Bah, I do not care for the AI diplomacy relations system

[Blake]

The AI system is a dream for "casual roleplayers" like myself. I enjoy nuturing religious allys, and sometimes going on crusades against other religions.

Religion is pretty good because it breaks down in the later part of the game, as holy cities change hands and some civs adopt free religion. It doesn't result in static power blocks or anything boring like that.

The one thing which doesn't make that much sense to me is the Civic relationship bonuses, it just doesn't seem well implemented.

Once the SDK comes out I expect some modders will eventually get around to writing "competitive" AI.

[Mergle]

What I'd like to see is serious penalties for warring against a co-religionist and serious bonuses for trade routes with them. This would make the AI's behaviour rational in game terms as well as "flavour".

[MadDjinn]

religions do tend to become lightning rods for bloqs though...

late game everyone tends to free religion, but for most of the game, it's a big diplomatic concern.


as per happy civics... democracies are generally more open with other democracies, than say a police state. so there is basis for the relations.

[Blake]

I meant the "favorite civic", to me it seems like "I'm going to play stupid and like this civic". The thing is with a few exceptions each civic is either situational or part of an "linear civic upgrade path". The civics that it does make sense to have as favorite are the end-game ones, but again it's situational.

I think it's just that the civic bonus is entirely co-incidental, it is rare to actually play towards the civic bonus, simply because you usually only have one good choice of civic in each category at a time.

For some reason the SE preferences in SMACX worked out a lot better, but I think that might have been because most the SE's were very early in the tech tree, Free Market vs Planned vs Green was actually a viable strategic choice.

[LDiCesare]

The problem if you want the ai to behave like a human player is you will have to get rid of diplomatic victories to start with (or consider game won when you reach 60% population).
A culture win would also be out of the question since you can hardly get one if you keep a military up to date.
Generally, wanting the ai to behave like players rules out diplomacy except as temporary alliances.
I suppose adding something like "you've started building a spaceship" or 'your culture is overwhelming" which would add -1, -2, ... -5 or worse to relations would be possible when the sdk comes out, but I for sure wouldn't want to play with that, because you would also need a 'you have the highest score", which is definitely the most stupid reason to attack someone in my book (he's the strongest thus let's attack him - how very realistic)..

[MadDjinn]

Originally posted by LDiCesare
I suppose adding something like "you've started building a spaceship" or 'your culture is overwhelming" which would add -1, -2, ... -5 or worse to relations would be possible when the sdk comes out, but I for sure wouldn't want to play with that, because you would also need a 'you have the highest score", which is definitely the most stupid reason to attack someone in my book (he's the strongest thus let's attack him - how very realistic)..

it's quite realistic.. achievement breeds contempt, even from friends... since you all want to be the best, easy way to up yourself is to knock them down...

[LDiCesare]

It's not realistic in the sense not everyone wants to be the best irl. Does everyone gang upon the US, and for the sake of what?
In-game, it would require more than just the figures I believe as you can't take out the best without being allied to someone else, and I am not sure this can be modeled without some major rewrite of the ai, since it doesn't seem to have any idea about coordinating forces (between attackers or defenders - it doesn't seem to take defensive pacts into accounts when declaring/bargaining war).

[LordShiva]

Re: Bah, I do not care for the AI diplomacy relations system

Originally posted by Strategist83
Pardon me, but I find the AI diplomacy to be a major drawback for the game. Why should the AI "care for their brothers and sisters of the faith"? The game is about winning, not seeing one's state religion spread all over the world!

I would rather have a much more opportunistic AI - that would resemble a human opponent much better. If your military is weak, the AI should exploit this and attack, regardless of diplomatic relations. It certainly should not hold back just because 'you have chosen your civics wisely' or some other BS like that.

I like how they gave the various AI's different personalities - aggressive Alexander or pacifist Ghandi make very different and very interesting opponents - but they really need to lose the overly artificial stuff like an AI being upset because 'you have fallen under the sway of a heathen religion'. A tad role-playing is cool, but let the AI be more interested in winning so the player can no longer manipulate it so easily.

Two words: Samuel Huntington.

[Arrian]

I'm getting deja vu. Didn't we have this thread already?

-Arrian

[CarnalCanaan]

Originally posted by Feyd
What I don't like is the penalties that I start to rack up when I refuse to give the AI a tech that nobody else has. I once got a -4 with a civ simply because I wouldn't give them techs that nobody else had.

I don't know, but I find that much more annoying than religious differences which I agree are very important to the realism of Civ IV.

So basically, you're not just stingy but you're also offended that others perceive it.

For what it's worth, I've found that you can go to a FRIENDLY AI in Civ4 and they will quite often give you what you ask for. Moreover--and this is a humongous improvement--your tone is appropriate; Your closest ally is not offended when you come to them asking for assistance, even if they refuse your request.

But this is the latest diplomatic faux pas I've discovered: If you turn down help for someone who counts you as a friend your relations will suffer dramatically. I figured this out a few games ago while pushing for a cultural win. By far the strongest AI in the game was Catherine, and we'd been the best of friends since ancient times. We'd sacked Germany together and shared a common faith. However, during the late renaissance, Catherine decided she wanted a second go at Germany and invited me to participate in the jolly fun. Seeing as how I, Gandhi, was developing my pacifist-hegemonic agenda, I politely declined.

Whoops.

Catherine lost it. "-6 You refused to help us during war-time!" After letting hapless Germany off the hook she turn her sizeable forces towards our long peaceful border. There was nothing I could do. My entire strategy had been devised under the assumption of Russian defense. It was like Canada being suddenly attacked by a spiteful United States.

I love the new diplomacy scheme because such intrigues just never happened in Civ3. As a Bond villian once said, "Delicious."

[Gatekeeper]

Well, tell us, CarnalCanaan! Did Russian armies sack your cities and bring ruin upon all of India? Or did you escape with some modicum of victory?

Gatekeeper (inquiring minds want to know)

[SSBLoveU]

If you are nice, then they will take advantage of you (and find out that all of the military is checked by other units). AI works by overrunning with small units mostly.

[Rook]

I disagree 100% with the original post on two accounts. One, the diplomacy part of the game is fun for me, and I think it needs more of it, not less. Two, the AI doesn't just go with the diplomacy. I think it DOES go for a win when it sees an opportunity. In my last game, I was on top of the pack. there was 35 turns left, and I was going for a score/time victory. I lead by like 200 and I was gaining. Washington was in second and pleased with me, but I was weak in tech. I spent most of the game at war and didn't keep up with the other civs, but I did well enough, I had 32% of the land. Anyway, Washington sees I'm going to win, and surprise attacks me with tanks and artillery. All my cities were heavily defended by Machineguns, but I didn't have much on offensive weapons, so over the next 35 rounds he tore up my improvements. The resulting starvation was enough to drop my score and he won. If I had more time, I would have eventually took him out.

[Urban Ranger]

You couldn't bribe another country into striking him from another direction?

[Rook]

No, everyone that was left was either furious with me for warring with them, or too buddy buddy with him to take such an offer. It was all bad strategy on my part, but it was fun.