Red Diplomacy Options

[Kc7mxo]

I can't understand why they designed the game so that I can't even ask/demand/beg for something the AI has. Half the empires in my last game wouldn't even consider opening borders with me so far.

I can't negotiate with some of my neighbors whatsoever because they simply won't listen to anything.

This really leads to very boring diplomacy. At least let me try and bribe them or something.

[Rychro Anrise]

Well, that's just the point. Anything red is something the nation would never, ever consider to do at this given point. Despite how much cash you throw at someone, you're not going to make them convert to Buddhism. I enjoy it purely because it's efficient. If its red, don't even bother clicking it.
Plus, if you're trying to get an open borders agreement with somebody who is in a relationship decline with you, you can never get that agreement. Twenty technologies or not, they just don't like you.

[Bill3000]

It happened in Civ3 from what I believe as well, although it wasn't a strict "we won't trade" red label - cities were a prime example of this. It's convinient and prevents frustration.

Plus, do you think a PC would have done those same decisions that you would want to negiotate with the AI about?

[Kc7mxo]

I don't agree, I think that there should always be a price. Almost everyone will bend for the right amount of leverage. But at the very least it should be discussable. Why even HAVE diplomacy if they never use it?

[notyoueither]

'Hi, Mr. Bush?

Yeah, it's me, Osama. How about we do a deal? How much for New York City?

What do you mean you'd rather see it as radioactive glass?

Whatever, poof! Come get me!

Now, about that tech for stealth. How much?

What do you mean, 'look out my window to receive the counter offer?'

Wait, you can't do that...bzzrrpubt'

[Kc7mxo]

Yeah. But if your neighbor who plays music a lil too loudly offered you 5 grand for your bush, are you going to say no to that?

I'm not talking bribing my most hated enemy here, I'm talking my Japanese neighbors, who share my religion, I have never been to war with, have given them several resources and gold yadda yadda, and yet are still too annoyed with me because I live next door to them and once refused to declare war on someone for them have therefore refused to discuss anything for the past three thousand years. . . .

[Tiberius]

Well, I must say that I agree.

After two played games I bother less and less to open the diplomacy screen. If there is something the AI wants to trade they will come anyway and offer it. All other options are red all the time.

Certainly two games are not a solid base for an analysis, but atm diplomacy seems less interesting than it was depicted.

[notyoueither]

It sounds to me as if you are making yourself personna non grata with all the neighbours.

Toku, and a few others, are tough nuts to crack. But everyone? You've got a serious socialisation problem if you can't get Ghandi to do a deal with you.

Oh, and a few AIs are there to be stuck in the mud, and throw sticks in your spokes. Mr G Khan is one, Monte another, and Tokugawa a third. See them on borders? prepare for extermination campaign.

[Ansaga]

To me diplomacy always stunk in every Civ game. Civ4 is only slightly better. Now you don't need to give an arm and a leg to get something.

[Egbert]

Originally posted by Ansaga
To me diplomacy always stunk in every Civ game. Civ4 is only slightly better. Now you don't need to give an arm and a leg to get something.

Civ1 was a so long ago but I vaguely recall that diplomacy was of some value.

In Civ2 I didn't bother with diplomacy. Late game I would be at war with everyone and I didn't care. AI couldn't get near you when you had stealth fighters, no matter what.

I found quite a lot could be done in Civ3 via diplomacy. Sometimes, it seemed, the AI was giving me an arm and a leg!