8000 fame in a 3 player game to my 4000 fame. The 2nd player is their vassal. The AI isn't accepting a surrender offer to become their vassal.

If this was a human player I'd be rather confused. "You've won. I accept."  ... "Okay but you haven't lost yet either, I decide when you've lost."

Also this kind of underscores something ... hmm
Should alliances mess with Fame scores.

Like ... maybe I dunno whatever

Ningauble wrote:

Also this kind of underscores something ... hmm
Should alliances mess with Fame scores.

Like ... maybe I dunno whatever

Hmmm maybe have a joint winner? At the end alliances (not including vassals) get marked as the winner. An alliances score is added together. So even those small civilizations can technically be marked as winners since they were in an alliance. The alliance could also have a generated name based on traits. You would still get the individual break down and the representative would be who has the highest and if the second highest in the game is also in that alliance then they would  also get 

10 player game *not accurate fame count*

1st place *primary nation a* 3000 fame with *sub nations a* 10000 total fame 5 nations

2nd place *primary nation b* 5000 fame with *sub nations b* 7000 fame 2 nations

3rd place *sub nation c* 2700 fame *sub nation a*

So this way while primary nation b has the highest fame individually their stats with their alliance was still under the 1st place alliance. Primary nation c has the third highest fame in the game. Since the highest in the alliance was counted as a representative for the entire alliance. Primary c gets third placed based on individual fame. As their individual fame was higher then any other alliance. 3rd place is just a accolade if this happens though. They would still have won first though. While the numbers definitely aren't accurate, this way the AI is encouraged to team play and encourage world wars near the end of the game.

If you just want to accept defeat and see the end game screen you can still concede the game, this option should be available in the pause menu.

Yutterh wrote:

Ningauble wrote:

Also this kind of underscores something ... hmm
Should alliances mess with Fame scores.

Like ... maybe I dunno whatever

Hmmm maybe have a joint winner? At the end alliances (not including vassals) get marked as the winner. An alliances score is added together. So even those small civilizations can technically be marked as winners since they were in an alliance. The alliance could also have a generated name based on traits. You would still get the individual break down and the representative would be who has the highest and if the second highest in the game is also in that alliance then they would  also get 

10 player game *not accurate fame count*

1st place *primary nation a* 3000 fame with *sub nations a* 10000 total fame 5 nations

2nd place *primary nation b* 5000 fame with *sub nations b* 7000 fame 2 nations

3rd place *sub nation c* 2700 fame *sub nation a*

So this way while primary nation b has the highest fame individually their stats with their alliance was still under the 1st place alliance. Primary nation c has the third highest fame in the game. Since the highest in the alliance was counted as a representative for the entire alliance. Primary c gets third placed based on individual fame. As their individual fame was higher then any other alliance. 3rd place is just a accolade if this happens though. They would still have won first though. While the numbers definitely aren't accurate, this way the AI is encouraged to team play and encourage world wars near the end of the game.

I do like this although the current AI/Balance can make it relatively viable to get the other empires to be in a state of 'mutual agreement' with everyone in the same alliance just accepting that Empire A is the winner. My hopes with this suggestion is that maybe alliances might behave a bit more like ES2 alliances and provide that mid to late game balance of power.