem so, because it has to do with whether the corruption is "good" "bad" or "neutral" to the race itself, as standard behavior. I had an Empire faction as a vassal to Sylvania, and they suffered from corruption effects, but it wasn't too bad for them - but of course they aren't going to be taking over half the map like that. They were mainly a source of recruitment units, which feels about right for the situation.

do you think it's at all possible to make it so vassals aren't adversely effected by their sovereign corruption type?

Well, it probably isn't compatible with that mod - seem like that other mod adds extra Corruption, which would make it incompatible, unfortunately.

also using Ashua/Rhox's seasons and holiday mod which can randomly give vampiric corruption, but also chaos one so i think they equal themselves out

Playing as Engra (WoC from LCCP, in IEE), also using your control mod. All my provinces are virtually full of vampiric corruption and i am getting a revolt every few turns - i am not quite sure how i am supposed to lower vampiric corruption and increase chaos one. i built the control building that also gives corruption, but doesnt seem to matter. Would appreciate some advice.

...
The best way to get rid of adjacent Corruption spread is to destroy the source, of course. So I guess the point is, adjacent Corruption is and should be handled differently than normal, as it is the hardest thing to do, and because it is essentially considered "upper tier" Corruption spreading.

But, I will still keep it in mind as I play my campaigns, and see if I can think of anything possible or necessary to adjust. For the time being though, I was satisfied with how it works in this regard, but I will keep an eye on it.

Thanks. Adjacent Corruption is a bit complicated.
Exerting Corruption into adjacent provinces is not easy - there isn't a lot of things that do it. The highest tiered rare buildings do it, mainly, and that is about it, and when it does, it is something like +1,3 or 5. Your own Corruption cannot get above 40 because it needs more positive Corruption influence behind it to get to the next tier, and there are a lot of ways to do that.

However, adjacent Corruption has very small to minimal positive influences, and so it cannot work in the same way or else it would never get higher than 10 or 20 if it worked in the same way. This is why I think having it work like a spreading cancer, where the counter would be your own Corruption (the higher tiers will start to negate adjacent Corruption gains), or by putting Heroes there that reduce bad Corruption gains (they have traits and skills that do this).
...

@Volcano
The mode is great! I always thought about the weakness of control and corruption mechanics in vanilla. Now I found a solution.

But I have noticed a small issue. I play Tzeentch and have a border with Slaanesh. When Slaanesh built the capital to level 4 it had an effect: "Slaanesh corruption in adjacent provinces: +5". So in my province, I constantly have +5 of Slaanesh corruption, and it never stops. On the other hand, my Tzeentch corruption stops to grow at a value of around 40. I think corruption in adjacent provinces should work as corruption in the current province, it should also get a debuff (now it shows as "effects" if I move a mouth on the corruption panel).

Take a look at the example here https://youtu.be/o3sosRQCZTw

Understandable. Thanks

@Bardin
Well, I would, but the problem is there is no way to actually see the different levels of Corruption (not like you can with Control), unless you are actually at that particular level of Corruption. With Control you can mouse over the different levels and see the effects, but not with Corruption.

This means that in order to show any useful pictures, I'd have to load up each Corruption type faction and get the corruption at least high, low and middle to take pictures. But maybe I can take a few sample ones. Well, the other issue is that I tend to adjust the values over time, so the pictures would be quickly obsolete, most likely.

@iCameHereForTheMusic
Right, well, since it is actually lowering the melee attack power, then it is also actually weakening the units if you fought the battle yourself, and we aren't talking about a huge decrease either here. So I think it should be fine, not much different than what it does already in the auto-resolve.

Hi man, this mod is very promising. Can you please put screenshots of your campaign corruption effects in the pictures of the mod?

When playing slaanesh they have a reputation for having poor AutoResolve scores (leading to higher AR damage taken) + slow army replenishment. Making playing them a bit of a pain when ARing a trivial fight sets you back several turns (moreso than normal). Worth noting that anything nudging their AR performance in either direction will affect the AI's willingness to engage which can be cheesed unless it also impacts their manual battle performance to a similar extent. (lowering their attack makes their AR score lower, which makes AI willing to bring a smaller/weaker army to fight. If the difference is small enough to barely affect the results of manual then the AI's weaker army will get stomped even harder)

...of course probably the best thing for me to do is play through a Slaanesh campaign once my Vampire Counts campaign is complete, though. Only then I might be able to see exactly what is needed here. A Slaanesh campaign is on the to-do list.

@cybvep
OK, I fixed/improved that just now, low Slaanesh Corruption no longer reduces their replenishment rate, instead it is a slight melee attack penalty to Slaanesh led armies. I think that is OK. I was forgetting about the "unique" penalty added, when I was making my previous comments, my mistake. I also changed the description.

One thing I want to mention is - you said their Heroes do not replenish? There is an effect to increase replenishment specifically for Heroes, and that might make sense for high Slaanesh Corruption bonus, perhaps.

Sorry, I wouldn't know how to do that since I don't use other mods.

Could this be expanded to incorporate 'Corruption of Hashut' for Chaos Dwarf? It's an newly added one via a mod.

OK, I see why you mentioned it, here:

__(Slaanesh) provincial, unique: Penalty to replenishment rates of Slaanesh units

Right, I think that might be a mistake, I will look into that. If it isn't a mistake then I will either make sure the penalty is minimal, or swap it with something else. The problem is that there isn't a lot of Slaanesh specific effects to utilize.

Now that said, nothing here is claimed to be perfect, but at the moment I like how it is working. I may nudge the bonus values around over time though. It could be that I make the bonus half as much as the penalty, who knows.

OK, well I disagree about the leadership bonuses, especially because here for Corruption to be at the highest levels, it means that Corruption faction is on the defensive in their own turf. It would make sense that they are harder to eradicate there.

For the leadership penalties, being in areas they have low Corruption, they are more fragile because their Corruption hasn't taken hold. It makes sense to me that the opposite should be true in areas that they have high Corruption, so I like how it works here.

Slaanesh here does NOT receive replenishment bonuses. Not sure why you mention it, unless I mentioned it in the description above by mistake? Maybe I did...

Basically, replenishment here is only a bonus, not a penalty, leadership is a bonus and a penalty.

LD penalties are more interesting because there is not as many sources of them as in case of LD bonuses. It's a good way of countering LD bonuses. In some cases it may also lead to some shock tactics being more effective which is always more interesting than units fighting almost to the death. Just sth to consider.

As for Slaneesh, in its current state that race should never receive replenishment penalties (bonuses are fine). Replenishment is bad enough for Slaanesh with no other factors involved and they have no access to a replenishment hero, so it's hard to counter this.

LD = Leadership, MA = Melee Attack. I gave MA as an example for a potential other bonus. LD bonuses are overused in the game and as a result they tend to be the most boring ones. LD is a bit trivialized, as by mid-game many units end up with inflated LD values and fight almost to the death unless it's army losses or an extreme situation. There are many traits which give LD bonuses to the army, as well as skills, techs etc. When player choice is involved (like with skills), LD is usually low priority unless it's a super specific case (like daemons and undead because of crumbling/banishment mechanics or total trash like skavenslaves which otherwise rout almost instantly). It should also be mentioned that your control mod also provides a LD bonus at high levels, so you are doubling down in that case and I don't think it's the best course of action.

I just looked, actually that is exactly what I did for Slaneesh already, at high Corruption (that is their bonus); they have a bonus in replenishment for "Slaanesh marked demon units".

I see that I missed this in the description, so I will fix that.

One more thing regarding #1...

In my opinion, a Leadership bonus is safer than a Melee Attack bonus, because Leadership just means that hang around longer before routing. It doesn't make it impossible, and there are plenty of effects that reduce leadership during the battle (like spells to make units rout), and if they stick around longer what does it mean - they just have to be killed off more before breaking.

A bonus to Melee Attack is risky though, for example the Vampific factions have all their Zombie/Skeleton spam units, and what we don't need is them attacking better (Skaven is similar with their rat hordes). On the other hand, Skaven rout if you fart in their general direction, and if Vampire factions rout then the whole army crumbles, so Leadership bonuses make more sense to me, as a safer boost. And again, as mentioned, the bonuses are not extreme, just a nice small boost.