Civ 3 vs Civ 4 diplomacy

[Pickles78uk]

Im not getting as mush as i was in Civ 3 out of diploomacy!

For me i feel that i got a lot more out of the Civ 3 diplomacy. Not only do i mean wealth, technology and resources but enjoyment. I really like Civ 4 and the Diplomacy is good dont get me wrong. However i feel that it does not have something that Civ 3 had.

Anyone else feel that there is something missing from the Civ 4 diplomacy?

I miss the advisor saying whether the deal was accecpable or not. It saved a lot of time and was quite fun too!

Thanks

Tom

[Francis Xavier]

I miss the advisors, they were funny.

I -really- like the (+) and (-) display system for diplomacy in Civ4 now. Other than that I think diplomacy is about the same really, just some new rules (like trading instant items for trade deals like furs etc not working), and no advisors.

In some ways I think it's more expansive due to the religious and civic options too.

[Pickles78uk]

what do you mean by the (+) and (-) display system?

[Francis Xavier]

+1 we have enjoyed years of peace
+4 we care for our breathren of the same religion
-2 our close borders cause tension

etc

[Pickles78uk]

i havent noticed that! do these numbers help with how willing the other civs will be to trade with you? how do you find them out?

[Francis Xavier]

If you put your cursor over the name of the civ's leader on the stat ranking on screen it'll display all the +'s and -'s you have with them. Also in diplomacy you can hover your cursor over their picture and it'll display all the +'s and -'s.

[swat-spas2]

It definitely effects how likely they are to trade or do anything else with you. They won't declare war on people they get along with, or they won't help you in a war unless they like you. If they hate you, or are just cautious, they won't trade much besides money, and will probably take more prodding to do so. Certain numbers are worth more for each leader, like Isabella likes you to be the same religion, or Mansa likes the same civics.

The AI won't trade techs that are providing them a wonder they are trying to build either, so don't take that the wrong way. (If you haven't already built it that is.. )

[QuestGAV]

The manual does say you'll get a better deal from people who like you more, and they're definitely more willing to trade various things to you if they like you.

[solo]

Originally posted by swat-spas2
They won't declare war on people they get along with, or they won't help you in a war unless they like you.

I used to think this was true until an AI who liked me in a Prince level OCC game did, in fact, attack. I had checked his attitude just before the attack. I've seen this happen in several OCC games, and the attacker does not have to have the Agressive trait, either.

In Civ IV, appeasement will not work if you lack a military. If you are low on military units (very likely to happen in an OCC space race), they may attack you for just this reason.

[swat-spas2]

Point taken. Military being equal, you should generally not be attacked by friendly fire. I've only been through a couple of games. In general I have at least a decent defensive army throughout the game. .so.. I didn't run into that. Besides I was busy crushing the hateful civs, with my buddies "helping".

[Pickles78uk]

last game i played on noble was with 5 other civs, i had a continent to myself and thigs were great, i was leading in points and techs all game. The Romans were steadily gaining in score and tech on me and hated me and a couple of the other civs all game, so when i had infatary artillery and tanks i massed an invasion army and fleet and went in. I bribed the french and the indians to be on my side giving them both money and tech. We obliterated them. I then built the UN and thought i was sure of a diplomatic victory, but Napster wouldnt vote for me, even though i had set him up to do so the whole game! Gahndi god bless him voted for me any ideas why napster was being an arse?

[clarkcd]

Originally posted by solo
(very likely to happen in an OCC space race)

Well unlike previous Civ games the AI in Civ IV is actually trying to win the game. Because of this when they see you getting ever closer to winning the game via space race they do what most PCs would do and attack you in an attempt to destroy your spaceship.

This is usually why I've had friendly AI attack me, I was close to a victory that they could see coming.

[Tiberius]

What I am missing is that I can't trade everything for everything. I mean, I can't buy a tech with resources, for example.
Sometimes I'd like to buy a tech but I can pay only with money (if I don't have an exchange tech, that is). Let's say the AI is missing iron or coal or horses or some other strategic resources and it'd be a good deal for both of us to make an exchange, but we can't.

This was possible in civ3. Why was it removed?

Also the AI never comes to ask for resources. Even if they are in war with someone else, they never ask for iron or horses. It happened not once that I gave them iron or horses for free, to help them. Also it'd nice if the AI appreciated more the help given during war times (strategic resources should value more than, let's say, spices).

On the other hand, the AI always comes to ask for my latest tech, and they are upset that I don't give it to them. I am talking about help given to friendly AIs here, not about tribute. I find it unfair that they come and ask for my expensive, "state of the art" tech but in return they won't even trade their tech, let alone gift it!

It seems to me that the AI is too "aggressive" in diplomacy. At least the friendly AIs should try to cooperate and look for mutually beneficial deals, and not act like greedy bastards

Now, I realize that this is difficult to implement, but it'd greatly improve the gaming experience. IMHO.

[solo]

Originally posted by Tiberius
What I am missing is that I can't trade everything for everything. I mean, I can't buy a tech with resources, for example.
Sometimes I'd like to buy a tech but I can pay only with money (if I don't have an exchange tech, that is). Let's say the AI is missing iron or coal or horses or some other strategic resources and it'd be a good deal for both of us to make an exchange, but we can't.

This was possible in civ3. Why was it removed?

Also the AI never comes to ask for resources. Even if they are in war with someone else, they never ask for iron or horses. It happened not once that I gave them iron or horses for free, to help them. Also it'd nice if the AI appreciated more the help given during war times (strategic resources should value more than, let's say, spices).

I agree, it should be possible to make trades other than by exchanges.

In several of my games the AI have come to me looking for resources, so my experience there is diffrent than yours. They often ask for even resource trades, as well as suggesting some tech trades that are mutually beneficial. From time to time I have seen them offer me a tech as a gift, too.

[LDiCesare]

I too agree that there are missing deals, like techs for resources and declaring war for money (you can bribe someone to go to war but can't be bribed).