*Professor voice* Good news, everyone!I found out that it wasn't just low maintenance cost that caused the AI to spam warriors and slingers. It turns out that almost no military land units had their pseudoflavors set up to point to "combat unit", and builders didn't have their pseudoflavors set up either. The instant I set them, the AI stopped spamming Warriors and Slingers and actually diversified their army! v8 will include the fix, as.Siesta Guru said: ↑ I hope the allow disband can be made to work and does something interesting. They may have just forgotten to add the UserData thing, with actual code ready in the dll. A simple update of the definitions could do enough.Way ahead of you, I changed this in v2 of my mod.Siesta Guru said: ↑ So some good news here, you can at least add items to the operationtypes enum, and I've been able to succesfully use that to create different types of attacks and behaviors. I'm experimenting with a small 'firestarter' operation that basically just declares war with a neighbour if a strategy sets the limit for that operation to 1. Other enums that have no clear meaning may also work.It would be awesome if we could create pseudoyields, and just slap unique pseudoyields on all combat units.The problem with this is that there's no inheritence system for pseudoyields, so e.g. if a new pseudoyield is introduced that's meant to be a subcategory of an existing pseudoyield (e.g. combat unit -> unique combat unit), then the only way to get the parent pseudoyield modifiers to trickle down to the child is to manually add them in for the child for every case, possibly breaking compatibility with other mods that alter pseudoyields (e.g. they might alter all combat pseudoyields to renormalize them, but because they haven't accounted for your new pseudoyields, so your new pseudoyields that aren't renormalized will mess with the old pseudoyields that are).